I have been using it for 5 years already, I am very satisfied, I use it in conjunction with the Canon 500d. Before that, I used a whale 18-55. The difference between them is palpable. 100% sharpness is very pleasing, now you don't need to "increase" it in the editor. The focal range is the most for shooting while traveling (I just didn’t have enough in one direction or the other). The stabilizer works wonders (compared to a whale lens). When choosing, I looked closely at the models 10-22 and…

Excellent staffer. On the crop, it is indistinguishable in picture quality from 24-105 F4 L. It remains to buy 17-55 F2.8 for indoors and that's it. And then save money and switch to full frame ;-) Different pros: Sharpness, color reproduction, well reveals 18 megapixel crop sensor (550D), universal FR, decent width, very fast USM, effective stub, comfortable in the hand, price-quality ratio, and in the direction of quality. For example, the trunk itself does not fall out =) and in general the…

When buying, the task was to find a relatively inexpensive and versatile zoom lens, compared 18-135, 17-85 and 15-85. The first two looked like plastic rattles, and I didn't really like the test shots. I took this one and I don’t regret it, but it makes sense to replace it with a full frame with a set of fast fixes :) Has pros: Convenient, well-assembled and quite versatile as a staff member on the 60D. It seems like the only non-L-lens that fully resolves the matrix and allows you to feel…

I use it on the 550D and am very pleased with both the design and the result. It goes like a whale to 7D, which is why you can find it much cheaper. As I already wrote, I dropped it on the asphalt, it was saved by the lens hood, which (not) accidentally ordered 2 pieces, and there was only a scratch on the lens. Got pros: 0) Sharpness and SHU 1) USM is nowhere faster) 2) The design is durable, dropped it on the asphalt . 3) Comfortable to the touch (pot-bellied)) which adds solidity 4) Ft

The nature of the blurring at the edges is due not only to chromatism, but also to other aberrations that are not corrected in the DPP RAW converter. At equal focal lengths of 55-85mm (at aperture 5.6) with a Canon EF-S 55-250mm f / 4-5.6 IS lens, it outperforms 15-85 at the edges by a factor of 2. In the center, they have parity. By the way - Canon EF-S 55-250mm f / 4-5.6 IS (by 55mm) surpasses even Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM ! You can throw yourself at me, but this is all a sad fact.

Blend cannot be found - but there are few of them. I bought a Japanese one for 2 thousand and have no regrets. Someone bought a Chinese one. I know what's the difference? The fact that the inner coating of the Japanese hood comes from suede (I can’t say exactly what kind of material, but it looks similar), while the Chinese have plastic. Do you think plastic suppresses or reflects the sun? And write expensive? Yes, pricey, but good quality. If there were more aperture, it would be great.

For a long time I chose between 24-105L and this glass. I have a 7D carcass, and I decided to take exactly 15-85. Since I live for today and I don’t know when I will switch to full frame, but I don’t like to look at mark3 and fantasize. As there will be a full frame, then you can buy 25-105, and then I think it's better to take 24-70 f2.8. I tried to shoot 24-105 on the crop, there is not enough wide angle indoors, and aperture 4, it was not very pleasing, although it is L with a red ring…

I bought it in order to take pictures on trips and in the countryside: to a greater extent, nature and architecture, to a lesser extent, people. For these purposes, the lens is perfect. Portraits also come out fine in good lighting. But there is one thing: it is very heavy - it does not bring joy to wear it for a long time. But, in fairness, it should be noted that lenses that are significantly lighter either narrower in the range of focal lengths or generally with fixes Obvious things: For…

Bought on EOS 70D. After fixing 50 1.4 mm, I wanted space in focal lengths, by the way, he didn’t really let me get acquainted with the new camera, of course, it’s not difficult to walk with legs, but there were a lot of “buts” during operation. 15-85 is ideal, there is no terrible barrel at all, I shoot people in the room and no one is flattened, almost the entire interior is also subject to the car, there is beauty on the street - it’s as if I have found a new vision and the heaviness of this

Those who admire "sharpness" most likely switched from unintelligible whale glasses (and corny have no experience with good lenses (not to mention top ones)), alas . no offense :) I took a slightly damaged Tamron to replace it, and at first I generally thought that I got a defective copy, the difference between the faster and cheaper 17-50 from Tamron_a was so visible. I tried a few more copies, but in the end the seller went forward and agreed to exchange with an additional payment for 17-40…

Eh, I thought of taking this lens, hoping for positive feedback from underexperts. The lens is extremely bad, I compared it with the whale 18-55 on the target, checking the sharpness (at different apertures), and the whale lens did it. In fact, the lens turned out to be neither here nor there. Dark for portraits, soapy for landscapes. It’s better to take 17-55 IS USM (or 18-55 IS STM) and 55-200 II for crop, these lenses will handle all scenarios simply gorgeously in a pair. If it is not…

On tours I used whale 18-55, it was not enough either at zoom, or, moreover, at wide angle (taking a picture of an average European town hall or church in a cramped square is always a problem). Now, as a new world has opened. In all respects, it beats the whale. The barrel is quite tolerable even at 15 mm. There is practically no chrome. The vignette is almost indistinguishable. It is clear that this is not a fix, but that's the beauty of it. One downside is it's heavy.

Took it along with 60D. Tested all different Elks! So here it is! Elks, guys, for full format, and for crop 15-85 - the perfect staffer! It fully resolves the cropped 18 megapixel matrix, and there are simply NO competitors for it at the moment! No need to take expensive Elks supposedly for a "fast" transition to FF. Live here and now. Take the best glass for your cropped camera, not the FF-rated emjujcnm!

in general, a very successful lens, primarily due to its versatility. I shot beautiful landscapes, and a reportage, and a portrait, and such a macro on it. for landscape, the main jamb is the blurry angles at 15-16mm, from about 18mm they are much better, but this can be seen on large print or at 100% viewing. also on a wide angle there is a small barrel and HA, but they are corrected by the profile in FS almost without a trace. the colors are good, but not perfect, and require little touch-up…

I tested 3 pieces in the store, the seller provided both a tripod and a target. In general, in the end I chose which room I liked more :) everyone worked like a clock (taiwan) Up to 80 is a very decent glass. after a barely noticeable soap appears. The stub behaves at 5+, sometimes up to 1 / 2s images are obtained without blurring. There are HA at the edges of the focal points, but after 85% from the center. Compared with ef50 1.8II This one seemed more interesting at 50, but only when it's…

I bought for a Canon 550D camera as a universal lens instead of a whale Canon 18-55. I got what I wanted, and a wide angle and zoom, almost twice as large as that of a whale. The focusing speed and sharpness itself do not differ from the whale Canon 18-55, in fact, more than 700 dollars only for a greater difference in focal lengths. Oh yes, the motor is still not buzzing. On the other hand, there are no cheaper lenses with such characteristics. Since I knew all this before the purchase, I can…

Analogues used: Canon EF 24-105 mm F/4.0 L IS USM. Bought in December 2022 for Canon 500D. Great versatile lens. Qualitatively made. There are no loopholes. Autofocus is accurate. I was pleased with the fidelity of color reproduction, the naturalness of the picture. Universal focal. If there are no plans to switch to full frame - that's it. Of the relative disadvantages - I had to "sharp" a lot in Lightroom. But, this, I find fault, because I compare it with the second five with 24-105 L and…

glass was taken to replace the whale (18-55). the main application is a lens for every day, travel, architecture. I needed a wide angle (10-22 was dismissed as very specific). Once again I say - you must be clearly aware of the purposes for which you take this or that glass. yes, portraits on it are not ice, but there are fixes for thoughtful portrait and subject shooting (I personally have 50 1.4). yes, you can’t run after birds and planes with him - but there are televisions for this. yes…

I bought it for travel as a universal lens for canon 80d, it fully met my expectations. The picture is good, compared to fixes, of course, not so sharp. Holds backlight well, excellent color reproduction. Universal range of focal lengths, no need to constantly change lenses! For 2 weeks of rest, I changed the lens only 2 times, and then for macro photography. Of the minuses: WEIGHT, normal aperture, the price could be less.

Bought in 2022. Sold it pretty soon. ✎ My assessment is conditional. a lot depends on what quality you are willing to pay 18-20 kilo for. ✎ bought after 18-55. waited a month to buy in a store for 18,000. sold after 6 months. filmed for a couple of weeks. ✎ I have read many comments here. and decided to buy. It happens when you want to buy something new. BUT! I did not ask myself: why do I need 15-85? the most important difference from the whale is a wider angle. ask yourself: do you need…