skibum5 Offline Image Upload: Off
|
p.1 #14 · EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS master thread | |
catfriend wrote:
Is it just me? Because I just don't get the point of this lens. It's got a good range, and it would be a decent kit lens on a first APS camera purchase, but other than that I don't see any compelling reason for existing APS camera owners to purchase it. If one owns the 17-55 2.8 (as I do), you might gain some range, but you lose the 2.8 constant aperture, and that's not a tradeoff worth making. If you own the 17-85 (which I used to, and I had an unusually good copy) the range gain is minor, and since this is $ 800 you're going to have to shell out at least 500 more bones after you sell the old lens. If you have the 18-55 it might be a nice upgrade if you have an extra $ 800 around the house, but I'm still not convinced that it would be the wisest move you could make. If this lens had a constant aperture of no more than 4 then it might be worth looking at, but I have to admit I was hoping for a new version of the 100-400. Today's lens announcements just baffle me. If I were looking for a zoom like the 18-135 (it's BIGGGER!!!) wouldn't I just spring for the 18-200? Is anybody else scratching their head over these choices?
Should be much higher quality than the 17-85 IS, which face it, may have been worse than the non-IS 18-55.
While maybe $200 more than I thought I guess it is still like $350 less than the f/2.8 and with more range. Still at $600-$650 it would probably seem more attractive since they you really would save a lot voer the 17-55 IS.
Lighter, less expensive, might be a more appealing landscape walk around than the 17-55 IS. But yeah the price is getting a bit close to the 17-55....
|