Dilema on lenses for Canon 550D

lucky_13

lucky_13

Suspended / Banned
Messages
624
Name
Billy
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone, I have a bit of a Dilema as on whitch is going to be my next purchase and I was hoping that some of you would help make the decision easier. I currently have a Canon 550D with the 18-55 IS kit lens and a canon 55-250 IS lens, I'm getting the 50mm f1.8 soon too, and I'm not looking on going FF anytime soon. I'm looking to purchase a lens that could be my main walk around lens as I think (for me at least) the 18-55 is too short of a focal length which is why I have writen off the superb 17-55 f/2.8
I have narrowed it down to the 15-85 is usm f3.5-5.6 (as it will do wide angle too, kill 2 birds with one stone) is the sort of range I'm looking for, or go for the 24-105L f/4 now I know that this lens doesn't go wide enough on crop sensors but I was thinking of getting a UWA too eg: (sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6) if I went for the 24-105L. So I'm split between
Canon 15-85 is usm f3.5-5.6
and
Canon 24-105L is usm f/4 with Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6?

Any suggestion will be greatly welcomed
Ps: I also have considered the canon 17-85 is usm but I was told that the 15-85 is superior.
Thanks.
 
Hi,
Used to have the 450D with a Canon 18-200.

I found it a good lens with a good range.

My Opinion only.

Regards.
 
Have you thought about Canon 70-200 F4 .Good range and excellent IQ.
 
Thanks for the reply guys, I have a telephoto so I just wanted something better than the 18-200 and although not in the league of the 70-200 f4 my 55-250 will do for that range. Just need something wider than 70mm
Thanks again
 
the 15-85 is a nice lens, I bought it as a kit with the 7D body, with a view of trying it, and if i didn't like it, move it on and replace with a 24-105L. I liked the 15-85 well enough as a walkaround lens for the 7D that I've kept it, and bought the 24-105L as well, mainly for use on my full-frame kit - well - needed to get the full-frame F4 trinity, didn't I :lol:

Now I'll generally use the 15-85 if i'm going out for the day with just the one lens. If I'm taking the full kit, or the weather's looking a little dicey (the L's are better weatherproofed than the 15-85) then I'll stick one of the F4 L's on (as appropriate for what I anticipate shooting), and take the rest in the bag.

Oh - and the 17-85's definitely not in the same league as the 15-85 :)
 
Was in same thoughts 4 years ago. Finally sold EF-s and went with 5D and 28-105mm 3.5-4.5. Much cheaper then cover same range by 17-40 + something else. Never regret.
 
Last edited:
10 - 20 / 24 - 105 sounds like a great setup to me. Im starting to get used to 24mm on a crop as well, its plenty wide enough for most applications. If you're doing full length portraits then maybe you might have to take a step back, but its not the end of the world.
 
I do agree with u samP as I very rarely shoot at 18 anyway and I did test my self on holiday trying to figure out at what focal length I shot the most and I must admit it was well past 18mm, I only shot 18mm when I was shooting landscape or panoramic shots.
 
The only problem I have with buying the 10-20 and 24-105 is the cost, for both lenses the cheapest I can find them is £1150 on amazon
Where as the 15-85 is going for £540-£560
 
lucky_13 said:
The only problem I have with buying the 10-20 and 24-105 is the cost, for both lenses the cheapest I can find them is £1150 on amazon
Where as the 15-85 is going for £540-£560
Click to expand...

So if you went with the two lenses - the extra 10-15mm & 85-105mm range either end will cost an extra £600.

I would miss the extra 10-15mm at the wide end but not the 85-105mm at the long.

Would a 15-85mm and 10-20mm save you a few bob ?
 
Last edited:
lucky_13 said:
The only problem I have with buying the 10-20 and 24-105 is the cost, for both lenses the cheapest I can find them is £1150 on amazon
Where as the 15-85 is going for £540-£560
Click to expand...

I'v seen a few places selling the 15-85 for around that price as an unboxed ex kit, London Camera Exchange being one last time I checked.

Personally having owned a 15-85 and 10-22 for 3 months or so I'm very glad I didnt go with the 10-22, 24-105 setup. Not only is it more expensive but it would mean a hell of alot more lens changes where as right now I tend to just pickup the camera and one lens or when I have both only change infrequently.
 
I only wanted to get the 10-20 to fill in the gap that the 24-105 leaves at the wide end, changing lenses all the time is exactly what I want to avoid which is why I'm swaying towards the 15-85, but having said that the 24-105 has amazing IQ and it's sharp corner to corner ( at least the one I used for a couple of days did), and I have no experience with the 15-85 but alot of people have told me that it's an amazing lens even the lady from canon at Jessops recommend the 15-85 over the 24-105 as she said that the 15-85 lives permanently on her 7D and she only uses the 24-105 when doing weddings and studio work.
 
Moreorless said:
I'v seen a few places selling the 15-85 for around that price as an unboxed ex kit, London Camera Exchange being one last time I checked.

Personally having owned a 15-85 and 10-22 for 3 months or so I'm very glad I didnt go with the 10-22, 24-105 setup. Not only is it more expensive but it would mean a hell of alot more lens changes where as right now I tend to just pickup the camera and one lens or when I have both only change infrequently.
Click to expand...

Just checked with thelondoncameraexchage and their price is £599
 
lucky_13 said:
Just checked with thelondoncameraexchage and their price is £599
Click to expand...

I'd keep on checking around, a few places had it ex kit when I bought mine.

I notice LCE do have it used for only £400 at the Lincon store, perhaps a bit fo a risk given the sample variation people often talk about but as cheap as I'v seen it.

I only wanted to get the 10-20 to fill in the gap that the 24-105 leaves at the wide end, changing lenses all the time is exactly what I want to avoid which is why I'm swaying towards the 15-85, but having said that the 24-105 has amazing IQ and it's sharp corner to corner ( at least the one I used for a couple of days did), and I have no experience with the 15-85 but alot of people have told me that it's an amazing lens even the lady from canon at Jessops recommend the 15-85 over the 24-105 as she said that the 15-85 lives permanently on her 7D and she only uses the 24-105 when doing weddings and studio work.
Click to expand...

I can't compair it to the 24-105 but I'v certainly not had any problem with the 15-85's sharpness, the very extreme corners at 15mm are pretty soft but that seems to be a problem with most Canion wide zooms.

Honiestly my opinion is that alot of the crop users with 24-105's have them due to red ring lust and the stattoish desire to not have any "wasted" overlap. I'm sure it really suits some people but unless you rarely find yourself going below 24mm when using your 17-85 I'd avoid it personally, the 24-105 and 24-70 are afterall designed to go as wide on FF as the 15-85 does on a crop.

Theres the weight issue aswell, the 15-85 is 100 grams lighter plus its a good deal shorter.
 
Last edited:
I do like the 15-85 but I'm thinking is the 24-105 gonna be better @ low light as it has the constant f/4?
 
TheBigYin said:
the 15-85 is a nice lens, I bought it as a kit with the 7D body, with a view of trying it, and if i didn't like it, move it on and replace with a 24-105L. I liked the 15-85 well enough as a walkaround lens for the 7D that I've kept it, and bought the 24-105L as well, mainly for use on my full-frame kit - well - needed to get the full-frame F4 trinity, didn't I :lol:

Now I'll generally use the 15-85 if i'm going out for the day with just the one lens. If I'm taking the full kit, or the weather's looking a little dicey (the L's are better weatherproofed than the 15-85) then I'll stick one of the F4 L's on (as appropriate for what I anticipate shooting), and take the rest in the bag.

Oh - and the 17-85's definitely not in the same league as the 15-85 :)
Click to expand...

What do u think in terms of better IQ and better in low light situation out of this two bigyin 15-85 or 24-105?
 
I do have the Tokina 11-16 on my wish list but I was told that the sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 is just as good despite the fact that Tokina is f2.8
 
lucky_13 said:
What do u think in terms of better IQ and better in low light situation out of this two bigyin 15-85 or 24-105?
Click to expand...

I'd have to give it to the 24-105 - but it's marginal at best, and really only something I'd fret about if I was pixel-peeping, tbh. For a cropped sensor, the 15-85 is a more useable focal length for my style of shooting (mainly landscapes - not into portraiture at all) than the 24-105, which outweighs most considerations, other than the inclement weather or if I'm sharing lenses with full frame body.

Another small thing, but I find that the L glass doesn't "balance" quite as well on the smaller canon bodies (i've a 450d as well as the 7D) as the 15-85 does.

I'll be honest with you - unless you have a need for all-weather shooting, going down the route of a 24-105 and a UWA lens is a very expensive way of getting a few mm at the wide end, and 20 at the long end. I'd not hesitate to recommend the 15-85.
 
TheBigYin said:
I'd have to give it to the 24-105 - but it's marginal at best, and really only something I'd fret about if I was pixel-peeping, tbh. For a cropped sensor, the 15-85 is a more useable focal length for my style of shooting (mainly landscapes - not into portraiture at all) than the 24-105, which outweighs most considerations, other than the inclement weather or if I'm sharing lenses with full frame body.

Another small thing, but I find that the L glass doesn't "balance" quite as well on the smaller canon bodies (i've a 450d as well as the 7D) as the 15-85 does.

I'll be honest with you - unless you have a need for all-weather shooting, going down the route of a 24-105 and a UWA lens is a very expensive way of getting a few mm at the wide end, and 20 at the long end. I'd not hesitate to recommend the 15-85.
Click to expand...

Thank's buddy!
No I have no need for all weather situations but I do love a bit of portraiture.
 
Last edited:
lucky_13 said:
I do have the Tokina 11-16 on my wish list but I was told that the sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 is just as good despite the fact that Tokina is f2.8
Click to expand...

I tried Sigma before getting Tokina. You wouldn't believe the difference. Sigma had to be used at f/13+ to get anything reasonable.
 
lucky_13 said:
I do have the Tokina 11-16 on my wish list but I was told that the sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 is just as good despite the fact that Tokina is f2.8
Click to expand...

The fact it's an f/2.8 lens doesn't mean it's better. You would rarely use f/2.8 on a UWA for starters. I shoot over f/7 with mine.
 
I've heard the 15-85 is a good lens, but don't rule out the 17-85. It is sharp in the middle and has great colours. It's poor in the corners unless stopped down (at 17mm) but otherwise it's very good - and very inexpensive.
 
daveb99 said:
I've heard the 15-85 is a good lens, but don't rule out the 17-85. It is sharp in the middle and has great colours. It's poor in the corners unless stopped down (at 17mm) but otherwise it's very good - and very inexpensive.
Click to expand...

I'v not owned it but going from reviews the problem is that the corners/borders don't really sharpen up much at the wide end even if you stop it down.
 
daveb99 said:
I've heard the 15-85 is a good lens, but don't rule out the 17-85. It is sharp in the middle and has great colours. It's poor in the corners unless stopped down (at 17mm) but otherwise it's very good - and very inexpensive.
Click to expand...

I was gonna get the 17-85 at first as Camera World are doing it for £290 new. But the man there seemed to think that 15-85 would be a much better lens as it has the latest IS with panning and much better glass.:-( and alot of people seem to say that the 15-85 is nearly as good as the 24-105 in picture quality at least but that's just what I've heard.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
The fact it's an f/2.8 lens doesn't mean it's better. You would rarely use f/2.8 on a UWA for starters. I shoot over f/7 with mine.
Click to expand...

That's true but it does mean it's a faster lens and I like photographing inside old churches which it would come in handy.
What lens do u have OddJim?
 
lucky_13 said:
That's true but it does mean it's a faster lens and I like photographing inside old churches which it would come in handy.
What lens do u have OddJim?
Click to expand...

I have the Canon EFS 10-22 and it's an awesome lens!

I have shot inside catherdrals with it and managed some of it handheld. The rest was on a tripod of course but I think shooting ultra wide-angle stuff at f/2.8, most of the image will be out of focus so it's a bit pointless!
 
odd jim said:
I have shot inside catherdrals with it and managed some of it handheld. The rest was on a tripod of course but I think shooting ultra wide-angle stuff at f/2.8, most of the image will be out of focus so it's a bit pointless!
Click to expand...

Im sorry that makes no sense at all. If im shooting 10mm at F3.5 then everything is in focus as long as im not shooting at the MFD. Even if it did go as wide as F2.8 everything would still be in focus...

24 F1.4 is a prime example (excuse the pun :clap:), unless your quite close to your subject completely diffusing the background is not possible.
 
SamP said:
Im sorry that makes no sense at all. If im shooting 10mm at F3.5 then everything is in focus as long as im not shooting at the MFD. Even if it did go as wide as F2.8 everything would still be in focus...

24 F1.4 is a prime example (excuse the pun :clap:), unless your quite close to your subject completely diffusing the background is not possible.
Click to expand...

No the focal plane front to back is too large on a UWA, but I see what you are saying.

I suppose it depends how you use the UWA. I don't shoot to "get it all in" I normally have a subject close to the lens when I shoot wide, and keep the aperture tight.

If you try shoot with a UWA without a focal point, you get a very bland image!
 
Last edited:
Also bare in mind that the Tokina has a more limated range, the Canon is F 3.5-4.0 between 11-16 so its not THAT big a difference and if you had the 15-85 you'd have 3.5 thoughout the range.

Personally the extra 1mm at the wide end, the flare resistance and the ability to use it as a relatively "normal" lens pushed me towards the 10-22.
 
Thanks for all ** thoughts, I did go into Camera World yesterday and I did have a go on the 15-85 24-105 and the 17-55 f2.8 when I got home I compared the shots that I took with the 3 lenses and I must admit the sharpness and the IQ of the 15-85 did take me by surprise, although not as pretty or as well made as the other 2,the underdog certainly punches above it's weight.I thought the colour and sharpness of the 15-85 was as good as the 24-105. Unfortunetly i liked the look of the 17-55 more than i liked the look of the pic's i took So I have made my decision and will go for the 15-85 is usm.
Thank you for all your input.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top