Is 24-105 on a FF better than 15-85 on cropped body?

Hello everyone. Planning to go to Europe this summer, cant decide what to bring with me. One part of me says - take 7D with 15-85 and add 35 1.4 for bokeh. The other one goes - take 5D3, 28 1.8, 35 1.4, 50 1,8 100macro and finish it off with 70-200 4is. So i came to this idea - buy a superzoom EF lens - 24-105. Accompanied with 35 1.4 it should give me the about the same focal range i had with 15-85. However, im not sure this lens is worth spending money on. I didnt really like 15-85`s IQ - only a significant IQ increase would persuade me getting 24-105. So - will i notice any improvements with 24-105 over 15-85?

For more info - i am going to Paris, Amsterdam, Ghent and Brugge with my wife, so a lot of wide-angle shots as well as full-body portraits are expected to be shot.

bronxbombers4 wrote:

Dimes wrote:

Hello everyone. Planning to go to Europe this summer, cant decide what to bring with me. One part of me says - take 7D with 15-85 and add 35 1.4 for bokeh. The other one goes - take 5D3, 28 1.8, 35 1.4, 50 1,8 100macro and finish it off with 70-200 4is. So i came to this idea - buy a superzoom EF lens - 24-105. Accompanied with 35 1.4 it should give me the about the same focal range i had with 15-85. However, im not sure this lens is worth spending money on. I didnt really like 15-85`s IQ - only a significant IQ increase would persuade me getting 24-105. So - will i notice any improvements with 24-105 over 15-85?

For more info - i am going to Paris, Amsterdam, Ghent and Brugge with my wife, so a lot of wide-angle shots as well as full-body portraits are expected to be shot.

Nah, it's not any better. It's an L but tht doesn;t mean it is magic, it's actually the least sharp L lens I've ever owned. On APS-C, it's not even as sharp as my tamron 28-75 2.8 or 17-50 2.8 were, but that said it is sharp corner to corner on aps-c. But I don't see the point of it on aps-c when you have stuff like 15-85 IS, 17-55 2.8, tamron 17-50 2.8, 28-75 2.8, sigma 16-50 OS, etc. available unless you don't shoot wide much, prefer more length built in and need IS and get it at one of the $550-600 type deals.

The thing is that i am thinking of taking just one-two lenses but on FF, not on a APS-C. Thanks for your reply - it confirms what ive heard about relatively low IQ of 24-105.

It is not all about the lens.

I can tell you from personal experience that the images you would get from the 5D3/24-105 will be much better than the 7D/15-85.

Yeah, its not. I really want to take that 5D3 with me cause it gives a better IQ by itself (plus the ability to shoot in high ISO). What stops me - i dont really want to carry all those lenses with me, since i dont have any non-tele zooms.

I have 7D+15-85 & 6D+24-105.  I would suggest to go with the 5D M3 + 24-105.

In terms of IQ, 15-85 is good but not great. Same goes with 24-105. But I m pretty sure the prime will behave much better on your FF than 7D.

I also own the 10-22 & definitely its sharper & much better in IQ on my 7D.

Great question! I've contemplated upgrading my T3i w/ 15-85mm to a 6D w/ 24-105mm. The main motivation is to take advantage of some of the great primes and thin DoF. However, I wouldn't be able to afford the primes I want right away and would have to live with just the 6D and 24-105 for a while.

I want to make sure I'm not taking a step back from the T3i + 15-85mm combo. It sounds like no, but could one of you that owns both combos take a photo or 2 of the same scene with similar settings and post it to this thread? It would be greatly appreciated! Something with good lighting. Obviously the 6D or 5Dm3 will shine at high ISO.

I don't have the 15-85, but I have the 17-55 f2.8 IS, which would be at least as sharp as the 15-85.

Although the 24-105L is not that sharp on crop bodies, pixels on FF bodies are larger and do not put as much demand on the 24-105. Pixel for pixel, the 24-105 on FF is better than any zoom lens on crop. From my experience, with more pixels on FF than crop, the overall photo from the 24-105 is definitely better.

Besides, the high ISO capability of FF will give you much better interior shots at your European destinations.

We will be going to Berlin & Prague this summer.  I am planning to take my 5Dmk3, 24-105L and a Samyang 14 2.8, plus the small Ex270 flash for fill.  I will leave my 70-200 f4IS home.

I have 6D/24-105 and used to own t2i/sigma 17-50.

I really like the IQ of sigma 17-50 but 6D/24-105 gives much better IQ and color.

I believe sigma 17-50 is better than 15-85, so hope this helps.

msowsun wrote:

It is not all about the lens.

I can tell you from personal experience that the images you would get from the 5D3/24-105 will be much better than the 7D/15-85.

I would say for me it is a better combination due mainly to the FF. 24-105 is better than it gets credit for here. BB has never liked that lens- of course that's his prerogative. Have had recent contact with several top pros here in LA, all use the 24-105 to good advantage.

Having said that I was always happy with the 15-85, until ISO800 anyway. But the main reason to go that route is to go small, and the 7D is already nearly the size of 5D, so what's the point?

FF all the way! Maybe go prime since you have them!

Something with good lighting. Obviously the 6D or 5Dm3 will shine at high ISO.

I can't do that comparison for you, but I made that switch and it's a big improvement for me. Though maybe not so much in bright sunlight at ISO100.

The point is, we often have to shoot higher, and the FF pulls away quickly above 400.

Certainly it's not a step back. Not a bit.

Thanks for the feedback. I was figuring it wasn't a step back but it good to get confirmation. Not a lot of 24-105 on FF versus 15-85 on Crop on the web.

Yes.

The 5D3 will give you better results regardless of lens. I have both the 7D and 5D3 and the 5D3 wins hands down on IQ. I still like my 7D as it's extra reach, frame rate and buffer depth cannot be ignored when the situation calls for it.

Now a 7D2 which gets somewhere towards the 5D3 experience now that would be something

it's mentioned a number of times above already but I'll drill it down a bit more... 

your 5d mk3 would give you noticeably better images regardless, even if you placed a 24-105 on your 7D. I own both lenses (used my 15-85 on a crop before upgrading to FF), and I can only repeat what you already know, that the 24-105 is not that much greater. It's more weather sealed than the 15-85, which is helpful when I want to brave a bit of rain and take the picture while travelling.

Of those places, I've only been to Paris, and I would definitely say a zoom is more useful than a wide angle. That said, 15-85 and 24-105 would both do well (albeit both lenses a little slow for low light shots, which might be where the 5D's high ISO performance steps in). I just don't see why not bring the FF. Ask yourself how often in the future do you think you'd pick your 5D over your 7D when heading out and about.