What are your quality concerns with the EF-S 15-85?
It's probably the best choice considering your comments about range, and IQ is very good. It just is a bit slow on the long end, but nothing comes without trade-offs.
The 15-85 would be a better bet if you really need the wider angle. The IQ is very good based on what I've heard. There's also the EF-S 18-135, which also might work for you.
I would also suggest the 15-85, it provides great IQ.
Of course it's variable aperture and, giving its speed, I prefer to use something different indoor. Apart from those, indeed pretty obvious, limitations, I am sure you are going to love it.
It's nice to hear that it's even better IQ wise than the 17-55. I don't really care about constant aperture in this case. So long as it's sharp at f8 and f11, that's mostly all I care about.
Any experience with how it compares to the 17-40 on the wide end?
The 15-85 is a great bit of glass, rented one for a week mid last year and loved the lens. It's quality, IQ, AF speed, color/contrast and sharpness are as good as my 10-22. The lens has some minor distortion at both ends but is easy to correct if needed. On a crop body it gives you 24-135mm and that covers a good bit of ground.
I didn't buy the lens as I usually carry a three lens kit most always. The 17-40, 100L and 70-200 f4L IS, it's not a light weight kit but works, sits on my lap. In my walking days it was an A-1, 24 f2, 35-105 and 80-200; with a few extension tubes...and too many rolls of Kodachrome...the 35-105 got the least use on a daylight walkabout
I've wondered how well those 18-250/270 zooms perform...would be a nice light weight option.
I have been using the Sigma 17-70 for 4 years now, I have no complaints with it, and the
new version now has IS. It is a nice range, good for landscapes and it has the semi-macro feature (at least the one I bought did), I love it. And it is not too heavy.
Hope this helps.
Another vote for the 15-85 IS. The old 17-85 IS had so-so quality, but the 15-85 is great. Unless I need the speed or bokeh of the 24-70 at 2.8, 15-85 is what I go to. It might just be my style, but I often carry along a 10-22 "just in case," but very rarely find a scene that needs wider than 15.
If your going to shoot at f8 and smaller most of the time just pick the lens that gives you the range you want at the price you want. The 15-85 is a good one, as is the 17-55, even the super zooms like the 18-200 would give you pretty good results at that aperture range.
Wes -- Thanks for the review and your thoughts. I looked at the sample images and your copy seems to have a lot more CA than mine, and is generally softer focus and lower contrast too. What CA my lens has cleans up in LR, but it's not bad except on the sides and mainly at the widest end.
I agree with your general findings though.
Mine was purchased used in excellent condition for $600 on eBay, but due to a small mark I found on the front element, I got the lens for $500, which I consider a very good price for the quality and features. Lens hood was extra, but small cost, being aftermarket from HK.
