ef-s 15-85mm or?

Hi
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]I have a 50D and the ef-s 17-85mm lens (came as a kit). I'm happy with the image quality most of the time and the zoom range is good. But feel it could be a little sharper.
I'm thinking about upgrading this lens to one or two of the following lenses.<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]1) ef-s 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
If I didn't had the 17-85 this is properly a excellent choice. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"]Can I justify the upgrade?<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]2) ef 24-105mm f/4 L USM
Is the IQ better than the new 15-85mm. If IQ is significant better I can live without the wide end.<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]3) ef 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM
Is IQ better than the new 15-85 and will I miss IS.
It could be good for indoor without flash?<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]4) ef-s 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
I should have bought than in the first place along with the 50D.
I like the L lenses better by look or the new 15-85mm.<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]5) wait to see if there is a new 24-70mm f/2.8 L with IS coming out.
I would choose this one<span style="font-family: Wingdings; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;"]J<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<o:p></o:p>
<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"]I have been starring blind at the iso crops to compare I and reading a lot of reviews. But not all are tested with the 50D.
By good IQ I will have very sharp images and good color/contrast.
I'm not going FF in the next couple of years.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] Might get a 70-200mm f/4 L<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] IS for the long end later.
If I choose the ef-s 15-85mm I will also get the 24 mm f/1.4 L II for low light all round shoots (the 35mm f/1.4 L is also a possibility, but is rather old). These to primes are super sharp.

To make it more simple to choose:
- don't focus to much on the zoom range (can live without the wide or long end).
- outdoor daylight shooting.
- travel lens.
- hand held shooting.
- don't focus on the price of the lens.
- don't focus on distortion and vignetting.
- family and kids in and around the house.<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]Which lens will give me the best IQ on the 50D? Hope someone can help me.

Have you seen Bryan's review? Yes, the camera he used there was a 7D, but I believe that what looks good on a 7D should look good on your 50D as well.

i also suggest Tamron 17-50 f2.8, now available wit VC (IS on Canon). I own non VC, and i am very satisfied with that lens

I'm the owner of the 17-552.8 and the 24-70L. I started on a 20d and moved on to a 5DII.


I've rented the 16-35.





I had some problems with the 17-55. It takes nice photos, but I was never as happy with the result as when I used the 24-70. The photos lacked a certain POP. Additionally, it's accumulated a lot of dust inside. I shoot in some odd environments, but they're hardly saw-mills, and that lens has never been to the desert. If I didn't tend towards low-light all that dust would be a pain.





I am in love with the 24-70. It's only downside to my shooting is its weight, and I don't feel it to be a major one. I love its reverse extension and macro-ish ability, which is enhanced nicely by a tube.





The 16-35 was sexy. I used it for a specific purpose on my 5dII. It would probably make a really interesting shooting experience on a crop body, having the tight end be a 50mm equivalent. You'd probably wind up taking some unique photos.

Tough call, but I would recommend the 24-105mm f/4L


[:^)]

24-105 or the <span><span style="font-size: small;"]<span style="font-family: Calibri;"] ef-s 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is my opinion depending on if you need the f/2.8 or not...

Hi again


<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]Thanks for your thoughts.
I think I'm leaning towards the 24-105mm. And maybe put inthe 16-35mm L II for the wide end (indoor).
I like the red ring and 24mm = 38mm on the 50D is like the normal start point (35mm) on most point&amp;shoot cameras.
Is it sharp at 24mm?<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]
But still miss a direct comparison between this lens and the ef-s 15-85mm.
<span style="color: black; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]For some unexplained reason I don't want to upgrade to the 17-55mm.
I have also seen the reviews on slrgear.com and photozone.de.


<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]So 24-105mm L + 16-35mm L II (usefull for a FF upgrade)
or 15-85mm (cheap solution) + maybe a 24/35 prime lens


<span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]Any thoughts :-)

From my experience I wouldn't choose anything slower than f/2.8 for indoors, in particular with kids. You can always add a EF 50 f/1.8 II, it's fast and cheap and has good optical quality. My personal planned upgrade path from the EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens, primes apart, is an EF 24-70 f/2.8 L for multi-use, and an EF 70-200 f/4 IS L for outdoors.


The final choice is up to you, try to be clear about what you really need! Using my 18-55 showed me that f/5.6 can be too slow even for casual outdoor shots, and that I can live without the 18-23mm range, but 55 is always to short for me, that's how I chose the above two zooms. I only hope that I won't miss IS on the 24-70 too much.


(Or that the much-hoped-for upgrade arrives before my purchase, and at a moderate price increase; it seems strange to me that a cheap low-end lens like the 18-55 has IS, while e.g. for the price delta between the 70-200 IS and non-IS you can get two or three 18-55 lenses?)

From my experience I wouldn't choose anything slower than f/2.8 for indoors, in particular with kids. You can always add a EF 50 f/1.8 II, it's fast and cheap and has good optical quality. My personal planned upgrade path from the EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens, primes apart, is an EF 24-70 f/2.8 L for multi-use, and an EF 70-200 f/4 IS L for outdoors.


The final choice is up to you, try to be clear about what you really need! Using my 18-55 showed me that f/5.6 can be too slow even for casual outdoor shots, and that I can live without the 18-23mm range, but 55 is always to short for me, that's how I chose the above two zooms. I only hope that I won't miss IS on the 24-70 too much.


(Or that the much-hoped-for upgrade arrives before my purchase, and at a moderate price increase; it seems strange to me that a cheap low-end lens like the 18-55 has IS, while e.g. for the price delta between the 70-200 IS and non-IS you can get two or three 18-55 lenses?)

Hi


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]Good thoughts about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L. I actually also think it could be an excellent choice. But as you point out - will I miss IS. I can see the good point in f/2.8 when it's for moving objects and bad light.
But IS is still good for my shaking hand <span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: Wingdings; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-font-family: Verdana; mso-hansi-font-family: Verdana; mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;"]J<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]
Have actually newer tried to turn off IS on my ef-s 17-85mm.
70-200mm<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] f/4 L is on the long list <span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: Wingdings; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-font-family: Verdana; mso-hansi-font-family: Verdana; mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;" lang="EN-GB"]<span style="mso-char-type: symbol; mso-symbol-font-family: Wingdings;"]J<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;" lang="EN-GB"]<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-size: 9pt; color: black; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-GB"]I have the possibility to tryout the 16-35mm L II and the 24-70mm L. So maybe I will evaluate the results first, plus hope for and announcement of a 24-70mm with IS.