Better choice for the $$$

[Wellcraft]

I'm about to purchase a 60d and I would like to know what would it be a better choice for the money.

60d with 15-85 with 70-300 for $1,829 or
15-85 with 55-250 for $1,634

60d with 17-85 with 70-300 for $1,715 or
17-85 with 55-250 for $1,520

60d with 18-135 with 70-300 for $1,500

 

[mtndew]

whichever you choose be sure the combo has at least the 15-85mm. It's sharp, sharp sharp. I also have a 70-300mm Tamron, but I'm sure you are referring to the Canon model. I had the 55-250mm and sold it to buy the 70-300mm. The 55-250mm was sharp, but I wanted the extra reach and build of the 70-300. I also have Canon's budget 50mm 1.8. In testing I found the 15-85mm at 50mm to be a match for the 50mm in sharpness. Oh, and I do have the 60D as well.
--
Rick,

 

[Wellcraft]

Thanks Rick, I'm thinking the same way you did.

I'm really considering now the 15-85 because is going to be my all around lens, before I had my mind set on the 18-135.

Will the 15-85 be better in low light situation than a 18-135? I've been told for sports neither is good, but I can't increase my budget anymore, which would be suitable for sports, at lesst for now.

I haven't been able to find low light sample pics for the neither lens toi have an idea.

Rick, since you have this set up, do you have samples or comments in low light and sports, how long have you owned this set up?

Yes, I'm reffering to the 70-300 from canon.

I'm, interested in this lense for the extra reach and build too quality, but I debbeting if is worth the $195 differnce. I started with a $1k budget, then $1500 and now I'm climing to around $1800, which is driving me a bit nervous, but i dont want to be replacing lenses any time soon, this is why I increased my budget.

I was planning on buying the 50mm f/1.8 in a few weeks, so we are going to have the same set up.

I'm kind of worry to break the 55-250 if I drop the lens or the camera/lens, since the 55-250 has a plastic mount, plus I read the IQ on the 70-300 is a bit better.

whichever you choose be sure the combo has at least the 15-85mm. It's sharp, sharp sharp. I also have a 70-300mm Tamron, but I'm sure you are referring to the Canon model. I had the 55-250mm and sold it to buy the 70-300mm. The 55-250mm was sharp, but I wanted the extra reach and build of the 70-300. I also have Canon's budget 50mm 1.8. In testing I found the 15-85mm at 50mm to be a match for the 50mm in sharpness. Oh, and I do have the 60D as well.
--
Rick,

 

[Peter Kwok]

The 15-85 is much better than the old 17-85 or the one-size-fits-all 18-135. As for the choice between 55-250 or 70-300, there is not much difference in optical quality. It is mostly build and AF speed.
--
Peter Kwok
http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok
WYSIWYG - If you don't like what you get, try to see differently.

 

[Wellcraft]

how much does affect the range difference between the 85 and 135 lenses?

Does it make a differnece that the 15-85 has USM and 18-135 doesn't?

 

[filmluvr]

My advice is only that you not get too twisted up over the decision. Canon lenses retain a huge percentage of their original cost on the used market. If you buy a lens and use it for a year, then switch it out, you'll lose very little. Other than that, I agree with the info being posted. Go as wide as you can afford on the wide end; don't plan on indoor sports shooting until you have a big budget. Sports and wildlife (especially birding) are the two most expensive genres.

--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon

 

[Wellcraft]

Is the AF faster because of he USM? I'm trying to understand the USM thingy.

The 15-85 is much better than the old 17-85 or the one-size-fits-all 18-135. As for the choice between 55-250 or 70-300, there is not much difference in optical quality. It is mostly build and AF speed.
--
Peter Kwok
http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok
WYSIWYG - If you don't like what you get, try to see differently.

 

[Wellcraft]

Since I'm planning in getting a 50mm 1.8 in the near future, would it be a good option if I buy a kit with 18-135 and the 70-300 and cover all the bases, or a kit with 15-85 and 70-300 still be better because of the 15-85 lens?

Sorry for so many question but I need to make sure before placing the order tonight.

 

[Jim4496]

Yes USM makes for a faster focusing lens. TheUSM focusing motor is faster.

Personally I'd get the 15-85mm and a Tamron 70-300 VC USD

I started with the 18-55 amd 55-250 kit and have since changed to the 15-85 and Tamron 70-300.

The USM/USD focussing is faster and the lenses are sharper. I went for the Tamron over the Canon 70-300 for the better image stabilization and the lower cost.

 

[filmluvr]

Since I'm planning in getting a 50mm 1.8 in the near future, would it be a good option if I buy a kit with 18-135 and the 70-300 and cover all the bases, or a kit with 15-85 and 70-300 still be better because of the 15-85 lens?

One of the most popular zoom ranges for walkaround during the days of 35mm film was 35-135mm, later expanded by several companies to 28-135mm. The 15-85mm Canon gives you the equivalent of approximately 24-135mm, so it's a perfect range to serve as a basic zoom, and probably the best quality you can get in that price/zoom range.

--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon

 

[djrocks66]

I would second that last post. I have the 60D and the 15-85mm as well as the Tamron 70-300 VC. Both lenses are outstanding. I got the 60D with the 18-135 lens but I was not that impressed with that lens. I have also used the Canon 70-300 but prefer the Tamron. I sold the 18-135 and was going to get the Canon 17-55 for the constant 2.8 but decided to get the 15-85 and the Tamron 70-300 VC for the same price as the 17-55. I have a Sigma 30mm f1.4 for the low light stuff and it is my favorite lens. I would definitely pick up a Canon 50mm f1.8 as they are so cheap and very good. Have fun.
--

 

[mtndew]

I haven't been able to find low light sample pics for the neither lens to have an idea.

Rick, since you have this set up, do you have samples or comments in low light and sports, how long have you owned this set up?

The only sports I have used the 15-85mm lens for is for was indoor ice hockey. In that setting it didn't do very well since the light was relatively dim. I had to shoot at the long end of the lens which will only open up to 5.6 so I had to bump the ISO to 6400 to get a fast enough shutter speed. The shots were pretty noisy. At 3200ISO the 60D does fairly well - as you can see in the sample shots of a maritime museum. The 2 shots are of display cases. I had to do some noise removal for these. The 3rd shot is from a cruise ship.

The 15-85mm, with good light, would do okay for outdoor sports although without much zoom capability. I've had the 15-85mm for a year now. For outdoor sports, if your on a limited buget, I'm sure the 70-300m would do fine. Ultimately, for outdoor sports, a 100-400mm F4 lens would be best - but at a high cost.

I'm not a sports shooter though, I mostly shoot travel, vacation, outdoor and family photos.
Good luck

Rick,

--
Rick,

 

[Wellcraft]

Do you miss the range you lost when you got the 15-85?

For what I read, I understand the 15-85 is sharpervthan the 18-135 and I believe at 15 is wider, does this make a huge difference compare with the 18 lens?

I'm trying to see if is worth the price difference of around $300.

I'm trying to find same pictures taken with both lenses so I can compare them.

 

[sjwolfhope]

I agree the others who have said to buy the Canon 15-85 and the Tamron 70-300. What you save in buying the Tamron 70-300 ($50 rebate now) over the Canon 70-300 will help offset the high cost of the 15-85 plus give you better build quality, non rotating front element and somewhat better optical quality - assuming you are not talking about the L version which is quite more expensive but very good optically. These are the two lenses I got to replace the kit 18-55 and 55-250. Often found that I needed slightly more reach than the 18-55 gave plus the extra 3mm helps on the wide end. I also considered the Canon 18-135 but looked at some reviews and saw that the optical quality was no better than the 18-55 in the same range and fell off more at 135. I was even offered a 18-135 at a real good price but couldn't justify spending anything on it.

Steve W.

 

[Wellcraft]

I agree the others who have said to buy the Canon 15-85 and the Tamron 70-300. What you save in buying the Tamron 70-300 ($50 rebate now) over the Canon 70-300 will help offset the high cost of the 15-85 plus give you better build quality, non rotating front element and somewhat better optical quality - assuming you are not talking about the L version which is quite more expensive but very good optically. These are the two lenses I got to replace the kit 18-55 and 55-250. Often found that I needed slightly more reach than the 18-55 gave plus the extra 3mm helps on the wide end. I also considered the Canon 18-135 but looked at some reviews and saw that the optical quality was no better than the 18-55 in the same range and fell off more at 135. I was even offered a 18-135 at a real good price but couldn't justify spending anything on it.

Steve W.

Thanks Steve,

I honestly haven't seen the tamron yet, ill take a look at it on the web to compare them. I just spoke to the wife and decided to go with 15-85 and a telephoto, will consider the tamron as you and other members suggested. You don't find your self missing the extra reach of an additional 55mm form lets say the 17-135, or is this something that I can fulfill by cropping.

 

[mtndew]

I agree the others who have said to buy the Canon 15-85 and the Tamron 70-300. What you save in buying the Tamron 70-300 ($50 rebate now) over the Canon 70-300 will help offset the high cost of the 15-85 plus give you better build quality, non rotating front element and somewhat better optical quality - assuming you are not talking about the L version which is quite more expensive but very good optically. These are the two lenses I got to replace the kit 18-55 and 55-250. Often found that I needed slightly more reach than the 18-55 gave plus the extra 3mm helps on the wide end. I also considered the Canon 18-135 but looked at some reviews and saw that the optical quality was no better than the 18-55 in the same range and fell off more at 135. I was even offered a 18-135 at a real good price but couldn't justify spending anything on it.

Steve W.

Thanks Steve,

I honestly haven't seen the tamron yet, ill take a look at it on the web to compare them. I just spoke to the wife and decided to go with 15-85 and a telephoto, will consider the tamron as you and other members suggested. You don't find your self missing the extra reach of an additional 55mm form lets say the 17-135, or is this something that I can fulfill by cropping.

There's some good advice above. I spent a lot of time researching the 15-85mm against other lenses before pulling the trigger. I didn't want to have regrets after spending the money. I'm not one to buy return, buy return and again buy and return. Some folks are.

If you knew how good the 15-85mm is against the 18-135mm I don't believe you would be asking the question about reach. Although the 35mm equivalent of 136mm on the 15-85mm may not be enough for you. The 35mm equ. of the 18-135mm on the long end is 216mm. At least check this out.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=678&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=675&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Buying lenses is no easy decision. I went 'round and 'round between the Canon 15-85mm and the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 before settling on the Canon. It's a decision I haven't regreted. If you are going to get the 70-300mm, whether the Canon or Tamron it may help make the decison an easier one.

One consideration, and it was one of mine, is the 15-85mm is a fairly compact lens and fits nicely into a belt holster case as a walk around lens. My Tamron won't fit in the belt case I have for the 60D with the 15-85mm. A bigger focal length at the long end is going to be farily large lens for a walk around. There's a lot to consider.

Good luck,

Here's a couple of sample shots with the 15-85mm









--

Rick,

 

[filmluvr]

I honestly haven't seen the tamron yet...

When you're making comparisons, don't forget that third-party lenses aren't compatible with the lens correction functions in DPP. They also don't seem to hold their value as well as OEM lenses. Just something to consider when you're reviewing the various options...

--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon

 

[Wellcraft]

Thanks Sir for your opinion.

I'm going with the canon 70-300 non L series because I can get it for $300 brand new as a bundle, so that's a saving of $250, the tamron is around $500 I think.

Again, I really appreciate your opinion..

I honestly haven't seen the tamron yet...

When you're making comparisons, don't forget that third-party lenses aren't compatible with the lens correction functions in DPP. They also don't seem to hold their value as well as OEM lenses. Just something to consider when you're reviewing the various options...

--
http://jackandkelly.zenfolio.com/

Canon 5D, 17-40mm, 70-300mm IS USM, 50mm f/1.8 II, 100mm macro, 28-135mm, 28mm f/2.0 Kiron, 135mm f/2.8 Rikenon, 200mm f/3.5 Komuranon, 500mm f/7.0 Komuranon

 

[Wellcraft]

Rick, really nice pics there, I really like the interior of the cruise and the ship.

I've been studding all the camera thing for about 1 1/2 months and I was between the Nikon 5100 and the t3i, the I decided to go for a t3i, then I decided to take a look at the 60d, at this point I decided to go with a 60d. After all this mind battle decision I realized that I needed good lenses, and it's been about 2 or 3 weeks on this battle.

After reading and reading and reading I decided to talk to the wife and she told me to go with the suggested one (15-85), I never thought I was going to pay About $600 for a lens, not even almost $2k for a complete set up. My budget was $1k. Per everyone’s suggestion I decided to go with a 15-85 and a 70-300. Like you I decided to go with this telephoto instead of the 55-250 because I want a better quality product, and knowing me I know I won’t be replacing lenses any time soon. I know this because I always had cheap P&S cameras and I found the picture Q was good, even my Smartphone. So I know whist this whole set up I 'm going to be more than pleased.

I don't like the return process so I want to get something I probably know I won't be returning. On top of that, I'll cost more money and the risk of getting lost or breaking or whatever during shipping.

Now my total is $1869 for a 60d + 15-85 + 70-300, they are now in my basket, but there is something in the back of my head to try to save some money, so I'm reconsidering the t3i so I can save $200. I really like the 60d more than the t3i, but don't know if is worth the extra $200.

There's some good advice above. I spent a lot of time researching the 15-85mm against other lenses before pulling the trigger. I didn't want to have regrets after spending the money. I'm not one to buy return, buy return and again buy and return. Some folks are.

If you knew how good the 15-85mm is against the 18-135mm I don't believe you would be asking the question about reach. Although the 35mm equivalent of 136mm on the 15-85mm may not be enough for you. The 35mm equ. of the 18-135mm on the long end is 216mm. At least check this out.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=678&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=1&LensComp=675&CameraComp=474&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

Buying lenses is no easy decision. I went 'round and 'round between the Canon 15-85mm and the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 before settling on the Canon. It's a decision I haven't regreted. If you are going to get the 70-300mm, whether the Canon or Tamron it may help make the decison an easier one.

One consideration, and it was one of mine, is the 15-85mm is a fairly compact lens and fits nicely into a belt holster case as a walk around lens. My Tamron won't fit in the belt case I have for the 60D with the 15-85mm. A bigger focal length at the long end is going to be farily large lens for a walk around. There's a lot to consider.

Good luck,

Rick,

 

[Wellcraft]

I just found this thread comparing side by side pictures using a 15-85 and 18-135, and if there is a problem with this lens (15-85), I honestly think the IQ of the 18-135 isn't bad at all.

Link http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1029&thread=40601376&page=1