Canon 15-85mm or 17-55mm???

H

Hydraulic_Man

New member
I'm a photographer going a bit to video.

I'm pretty happy with the 15-85mm lens for photo, but how is it for video?
It seems like there aren't alot of people using it onhere, but I did already find some footage on vimeo of people using it.

The variable aperture seems like a negative point.

but other then that? It has IS, is pretty sharp....

Sell it and add extra money for a 17-55 f2.8?
Or not worth the trouble
 
Depends on your shooting.. I personally would like the static 2.8 across all focal lengths. I HATE zooming in and the camera adjusting the aperture.. It hurts on the video side because you SEE the change..

So me being more video than photo at the moment, i would sell it and grab the 17-55.. I loose 30mm, but thats what feet are for right? :)

*or grab the tamron 17-50 non vc ($400ish) and keep your 15-85 w/ IS..

Hope that helps a bit..
 
NormanBates said:
+1 for tamron 17-50 nonVC and keep current lens if you like it; or some nice primes, maybe the samyang 35mm f/1.4- in fact, if you like primes, trading that 15-85 for the nearly-free 18-55 (so you still have a zoom lens with IS) and getting a set of primes may be a very good option - http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html
Click to expand...

Well I did hear some good things about the 18-55 for video, but as i will always be into photo, I don't know if the 18-55 would be a good option. On the other hand the 17-55 is good for photo and video ;)
 
I have the 18-55, my father has the tamron, you can see my tests with both here:
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsv.html
http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html
the tamron 17-50 non-VC, widely praised by a lot of shooters, is not any sharper, and has much worse bokeh; but it's f/2.8 throughout the range

anyway, my point is: the 17-55 is a great lens, but it's basically $1K more than the 18-55; for that money, I'd rather get the 18-55 (just so I have a zoom, and a lens with IS), and spend $1K on a set of primes (35+50+85, use 18+24 from the zoom)
(as I think about it, it's not "I'd rather", but exactly what I did)

but I hardly ever take stills, so I could go for manual primes; if you want to take stills and need AF for that (most common reason: kids), then neither vintage nor samyang is an option, you either have to spend a lot of money on L glass, or go for still-quite-nice-but-not-so-stellar primes (for the price of the 17-55 plus some change, you can get the 18-55, 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, and 85mm f/1.8)

or you can just get the 17-55 and forget about changing lenses; I think you'll be happy either way
 
Hydraulic_Man said:
I'm a photographer going a bit to video.

I'm pretty happy with the 15-85mm lens for photo, but how is it for video?
It seems like there aren't alot of people using it onhere, but I did already find some footage on vimeo of people using it.

The variable aperture seems like a negative point
2.jpg


but other then that? It has IS, is pretty sharp....

Sell it and add extra money for a 17-55 f2.8?
Or not worth the trouble
Click to expand...

I went with the 2.8 17-55mm canon lens because it was simply better.
what did you pick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top