 |
|
|
PicGuy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 854
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2019
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $195.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great zoom range, fast focus, good color and overall IQ, fairly small and lightweight, can be found for a good price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens is somewhat slow for the price, IS noise shows up in video recording when using the internal mics.
|
|
|
I used this lens off and on several years ago. I found it to be a good performer. I recently had an opportunity to buy one at a great price and jumped on it. I find it to be a great match to the SL2 I own and the performance is as I remember it being. This lens is a little on the heavy side but not as heavy as the EF-S 17-55mm lens I own. Plus, the equivalent 24-136mm range is ideal as a walk around all purpose lens. The IS works very well and sharpness/color is very good for a zoom of this range. Focus speed is very good with this lens.
The variable aperture can be challenging but, once again, the zoom range requires compromises be made in this lens' design. Also, this lens is not the best to use with DPAF on the newer cameras. It focuses well but the IS noise is noticeable in the audio of recordings.
|
|
 Apr 11, 2019
|
|
tomri
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 11, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 5
|
|
Pros:
|
Great IS, little flare, fast & silent AF
|
|
Cons:
|
high field curvature, blurry corners
|
|
|
After using this lens for about 2 years I don't quite understand all the raving reviews on the web. I used the EF 17-85 for about 3 years until it stopped working due to the widely known "flex cable" problem. I switched to the 15-85 based on the many positive reviews. Here is my comparison of the two lenses:
- The 17-85 is sharper at the long (telephoto) end of the zoom range.
- The 15-85 is sharper in the corners at the wide end *if* you manage to get center and corners focused simultaneously. Doing so is not as easy as it may sound because the lens exhibits a strong field curvature, meaning that the image field is not flat but strongly curved. So unless you stop down to f11 or more, depth of field will often be too shallow to bring both center and corners properly into focus. This effect accumulates with the inherent inaccuracy of phase detection AF. As a result, corners and edges of images shot with this lens are often *very* blurry and in no way better than what I got from the 17-85 in terms of sharpness.
On the positive side the 15-85 renders images with beautiful color and contrast, the AF and IS work great and the lens is rather resistant to flare for a complex zoom.
The field curvature on the other hand prevents it from reliably exceeding the 17-85 in terms of edge/corner sharpness. The field curvature also seems to be distance-dependent. It appears stronger at large distances. When shooting test charts indoor at short distances the problem is less pronounced. This could be a reason why the lens performs well in formal lens tests. Note also that some sites (like photozone.de) focus the lens separately for each corner which is something you can't do in real shooting.
Note that I had the opportunity to check several copies of this lens and they all performed similarly. I rated sharpness by viewing images from a 10 mega pixel camera at 100% on an LCD screen.
Bottom line, a nice versatile lens, but if you mind having significantly blurry edges and corners in many of your wide angle photos, you better look somewhere else.
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2014
|
|
JeanP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 3, 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 3, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great sharp (even wide open) allround lens
|
|
Cons:
|
No hood included
|
|
|
This lens is a great walkaround lens, very sharp at f5.6 at all lenghts all over the frame.
When correctly adjusted (calibrated) on a AFMA body the results are stunning.
Yes this lens is a bit slow but it is sharp and has some kind of macro possibilities.
I enjoy using this lens very much on my 70D.
Overall, highly recommended.
|
|
|
Mar 3, 2014
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 25, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
The best one lens solution for Aps-C, excellent range, good macro capabilities, nice sharpness, colours and contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
Not FF compatible, price is high, not so bright
|
|
Perhaps this lens is the best one lens solution for a Canon Aps-C camera, this camera has lot to offer: picture quality, Usm focus, excellent range, macro abilities
See in more detail here
http://oldshutterhand.com/equipment-reviews/canon-15-85-review/
http://oldshutterhand.com/canon-lenses/
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2013
|
|
rbussmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 7, 2013
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Color rendition, built, weight, AF speed
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit soft at the long end
|
|
|
Great walk around lens, with excellent color rendition. Wish there would be a similar range for full frame! IQ is pretty good, albeit with a some border softness on the long end, and some field curvature. Prone to flare when shooting into the light, but not too much of a problem. All plastic, but still a tough piece of optics. Mine has survived years of expedition work, and still works flawlessly.
|
|
|
Jul 7, 2013
|
|
rbussmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Color rendition, size and weight
|
|
Cons:
|
Prone to flare, resolution at the long end could be a little better
|
|
|
Great allround zoom change for crop sensor. Wish sometimes I could get this range on full frame. The lens is certainly tough, but could have less plastic. Image quality is generally great, but on the wide end flare is a problem when shooting into the light, even with the hood.
|
|
|
Apr 14, 2013
|
|
unclechuck
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 11, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 1579
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, great colors, solid focus
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Lives up to it's billing as L equivalent performance.
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2013
|
|
macs69
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2013
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 19, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
light weight, very nice colors, fast focusing, great range
|
|
Cons:
|
tend to flare, slow at long focal length
|
|
|
I switched from 24-105L after 3 years of use on 20D.
Actually on an APS-C sensor the 15-85 is quit analogous to the 24-105:
It have almost the same image qualities virtues, but being much more lighter, and feels-like, smaller, making it an ideal walkaround lens.
Very fast focusing, and very good IS.
Light tend to flare in some condition and the fact the hood is not included is a pity.
I got the feeling that I missed a lot using the (GREAT) 24-105L on my 20D. The switch was just great.
Sorry, but I don't miss the 24-105L...
|
|
|
Mar 19, 2013
|
|
noncho
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 2012
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 1
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2012
|
|
jeremytf50d
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2010
Location: N/A
Posts: 63
|
|
Review Date: Dec 19, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, excellent IS, zoom range, consistent AF, build quality is pretty good,
|
|
Cons:
|
Tends to pull minor dust inside (very small amount). Price is a little bit high. Some distortion and vignetting on the wide end, easy to fix in PP.
|
|
|
I have been more than happy with the image quality of my EF-S 15-85mm, which was clearly better than the 24-105L I sold to get it. I find the focal range ideal for a walk-around, understanding that it has variable maximum aperture as the compromise to its range. It is worth it to me, especially because I pair this lens with a fast prime to cover darker situations or shallow depth of field shots.
This isn't a very cheap lens, and I pondered the comparable, less expensive Sigma (17-70mm). I ended up going with the Canon to get the wider end's 2mm and I did not regret it. I used my ultra wide angle lens rarely after acquiring the 15-85.
The image stabilization and autofocus were both excellent for me.
My only negatives, as noted, were some distortion and vignetting on the wide end. I don't consider these very serious because they easy to fix in post processing.
I didn't realize this for almost 2 years, but the lens did gain some very small and few dust particles inside. I only realized when shining a flashlight and taking a close inspection. I didn't really care because I did not see any effect on the image quality.
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2012
|
|
Gunzorro
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 27, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 14586
|
|
Review Date: Sep 26, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Most useful focal range for travel. Great IQ. Light weight.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
It's not an "L" lens in build and sealing, but the IQ of mine equals L. I've used this on my 60D for a number of events with terrific results, although I generally prefer full frame. This lens lives on my 60D. I've heard of sample variation, but this can be used wide open. At f/8 its amazing throughout its entire range, making it a terrific travel lens. Equal to 24-136mm in full frame. The IS helps make up for the f/5.6 minimum aperture around 85mm. I wish Canon made an equivalent full frame version -- I'd buy it in a second.
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2012
|
|
Marc de Wit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 3, 2010
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 8, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Very allround. IS working really good.
Sharp 24-85mm
|
|
Cons:
|
Very soft at 15mm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 8, 2012
|
|
Allan Gobin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 17, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2012
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $720.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, good size.
|
|
Cons:
|
Renders image in odd way. Nothing to directly complaint about but there is just something about how the color, contrast, and exposure that is off.
|
|
|
Something is wrong with the color and contrast on this lens. I don't know how to describe it. But loved the way my 17-55 rendered images and I dislike the way this lens does. I sold it and bought another 17-55. That's how big an issue it was for me.
|
|
|
Apr 2, 2012
|
|
sf2photos
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 4, 2012
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 5, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great "walkaround" lens, Very good IQ for price, Very good IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Vignettes a great deal wide open,
|
|
|
A great ef-s lens. Good value for money and a superb focal range. 24 to 136mm 35mm equivalent with IS…. I know a couple of FF users who would love that little extra range from the 24-105L. Obviously as is Canon's preference, ef-s lenses do not get L classification; Build quality wise, this lens doesn't quite justify it anyway. It feels quite plasticky in the hand but very solid none the less, not too heavy, but good enough to let you feel that it's not badly built.
FTM focus and nice IS top off the package, but every so often it reminds you that it's built to a budget, aperture narrows very quickly through the focal range. This is almost handy in a way though because wide open at 15mm, it vignettes considerably…you need to remember to stop down. There's almost a tendency to just keep shooting with as wide an aperture as possible, as IQ stays nice and sharp when you're using it fully open.
Out of focus areas seem reluctant to blur nicely…its almost as if the lens compulsively wants everything to be as sharp as possible. It took the use of a hill half a mile away to produce usable "bokeh" effects, but in some circumstances, thats a plus point.
Teamed with a good telephoto and a quick prime, it's almost the perfect lens combination for a crop body Canon owner. It now lives on my body 95% of the time…in fact whenever I'm not doing a portrait session/reaching for extra length or aiming for min depth of field.
|
|
|
Mar 5, 2012
|
|
Giancarlo D
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 21, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Feb 29, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fairly sharp, great range for a crop camera, IS, good colors
|
|
Cons:
|
variable aperture
|
|
|
This lens is a great buy for any crop camera. It's not weather sealed like the L's but it has some weight and feels like a high quality lens. Color reproduction was great. Good saturation on the Rebel T2i.
This lens will give a novice photographer the confidence to continue in this hobby. Great as a walk around lens.
If it had a constant 2.8, it would be $500 more and called the EF-S 17-55.
|
|
|
Feb 29, 2012
|
|
packpe89
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 5, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 484
|
|
Review Date: Aug 15, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $600.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp, Good color and contrast, IS works great and AF is spot on.
|
|
Cons:
|
Wish it was 77mm instead of 72, so more of my filters would fit it. Price still a little high
|
|
|
I purchased this lens for a trip to Yellowstone and it performed great! I got it refurbished from Canon. The zoom range is ideal for walk around.
|
|
|
Aug 15, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
34
|
117325
|
Apr 11, 2019
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
91% of reviewers
|
$653.76
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.48
|
7.38
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
