Opinions on 15-85 or 18-135 (STM) or 24-105 requested

So, it looks like my trusty 24-105L needs some repairs, after nine years of flawless operation. I'm getting the error 1, and no amount of cleaning the lens contacts seems to make any difference. I'll call Canon on Tuesday, and see what they say, but I'll probably be sending it in for repair. Depending on the price of the repair, it might make sense to replace it with another lens, either another copy of the same lens, or a different lens. I'm looking at the 15-85 and the 18-135 STM as possible replacements. A white box 24-105 is around $650. The 18-135 STM is around $550. And the 15-85 is around $800. Depending on how much it will cost to repair my 24-105, I'm prepared to spend any of those amounts.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has experience with these EF-S lenses, and especially those who have comparative experience with the 24-105L as well. I'm not interested in the 17-55. 55 is simply too short for me on the long end.  I also don't need opinions on whether 24 or 18 or 15 is 'wide enough' on the wide end. I know exactly how wide 24 is on crop, and 18, and 15. I have the 10-18 for wide angle. I'm only interested in hearing about the IQ of the lenses (sharpness, contrast, bokeh), and performance in general (AF, IS effectiveness, etc.). I also know that the 15-85 and the 18-135 are EF-S lenses, and don't need reminding that they won't work on FF cameras, if I ever decide to get one. I have the 7DII, which is an amazingly good camera, and I have no plans to get a FF camera, but I'll be quite happy selling any EF-S lenses I have, if I ever get one and get rid of my crop cameras.

Normally, I would have said the 15-85. Love that range on a crop cam. However, with the availability of the new 10-18, I'd be most likely tempted to go a combo of the 10-18, & 18-135. Would make an absolutely brilliant travel/walkaround setup imo. Chuck in the new 24 f/2.8 & 50 f/1.8 STM & there's not a lot you couldn't shoot. For peanuts really

I'm on my 2nd 15-85.

The 15-85 is my standard lens of choice. It's pretty much sharp throughout the range. Full tele and wide open.

It's my travel lens. It's my scenery lens.

You don't want anybody to tell you about the width. Well I will.

When you come home from a trip and your photos just don't look like what you saw it's usually because your eyes saw a lot wider than your lens & camera captured.

Several years ago I was on a hiking trip with my daughter and I was jogging on the trail catching up with her. I tripped on a root or rock and went flying. I landed on my front where my camera was.

It took me over an hour to clean everything up. The camera and lens worked but the lens had a squeak and a few other things. From then on I suspected the accuracy of the focus.

Canon was going to charge about $300 to fix it so I sold the lens to a store and bought a new one.

Great lens.

speedync wrote:

So, it looks like my trusty 24-105L needs some repairs, after nine years of flawless operation. I'm getting the error 1, and no amount of cleaning the lens contacts seems to make any difference. I'll call Canon on Tuesday, and see what they say, but I'll probably be sending it in for repair. Depending on the price of the repair, it might make sense to replace it with another lens, either another copy of the same lens, or a different lens. I'm looking at the 15-85 and the 18-135 STM as possible replacements. A white box 24-105 is around $650. The 18-135 STM is around $550. And the 15-85 is around $800. Depending on how much it will cost to repair my 24-105, I'm prepared to spend any of those amounts.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has experience with these EF-S lenses, and especially those who have comparative experience with the 24-105L as well. I'm not interested in the 17-55. 55 is simply too short for me on the long end. I also don't need opinions on whether 24 or 18 or 15 is 'wide enough' on the wide end. I know exactly how wide 24 is on crop, and 18, and 15. I have the 10-18 for wide angle. I'm only interested in hearing about the IQ of the lenses (sharpness, contrast, bokeh), and performance in general (AF, IS effectiveness, etc.). I also know that the 15-85 and the 18-135 are EF-S lenses, and don't need reminding that they won't work on FF cameras, if I ever decide to get one. I have the 7DII, which is an amazingly good camera, and I have no plans to get a FF camera, but I'll be quite happy selling any EF-S lenses I have, if I ever get one and get rid of my crop cameras.

Normally, I would have said the 15-85. Love that range on a crop cam. However, with the availability of the new 10-18, I'd be most likely tempted to go a combo of the 10-18, & 18-135. Would make an absolutely brilliant travel/walkaround setup imo. Chuck in the new 24 f/2.8 & 50 f/1.8 STM & there's not a lot you couldn't shoot. For peanuts really

This is exactly what I did. I have all four of those lenses and saved my money on the big boys (Sigma 150-600c & Canon 100 2.8l) The 10-18 and 18-135 make a great travel combo and produce sharp photos.