September 18, 2014, 04:14:18 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF-S 17-85mm vs Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Please help me!  (Read 1425 times)

dgatwood

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 710
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF-S 17-85mm vs Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Please help me!
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2014, 06:50:00 PM »
Keep your 17-85. You seem to be satisfied with it.

If you get a full-frame camera in the future, then buy the full-frame lens at that time. There may be new ones coming, or you might find a deal when it's relevant. But why spend money on a lens that you apparently don't need, for a camera you don't own?


Agreed.  The 17-85 is a solid lens.  The 15-85 is a step up, but probably not enough to justify the cost.  And if you ever go full-frame later, that's money down the drain.

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=32

Alternatively, you might wait, save up the extra few hundred bucks, and buy a 6D/24-105L kit.  That will do far more for your image quality than any lens upgrade by itself, and it's not a lot more than the eBay prices for the original 24-70 f/2.8 lenses.  And the 24-105 is also sharper than the original 24-70 L f/2.8 even when stopped down to f/4, according to LensRentals.

So IMO, the only reason you should even consider the original 24-70 f/2.8 L is if you shoot a lot of sports and really need the f/2.8.  Maybe not even then.  The increased ISO capabilities of a full-frame body will usually do a lot more for you in terms of usable low-light performance than a single extra f-stop on the lens.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF-S 17-85mm vs Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Please help me!
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2014, 06:50:00 PM »

lescrane

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Canon EF-S 17-85mm vs Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Please help me!
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2014, 12:32:13 PM »
Keep your 17-85. You seem to be satisfied with it.

If you get a full-frame camera in the future, then buy the full-frame lens at that time. There may be new ones coming, or you might find a deal when it's relevant. But why spend money on a lens that you apparently don't need, for a camera you don't own?


Agreed.  The 17-85 is a solid lens.  The 15-85 is a step up, but probably not enough to justify the cost.  And if you ever go full-frame later, that's money down the drain.

http://www.juzaphoto.com/article.php?l=en&article=32

Alternatively, you might wait, save up the extra few hundred bucks, and buy a 6D/24-105L kit.  That will do far more for your image quality than any lens upgrade by itself, and it's not a lot more than the eBay prices for the original 24-70 f/2.8 lenses.  And the 24-105 is also sharper than the original 24-70 L f/2.8 even when stopped down to f/4, according to LensRentals.

So IMO, the only reason you should even consider the original 24-70 f/2.8 L is if you shoot a lot of sports and really need the f/2.8.  Maybe not even then.  The increased ISO capabilities of a full-frame body will usually do a lot more for you in terms of usable low-light performance than a single extra f-stop on the lens.

I found that the upgrade from 17-85 USM IS to the 15-85 USM was well worth the cost.  The lens is somewhat sharper, much less CA and I find that those 2mm are a big difference for wide landscapes.   I think the 15-85 is a great value.  before buying a I rented it along with the 24-105 L  and could barely see a difference in tests in overlapping focal lengths.  Can't speak to video at all as i don't do it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF-S 17-85mm vs Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L - Please help me!
« Reply #16 on: May 22, 2014, 12:32:13 PM »