Is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS a worthwhile upgrade from the EF-S 15-85mm on a 60D?
Asked 9/7/2012
2 views
2 answers
0
I use a Canon 60D and my main walk-around lens is the EF-S 15-85mm IS. I like its flexibility, especially for everyday shooting, family moments, and indoor snapshots where I do not have time to change lenses. My main complaint is the variable f/3.5-5.6 aperture.
I am considering the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS as a possible upgrade. I understand it is still an EF-S lens rather than an L lens, but I care about keeping useful wide-angle coverage on a crop body.
For those who have used both, is moving from the 15-85mm to the 17-55mm a meaningful upgrade in image quality and usability, or is it more of a tradeoff between range and speed? Also, if I wanted an L-series alternative, which Canon options come closest on APS-C?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
5
I'm going to step around the discussion of the 17-55 EF-S lens and its comparison to an L lens as thats a loaded question that has lots of heated debate surrounding it. To address the meat of your question which I take as 'I want to upgrade to an L lens, which one?' that depends on what you're looking for in a lens. Unfortunately there isn't a single L lens that will cover the same range as the 15-85, if you're looking on the wide end of a zoom lens there is the 16-35 f2.8L and 17-40 f4L, if you're looking for a mid zoom that covers a wide range then look at the 24-105 f4L.
But I bet you already knew your options and you're looking for a nudge in one direction or another and in this case it really comes down to how much do you use the 15-23mm range of your current lens?. If its 'not so much and I wish I had more reach' then certainly go for the 24-105L, however if you primarily shoot on the wide end then perhaps you should strongly consider the 16-35L, 17-40L or even the 17-55.
Originally by user1819. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1819
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
On a 60D, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is generally the most sensible “upgrade” if your priority is better low-light performance and excellent optics while keeping useful wide-angle coverage. It is widely regarded as one of Canon’s best EF-S lenses and can compete with, or even outperform, some L zooms on APS-C.
The tradeoff is clear: you gain a constant f/2.8 aperture, but lose range at both ends versus the 15-85mm. So this is less a straight upgrade than a switch in priorities: speed and optical performance versus versatility.
If you want a true L-series replacement, there is no single Canon L lens that matches the 15-85mm range well on a crop body. Common options are the 16-35mm f/2.8L, 17-40mm f/4L, and 24-105mm f/4L, but each gives up something important on APS-C, especially at the wide end. That is why many photographers stay with EF-S glass on crop bodies.
So: if you value wide-to-tele flexibility most, keep the 15-85mm. If you want a faster walk-around lens for indoor and family shooting, the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS is a very strong choice.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Canon EF-S 15-85mm plus 50mm f/1.8 vs EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 for a 550D
Is the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM really "L-series" quality?
Canon EF-S 17-85mm USM vs 18-55mm STM: which is better at the wide end?
Can Canon EF-S lenses be used on a Canon 6D full-frame camera?
Why is Canon's EF-S 15-85mm called a standard zoom while the EF 17-40mm is called ultra-wide?