Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Thinking about a change.


Mozzytheboy e2
4 701 3 United Kingdom
6 Dec 2012 7:45PM
Good point Steve. Just had the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX DG HSM recommended which is VERY different to the Tamron but similar (ish) to the Canon 15-85. I suppose as most really what I do with my Canon is around 30-100 120 ish, I need to think further. Crikey this is difficult Sad

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Mozzytheboy e2
4 701 3 United Kingdom
6 Dec 2012 7:50PM
Indeed Steve, it does I guess.
Mozzytheboy e2
4 701 3 United Kingdom
7 Dec 2012 11:06AM
Been having a good think and read of reviews. Crikey don't they vary? I wanted this to replace my Canon 17-85mm which is good on my 500D but truthfully I feel I can do better. Eventually I will I have little doubt upgrade to a full frame camera. Hopefully a Canon as I am used to the way in which they function.

I have taking in advice from you all; got myself down then to two choices.

The Canon 15-85mm

The Canon 24-105mm

Some have suggested I think hard about what I really do want it to do. In the main I suppose I do work from roughly 35-40 through to 85 but wish I had a bit more than 85 quite frequently. I rarely, almost never use the 17-85 at the 17-30 end. I'm forgetting going any bigger than the 105mm above as I think that is moving away from what I first asked about. I see the 15-85 can be had for around 450 which with say 150 back on my 17-85 means it is 300 to change. On the 24-105 the best price I can find is 545 so it means 300 or 400 to change.

I think I am right in saying the 24-105 is for a FF camera but will work fine on my 500D and give better results than my existing 17-85?

I've looked at Tamron and Sigma and neither seem to offer what these two do. Unless anyone can throw a 'fly in the ointment' I'll choose between these. And how do I do that?
mikehit e2
5 7.1k 11 United Kingdom
7 Dec 2012 11:44AM
Yes the 24-105 will work on your 500D.
I will give better quality than your 17-85 - and so it damned well should considering it is an 'L' lens and the price difference.


Quote:Eventually I will I have little doubt upgrade to a full frame camera.

Get the lens you need for the 500D. Photography fora have loads of people who year after year say 'I will go to FF soon' and end up with less-than-ideal lenses or their purpose.
If you do move to FF, the 24-105 on a FF camera is equavelent to 15-65 on the 500D and you are back to square one! Wink
steve_p 9 1.1k England
7 Dec 2012 12:57PM
If you think that you will be getting a FF camera in the near future the only option is the 24-105!
Having said that, from what you say you don't use the wider end of the 17-85,then get the 24-105 to use with your 500D.
I understand your problem, don't do what I did and ended up spending a fortune trying to get the ideal lens. Anyway I don't think that exists Wink.

Decision made!!Wink
Mozzytheboy e2
4 701 3 United Kingdom
7 Dec 2012 1:12PM
OK dumb alert question coming. Will the 24-105 on my Canon 500D give me a similar range as my existing 17-85. Orrr will it be lesser as Mike (I think) said above.?
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
7 Dec 2012 1:17PM
No no no... you should get the Canon 24-70 F2.8.
Coincidentally, there is one for sale in EPZ classifies....TongueWinkSmileGrin
Mozzytheboy e2
4 701 3 United Kingdom
7 Dec 2012 1:40PM
Why Coleslaw? because you have one for sale ? Wink
steve_p 9 1.1k England
7 Dec 2012 1:40PM
Good piece of sales patter, Cole !!!, seeing as its your lens!!

The 24-105 will give you more reach than the 17-85, at the telephoto end but not such a wide view, it's only on the FF cameras 5D etc where the change comes in. I can see you are getting more confused as time goes on. Personally as I said before go for the 24-105 as it seems to suit your requirements if you don't need the wide view.
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
7 Dec 2012 1:43PM

Quote:Why Coleslaw? because you have one for sale ? Wink

Not entirely.
Because it is a great lens, and sharp wide open. TongueWinkSmileGrin
steve_p 9 1.1k England
7 Dec 2012 1:47PM

Quote:Why Coleslaw? because you have one for sale ? Wink
Not entirely.
Because it is a great lens, and sharp wide open. TongueWinkSmileGrin


I agree with that but Mozzy is looking for something with a longer reach!
adrian_w e2
7 3.4k 4 Scotland
7 Dec 2012 1:47PM
Back in your kennel Cole! Wink

Mozzy, the 24-105mm on your 500D will give an equivalent field of view to a 38-170 mm lens on a FF body.
Or alternatively the 24-105mm on FF will be the equivalent of 15-65 on a 500D ( as Mike said above).
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
7 Dec 2012 1:52PM
I am a bit confused here....TongueTongueTongueTongueTongueTongue
He mentioned:

Quote:I wanted this to replace my Canon 17-85mm

and he got down to two choices.

Quote:The Canon 15-85mm
The Canon 24-105mm


How does 15-85 gives longer reach?
steve_p 9 1.1k England
7 Dec 2012 1:56PM
That's why I said 24-105!!
Coleslaw e2
9 13.4k 28 Wales
7 Dec 2012 2:00PM

Quote:Some have suggested I think hard about what I really do want it to do. In the main I suppose I do work from roughly 35-40 through to 85 but wish I had a bit more than 85 quite frequently. I rarely, almost never use the 17-85 at the 17-30 end. I'm forgetting going any bigger than the 105mm above as I think that is moving away from what I first asked about

In that case, go for the 24-105 then. Easy peasy. (Though don't forget there is a 24-70 for sales here in EPZ classifies....TongueTongueTongueTongueTongue I will go back to my kennel now)

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.