Both of these EF-s lenses are working well with the 7D. Deuce helps also.

Top is 15-85 and bottom is 17-55

Which one do you like the best? Do you have anymore comparison samples from both lenses on your 7D?

I'm looking at possibly adding one of these lenses to my kit, but still can't decide which one to go with. Both have their pros and cons, and all the dust problems with the 17-55 IS kind of puts me off buying that lens, but the strong vignetting that I've seen so far on the 15-85 IS makes me think twice about getting that lens.

I have not tried the 15-85, but love the 17-55 on my 7D.

EOS20 wrote:
Which one do you like the best? Do you have anymore comparison samples from both lenses on your 7D?

I'm looking at possibly adding one of these lenses to my kit, but still can't decide which one to go with. Both have their pros and cons, and all the dust problems with the 17-55 IS kind of puts me off buying that lens, but the strong vignetting that I've seen so far on the 15-85 IS makes me think twice about getting that lens.



I can't say I like one over the other. I really have not had a chance to fully explore the 15-85 but it certainly is built better than the 17-55 and the IQ seems very close or perhaps equal to it. The advantage of the 17-55 is the f/2.8 through the full zoom range but the 15-85 has a greater range. I like having both... as a everyday walk around I think the 15-85 is the better choice. For interiors and where the f/stop is really a factor then the 17-55.

BTW, I have dust in my 17-55 but it has not effected it's IQ that I can see. It was one of the first and perhaps they have tightened the seal to reduce the dust problem.

I really do not have any comparisons... believe it or not I sent the 7D back to Canon for the AF focus inconsistencies problems which you could not tell from the above two images. I should have it back tomorrow.

Assuming IQ is the same (and I'd double check to verify if it actually is) then it's a question of which do you prefer, range or aperture? Another option is to mate the 15-85 with some fast primes, again assuming IQ is equal.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Yakim Peled wrote:
Assuming IQ is the same (and I'd double check to verify if it actually is) then it's a question of which do you prefer, range or aperture? Another option is to mate the 15-85 with some fast primes, again assuming IQ is equal.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



I really think from my limited shots with the 15-85, it is at least as equal to the IQ of the 17-55. Here is a shot with my "serviced" 7D received last night from Canon in Irvine. They "adjusted the AF focus" and it appears they were sucessful. More shots later when the sun is up...

John, if you are happy, I am too.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

John McLean wrote:

More shots later when the sun is up...



Look forward to seeing a few more shots!

Looks to me like Deuce prefers the 15-85.

EOS20 wrote:
John McLean wrote:

More shots later when the sun is up...



Look forward to seeing a few more shots!



Here is a non-Deuce shot. Nothing special but with 15-85 @ 31mm.

That looks pretty good! I too am interested in the 15-85mm, but I am nagged by thoughts of the 17-55mm 2.8 . Right now I only want to buy one and the decision is consuming me. I'm obsessed. Or posessed. Whichever.

I'm looking to make the same choice soon as well. Could you please post a 100% crop of the focus point from both the Deuce shots?

One comment related to the top 2 photos....looking at the exif, they are somewhat comparing apples and oranges.

The second photo exif:
Exposure time 1/15 sec
Focal length 55mm
Focal number f/2.8
ISO speed 1600 ISO

ok, under the same conditions with the 15-85, at that focal length you'd be limited to f/5. That's a stop and 2/3. So you'd have to slow the shutter to...wait...already pretty slow at 1/15...so we've got to bump up the iso to...something over 3200.

Of course, the 7D (and even the 40/50D) will clean up ok at the higher ISO...but the point is you'd have to do it....

Not saying the 15-85 isn't a nice lens....just that in those circumstances it wouldn't get the shot without extreme high iso....

good light, all.

A.

smjenkins wrote:
I'm looking to make the same choice soon as well. Could you please post a 100% crop of the focus point from both the Deuce shots?

Sorry I can't do that. My new 27" Quad 4 i7 was shipped back to Apple today for a new replacement. The 1 TB HD failed after just 5 days of use. I was able to BU my drive before I packed it but my Macbook does not have CS or DPP to find the focus point. A good guess would be the eyes.

Apple was kind of floored when they took my call and wanted their engineers to look at it to find the problem.

Jack

A couple of quickies, no post processing, RAW, all from a 40D + 15-85 IS

wide open 1/20 sec


center/corner (dark but sharp)




center/very bottom of frame F7.1, with polarizer


indoors, with onboard flash


bokeh is decent

A couple of quickies, no post processing, RAW, all from a 40D

wide open 1/20 sec



Which lens?

NotoriousSEG wrote:
A couple of quickies, no post processing, RAW, all from a 40D

wide open 1/20 sec



Which lens?

oops, sorry, these are all 15-85 IS

When the 15-85 was released I thought Ok, yet anther of those murky plastic zoom pipes. It has the same basic optical design as most of the older zooms, e.g. 17-35L, 24-105L, 17-55EFS to name a few of the better ones. And now, when the results are coming from the field, it seems like even Canon is aware of the fact that more pixels need better optics to blossom. Does Canon after all have a clue and perhaps even a plan?!!

Well crap. Now I don't know what to do. Those images look pretty good. If the widest part of the lens (15mm) is f3.5, would I miss f2.8 that much?

I have agonized over this decision for so long I know at least a couple of you are about ready to kill me. It'll be over soon, I promise.

SEG;

yes, you will miss it. Go back and look at the second shot in the post. Wouldn't have happened except with extreme iso (6400 or higher) with the 15-85. The 17-55 didn't even flinch taking it...

IMPORTANT! It's not a choice between 2.8 and 3.5. You only get f/3.5 between 15-17mm. Then you're up to f/4. And then, fairly quickly, beyond:

15-17mm = f/3.5 down 2/3 stop compared to 17-55/2.8
18-26mm = f/4.0 down 1 stop
27-37mm = f/4.5 down 1 1/3 stop
38-60mm = f/5.0 down 1 2/3 stop
61-85mm = f/5.6 N/A - points go to the 15-85

Look at the chart and think about where the majority of your shots will land.

Not ready to kill you - yet. Just buy one and if you don't like it sell it (the argument for visiting the buy/sell forum - you won't lose much). And then buy the other.

But I understand....it's the RANGE. Gotta definitely give it that.

but I've told you all this before....

good light,
A.