15-85mm or 18-200mm

[NFLD Stephen]

Despite the examples of issues with the 15-85, I still recommend it. Really, it is part of "knowing your lens".
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Don't get me wrong: I still definately recommend this lens. I have it and I use it all the time. I agree that it is totally an issue of "knowing your lens" and working within the limitations of your equipment.

As a question for Stephen/others, is there more than one type of distortion going on inthe photo of Big Ben at 15 mm? It is certainly extreme. I am wondering ifpart of it is"convergence of parrallel lines"?A perspective issue?

I agree: there is likely other distortion types in this picture as well. In any case, I don't find this to be acceptable and was only trying to use this as an example of the types of things I need to activly look out for when using this lens at the wide end.


Stephen

[NFLD Stephen]

The photographer is to blame here, not the lens.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Thanks Mark! [:P]


This wasn't meant to be a great shot, as mentioned I was just taking this pic for my own curiosity looking at the distortion.


Whether this is barrel distortion or mostly perspective distortion I'm not entirely sure. I definately agree that this pic does show perspective distortion, but I also thought this was barrel distortion as well. Maybe I'm wrong. But I have noticed (albiet I haven't done a direct scientific comparison) that at the extreme wide angles of this lens (ie 15-17mm) there seems to be some distortion of straight lines near the edges of the frame. Perhaps this is also perspective distortion, but it does seem to improve as with slightly longer focal lengths. Unless I really need the wide angle I try not to go wider than 20mm and this seems to help with the issue.


Stephen

[NFLD Stephen]

There is also the Canon 18-135 that I forgot about. Any thoughts on that one?
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

I believe the 18-135 is slightly better than the 18-200 for image quality, but the 15-85 is still the better lens. I don't think you'll be disapointed with this choice.


Stephen

[R.Acevedo]

Ok, thanks again. I

[Mark Elberson]

The photographer is to blame here, not the lens.
<div style="CLEAR:both;"]</div>

Thanks Mark! [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]

I didn't mean you specifically :-) I was just making a general statement. Sometimes you can't back up any more and the only way to capture the entire scene is to tilt the camera up.

[Kayaker72]

Despite the examples of issues with the 15-85, I still recommend it. Really, it is part of "knowing your lens".
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Don't get me wrong: I still definately recommend this lens. I have it and I use it all the time. I agree that it is totally an issue of "knowing your lens" and working within the limitations of your equipment.

Stephen.....yep, I thought all along that your shots were simply "test" shots, really, to get to know your lens. As this thread was originally about selecting one lens over another, I didn't want the OP or others to think that was a typical shot out of the 15-85 at 15 mm.


On another side note, I am beginning to think I need to get DxO software. So many photography things to buy......

[neuroanatomist]

I am beginning to think I need to get DxO software. So many photography things to buy....

Always! But I look at it this way: Do you use the same lens for every shot? Do you use a flash for every shot? Probably not. A good piece of post-processing software can improve every shot you take. In particular for noise, DxO does a great job (at least vs. DPP, from my previous testing).

[R.Acevedo]

Purchased the 15-85mm today via eBay. New condition came with a Promaster UV filter and lens hood. Should be here Tuesday or Wednesday. $701 shipped.

[Fast Glass]

I think that

[Kayaker72]

Purchased the 15-85mm today via eBay. New condition came with a Promaster UV filter and lens hood. Should be here Tuesday or Wednesday. $701 shipped.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Congrats. That is great. I think you will be very happy with that set up.


Others may know who makes the Promaster UV filter and how good it is, but that is the one thing I would suggest checking. Just aim the lens at a light at a slight angle and snap a picture with it on and with it off and compare. You might also take a few other pictures of a subject with detail in it. Many UV filters are very good. Some, not. And you don't want a UV filter to impede the quality of the lens. Many here use B+W MRC filters.


Here are some example photos:


15-85 with "Canon" UV filter (cheap UV filter)


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-46-64-test/Direct-Light_2D00_Canon-Glass-Filter.JPG[/img]


B+W MRC UV filter


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-46-64-test/Direct-light_2D00_B_2B00_W-MRC.JPG[/img]


No UV filter, just the lens:


[img]/resized-image.ashx/__size/550x0/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-46-64-test/Direct-light_2D00_no-UV-filter.JPG[/img]