A general purpose lens that takes sharp pictures.

[Tack Sharp]

I have a T3i and want to upgrade from my kit lens to one of the following 2 lenses

[DavidEccleston]

Having gone with the 24-105mm option, I'd suggest going another route. 15-85mm is a nice lens, or perhaps consider the Canon 17-55mm f2/8 or the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (non VC version).


On the 24-105mm, 24mm isn't wide enough, and I don't find the lens to be super sharp.


With the 15-85mm, you'll get more range on both ends compared to your kit lens (assuming it's the 18-55mm), and it's quite sharp. It's probably quite a bit lighter too.


The Canon 17-55mm is generally regarded as the best general purpose zoom for a crop body. With a constant f/2.8 aperture, you can shoot with thin DOF, or in lower light. It's in the same sort of price range as the 24-105mm.


The Tamron 17-50mm is supposed to be quite a nice lens, plus with a constant f/2.8 aperture, you can shoot with thin DOF, or in lower light. The VC version (Tamron's name for IS) is significantly softer, so you'd be giving up image stabilization if you did this. The reason to consider this vs. the Canon 17-55mm is that it's less than half the price.

[clemmb]

15-85mm is a nice lens, or perhaps consider the Canon 17-55mm f2/8 or the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (non VC version).


On the 24-105mm, 24mm isn't wide enough, and I don't find the lens to be super sharp.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Welcome to the forum.


I see a lot of people saying that the 24-105 is not that sharp. My first two cameras were the XT and XTi with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 (non VC version). When I upgraded to the 24-105 I could see a big improvement in IQ including sharpness. I did however have an issue with it not going wide enough. I now have two 24-105s but I no longer shoot a 1.6x camera. Both of mine are full frame or 1.3x.


With that said, if I still had a 1.6x camera I would go with the canon 17-55 f2.8 IS. I have no experience with the 15-85 but from what I have seen it looks like a good choice as well.


Mark

[Daniel Browning]

+1 15-85

[George Jogtich]

+2 15-85

[neuroanatomist]

Welcome!


You want a general purpose lens, and if you really mean that, you

[Chris White]

Welcome Tack Sharp,


I would go with the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM of the two choices you listed. I have the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM, but on a APS-C 1.6 crop Canon, such as the T3i, 24mm is the equivalent of 38.4mm on a FF body. Personally I have the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM because I needed the constant f/2.8 for what I do. If you are not using it in low light without a flash the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is a very good choice. Since you have a T3i, a fairly new body and are looking to upgrade from the kit lens, I am making the assumption you are not looking at FF anytime soon. If you were thinking of say a 5D II purchase soon, then the the 24-105 would merit more consideration. If you have not done so yet, I would recommend you read Bryan's excellent reviews on both EF-S lenses.


http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-15-85mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


Fair warning though: good Canon glass is like Lays Potato Chips -- one is never enough.


Welcome to the addiction,


Chris

[Chris White]

[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Discussions-Components-Files/8/8420.20110827_2D00_IMG_5F00_0035.jpg[/img]


50D/EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM 1/125-f/2.8-ISO 200


<span class="field-item-description"]<span style="color: #000000;"]Here is a photo of my son at his first NFL game last Saturday. This printed out incredibly sharp. The first seat is approximately in the same plane as him, but I could easily crop that out. What I really like is the way other the seats blur in the background pulling you attention to him. Keep in mind this is just a "memory" photo run through LR3 to convert from RAW for printing.

[Tack Sharp]

Thanks Chris, I appreciate your feed back. I actually went and tested the EF-S 17-55 this morning... It was a great lens. Much sharper than my standard kit lens and it worked great in the store in low light. With concerns to the crop body factor, yes the lower end 17mm was better than the 24 that the EF 24-105 offers but am I going to be disappointed turning down the opportunity of buying an L lens? I mean, you even said it... I

[clemmb]

Thanks Chris, I appreciate your feed back. I actually went and tested the EF-S 17-55 this morning... It was a great lens. Much sharper than my standard kit lens and it worked great in the store in low light. With concerns to the crop body factor, yes the lower end 17mm was better than the 24 that the EF 24-105 offers but am I going to be disappointed turning down the opportunity of buying an L lens? I mean, you even said it... I'm after those Lays chips! (good glass)
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

If you go with the 24-105 you may find it not wide enough as was said numerous times above. When I was making this decision with my XTi I looked back at many of my shots and found I rarely went lower than 24mm on my Tamron 17-50. The decision to go with the 24-105 was the right decision for me especially since I have now gone full frame. If you do not think you will ever go FF then I would go with the canon 17-55.


Mark