I had both for a very long time and i love the 15-85mm. It is a underrated crop lens, by me: the "best all around lens for APS-C". 18-135mm Nano is also a good lens but the wide end is not enough if you shoot interiors.
absolutely not the same, please research your answers, USM is one huge plus for 15-85, go search for sharpness and you will find that you just gave a hypothetic answer. People ask you here not about what you personally like. please pay attention to that. Thanks.
The good part about getting the 18-135mm STM is that you can also buy a 10-18mm STM and still have $200 left over. The 15-85mm is fairly expensive compared to the other two. Just a thought.
just wanted to ask because i have a 10-18mm but i think the 15mm is wide enough its equivalent to a 24-135mm on a crop so i'm not sure what i wanna go with. it would be cool to try it out though! but i end up bringing the 10-18mm and 55-250mm so maybe having a 15-85mm i can keep everything in one lens package i'm not sure
One of the thins you did not mention assuming that everything else being equal, (sharpness, build quality, etc.) is the price as others mention. I wanted the 15-85 and it suits my shooting preference but it is more expensive than the 18-135 especially when the 18-135 is bought as a kit lens. So I went ahead with the 77D and the 18-135 for a very reasonable price.
The guy who asked the question said he already had the 10-18 stm, so he's already covered as far as wide angles are concerned. I would say there is a third, very good option which is to get the 18-55 stm and the 55-250 stm. I know the 18-55 doesn't have the best reputation, but I personally think it's fine. And 55-250 stm is super sharp and has this wonderful 400mm equivalent reach. I think it's a must-have! It's lightweight with fantastic AF, and the price moves up and down between fairly low and ridiculously low! For photographing butterflies it's unbeatable.
For an ASPC body, if I could only have one lens, or take only one lens with me on a trip, it would be the 18-135. I've owned the 15-85 for many years and like it for portraits, but find the focal length too limited for many situations. I agree with Matt. My choice is the 18-135 STM.
Hi Matt, got a question for you. I want to buy a new camera for myself and I was thinking. Should i buy the sony a6500, panasonic gh4, nikon d7300 (if 4k is available), fujifilm xt2 or panasonic g7? The camera that i want is just for travelling or hobby. I want my camera to be able to record 4k videos and also good for photography & low light and can you see any difference between aps-c with micro 4/3 sensors. THX! Luv your channel. Keep up the good work :)
Not used either but I'd go for the 15 to 85 over the 18 to 135. Why? Well zooms are a compromise anyway, expecting a single lens to cover such a wide focal range is going to impact it's quality so I tend towards zooms that have a more limited difference between their widest and most telephoto range. The 15 - 85 is basically a X5.7 zoom, the 18 - 135 a X7.5 zoom. Not a massive difference but still. I also find the wider 15mm more useful than 18mm. Don't forget to include the crop factor when using APSC, that difference is large when the 15mm becomes a 24mm field of view vs the 18mm which becomes almost 29mm. 4mm doesn't sound much but it's a lot at the wide end. The decision will have to come down to what you shoot. If it's mainly portraits, street and landscapes go for the 15 to 85, if it's sports and wildlife take advantage of the greater reach from the 18 to 135. :-D
Hey Matt, I've got a question for you. So I am just about to switch to Panasonic from Canon and buy the new G85 mainly for video use. But I'm worried about the colors on a Panasonic image... How do they compare to the famous Canon colors? And is there a good flat picture profile for color grading on the G85 like Sony's S-LOG? Thanks! :)
Colors are always such a personal thing, but I'm VERY happy with Panasonic color for video. In fact, I think the latest Panasonic cameras (GX8, G85, GX85) are unbeatable for video, especially considering the value for your money :-)
ArtoftheImage Yeah, I completely agree, thanks Matt! Oh, also, if you were going to shoot a video on your G85 with the intention of color grading it in post, what picture profile would you use? Is there one similar to Technicolor's Cinestyle but for Panasonic? I know Panasonic has one called V-LOG, but that's not available for the G85. What would you use instead?
I don’t own the 15-85 lens, but I’m toying with getting the 17-85 as a walkabout for single camera days. What I do have is the 10-18 EF-S which I recommend wholeheartedly. I also have the 18-135 STM which I use currently as a walkabout. When I bought it I was very impressed with the build and image quality and I still am. When I go out loaded for bear I have a 200D+10-18, 77D+18-35 and M5+adapter+Sigma 100-400 contemporary. I always come back with good photos 😊 Good luck with your photography 👍🤞😁
Well, there's the price to consider. Over here in Denmark, Europe the 15-85 is a bit over $800. And I just ordered the 18-135 (nano) USM for a little less than $300 from a reputable camera shop. (Special weekend offer, they say). And a $500 difference is important to me. Something else is the power zoom PZ-E1 which is available for the 18-135 and not the 15-85. (I ordered that too, btw). Now, if the price had been the same, and the PZ-E1 had worked on both ... I still think I would have chosen the 18-135. I find 18mm wide enough for most situations, and when I need a wider angle I have the 10-18 STM. I don't know how well suited I would find an 86mm for candid portraits - it might be just good enough... But I know that a 135mm will work beautifully.
I currently own the 17-85 and I like this lens a lot. The IQ is very good, and it is light, I thought about the 15-85, and I own an older version of the 18-135.
It was sunny LOL... but seriously, I try new things. I've always liked the look of sunglasses, and I like the look when Casey Neistat does it. Also helps huge by not having to worry about red-eye from a late night or early morning :-)
Pretty good review though one thing you did not mention is the STM on the 18-135, when shooting video with the 15-85 people will get the whining sound when focusing in there recordings and Not when using an STM lens. I own the 18-135 but wanted a little more wide sometimes so what I did was buy the canon 10-18 IS STM lens and now I have a super wide quit focusing lens. The canon 15-85 is a really nice lens that will give you pristine photos, much better than the 18-135 and now it's much cheaper $$ than years ago, it's a Great Walk Around lens but if you don't mind switching out lenses then I would recommend buying both 10-18 and 18-135.
18-55 STM - A kit lens. Enough said. Fast for video in decent light. 18-135 STM - Another version kit lens. Same class as 18-55 STM, but more expensive because of the greatly expanded focal range, which comes at some expense of sharpness. 17-85 Canon's original "EF-S Upgrade" lens, introduced with the 20D. Very versatile at the expense of some IQ, mostly distortion and CA. 15-85 L-quality glass for APS-C sensors. I like everything about this lens more except the maximum aperture better than Canon's 17-55 f2.8 IS. In my opinion, it's Canon's sharpest non-L, non-prime lens.
I actually have used both lenses and think the 15-85 is a much superior lens. It's usable focal length is stronger. If you are just out taking snapshots the 18-135 gives a better overall range but as far as quality, I would say the 15-85 is superior.
Also the 15-85mm costs 800$. (You could buy a couple primes and a zoom for that price) better build quality a distance scale etc. but the aperture is where it falls short if this was even a constant f4 ! the equivalent focal length is perfect( 24-136mm ) Also weighs more then the 18-135mm For that money I'd get the sigma 18-35 1.8
I've never tried any of the two lenses, but what I hear in reviews is that the 15-85 is a lot better than the 18-135 in both build and image quality. It's more expensive for good reasons. The question is if it's worth the extra money. What I'd like to see is an upgrade to the 15-85 making it a constant aperture of F2.8 (or perhaps even 1.8) with perfect corner-to-corner sharpness even wide open. I don't know if Canon (or anybody else) would be able to manufacture such a lens, and if Canon did it, the lens would probably cost a fortune.
Agreed with Matt. Habeeb is using a crop sensor body (most Canon crop are crap IMO). None of the lenses mentioned are pro-grade, and there is very little difference (15-85 is very slightly sharper than 18-135, but it is not easily apparent in pictures - only in pixel-peeping with 100% crop with difficulty). So it is all about what focal length will suit his purpose. To get better results he might have to look at third party (Tamron/Sigma) f2.8 lenses, or much costlier Canon L glass. To get even better results, he will have to move to Canon full-frame bodies (whole different set of lenses).
I had both for a very long time and i love the 15-85mm. It is a underrated crop lens, by me: the "best all around lens for APS-C".
18-135mm Nano is also a good lens but the wide end is not enough if you shoot interiors.
absolutely not the same, please research your answers, USM is one huge plus for 15-85, go search for sharpness and you will find that you just gave a hypothetic answer. People ask you here not about what you personally like. please pay attention to that. Thanks.
I own both lenses. Image quality is equal. 18-135 is every bit as good as the 15-85 and in my opinion, possibly better.
The 18-135 he is reviewing is the USM version, 18-135 USM. Read the title of the video.
The good part about getting the 18-135mm STM is that you can also buy a 10-18mm STM and still have $200 left over. The 15-85mm is fairly expensive compared to the other two. Just a thought.
I use 15-85 mm. for two years on my EOS 90D📸 I Love this lens❤ because this lens is extremely great.
just wanted to ask because i have a 10-18mm but i think the 15mm is wide enough its equivalent to a 24-135mm on a crop so i'm not sure what i wanna go with. it would be cool to try it out though! but i end up bringing the 10-18mm and 55-250mm so maybe having a 15-85mm i can keep everything in one lens package i'm not sure
One of the thins you did not mention assuming that everything else being equal, (sharpness, build quality, etc.) is the price as others mention. I wanted the 15-85 and it suits my shooting preference but it is more expensive than the 18-135 especially when the 18-135 is bought as a kit lens. So I went ahead with the 77D and the 18-135 for a very reasonable price.
ef-s 15-85 construction/rugness is significantly better than any STM lens. USM is also faster.
The guy who asked the question said he already had the 10-18 stm, so he's already covered as far as wide angles are concerned. I would say there is a third, very good option which is to get the 18-55 stm and the 55-250 stm. I know the 18-55 doesn't have the best reputation, but I personally think it's fine. And 55-250 stm is super sharp and has this wonderful 400mm equivalent reach. I think it's a must-have! It's lightweight with fantastic AF, and the price moves up and down between fairly low and ridiculously low! For photographing butterflies it's unbeatable.
For an ASPC body, if I could only have one lens, or take only one lens with me on a trip, it would be the 18-135. I've owned the 15-85 for many years and like it for portraits, but find the focal length too limited for many situations. I agree with Matt. My choice is the 18-135 STM.
Agreed , I took the 18/135 usm , along with my 90 D , up to Rockport, Ma.
It was perfect for that trip , I came back with some good images
Hi Matt, got a question for you. I want to buy a new camera for myself and I was thinking. Should i buy the sony a6500, panasonic gh4, nikon d7300 (if 4k is available), fujifilm xt2 or panasonic g7? The camera that i want is just for travelling or hobby. I want my camera to be able to record 4k videos and also good for photography & low light and can you see any difference between aps-c with micro 4/3 sensors. THX! Luv your channel. Keep up the good work :)
Not used either but I'd go for the 15 to 85 over the 18 to 135. Why? Well zooms are a compromise anyway, expecting a single lens to cover such a wide focal range is going to impact it's quality so I tend towards zooms that have a more limited difference between their widest and most telephoto range. The 15 - 85 is basically a X5.7 zoom, the 18 - 135 a X7.5 zoom. Not a massive difference but still. I also find the wider 15mm more useful than 18mm. Don't forget to include the crop factor when using APSC, that difference is large when the 15mm becomes a 24mm field of view vs the 18mm which becomes almost 29mm. 4mm doesn't sound much but it's a lot at the wide end. The decision will have to come down to what you shoot. If it's mainly portraits, street and landscapes go for the 15 to 85, if it's sports and wildlife take advantage of the greater reach from the 18 to 135. :-D
I've seen 15-85 being used a lot by indie filmmakers and I feel it's sturdy and got good weight. I would go for that lens IMO.
when u say breathe what does that mean
Meaning the focus takes longer and inconsistent.
Hey Matt, I've got a question for you. So I am just about to switch to Panasonic from Canon and buy the new G85 mainly for video use. But I'm worried about the colors on a Panasonic image... How do they compare to the famous Canon colors? And is there a good flat picture profile for color grading on the G85 like Sony's S-LOG? Thanks! :)
Colors are always such a personal thing, but I'm VERY happy with Panasonic color for video. In fact, I think the latest Panasonic cameras (GX8, G85, GX85) are unbeatable for video, especially considering the value for your money :-)
ArtoftheImage Yeah, I completely agree, thanks Matt! Oh, also, if you were going to shoot a video on your G85 with the intention of color grading it in post, what picture profile would you use? Is there one similar to Technicolor's Cinestyle but for Panasonic? I know Panasonic has one called V-LOG, but that's not available for the G85. What would you use instead?
I don’t own the 15-85 lens, but I’m toying with getting the 17-85 as a walkabout for single camera days.
What I do have is the 10-18 EF-S which I recommend wholeheartedly. I also have the 18-135 STM which I use currently as a walkabout. When I bought it I was very impressed with the build and image quality and I still am.
When I go out loaded for bear I have a 200D+10-18, 77D+18-35 and M5+adapter+Sigma 100-400 contemporary. I always come back with good photos 😊
Good luck with your photography 👍🤞😁
Well, there's the price to consider. Over here in Denmark, Europe the 15-85 is a bit over $800.
And I just ordered the 18-135 (nano) USM for a little less than $300 from a reputable camera shop. (Special weekend offer, they say). And a $500 difference is important to me.
Something else is the power zoom PZ-E1 which is available for the 18-135 and not the 15-85. (I ordered that too, btw).
Now, if the price had been the same, and the PZ-E1 had worked on both ... I still think I would have chosen the 18-135. I find 18mm wide enough for most situations, and when I need a wider angle I have the 10-18 STM. I don't know how well suited I would find an 86mm for candid portraits - it might be just good enough... But I know that a 135mm will work beautifully.
I currently own the 17-85 and I like this lens a lot. The IQ is very good, and it is light, I thought about the 15-85, and I own an older version of the 18-135.
What's with the sunglasses?
It was sunny LOL... but seriously, I try new things. I've always liked the look of sunglasses, and I like the look when Casey Neistat does it. Also helps huge by not having to worry about red-eye from a late night or early morning :-)
Fair 'nuff!!
Pretty good review though one thing you did not mention is the STM on the 18-135, when shooting video with the 15-85 people will get the whining sound when focusing in there recordings and Not when using an STM lens. I own the 18-135 but wanted a little more wide sometimes so what I did was buy the canon 10-18 IS STM lens and now I have a super wide quit focusing lens.
The canon 15-85 is a really nice lens that will give you pristine photos, much better than the 18-135 and now it's much cheaper $$ than years ago, it's a Great Walk Around lens but if you don't mind switching out lenses then I would recommend buying both 10-18 and 18-135.
18-55 STM - A kit lens. Enough said. Fast for video in decent light.
18-135 STM - Another version kit lens. Same class as 18-55 STM, but more expensive because of the greatly expanded focal range, which comes at some expense of sharpness.
17-85 Canon's original "EF-S Upgrade" lens, introduced with the 20D. Very versatile at the expense of some IQ, mostly distortion and CA.
15-85 L-quality glass for APS-C sensors. I like everything about this lens more except the maximum aperture better than Canon's 17-55 f2.8 IS. In my opinion, it's Canon's sharpest non-L, non-prime lens.
*15 85
I actually have used both lenses and think the 15-85 is a much superior lens. It's usable focal length is stronger. If you are just out taking snapshots the 18-135 gives a better overall range but as far as quality, I would say the 15-85 is superior.
Also the 15-85mm costs 800$. (You could buy a couple primes and a zoom for that price) better build quality a distance scale etc. but the aperture is where it falls short if this was even a constant f4 ! the equivalent focal length is perfect( 24-136mm )
Also weighs more then the 18-135mm
For that money I'd get the sigma 18-35 1.8
4 minutes and almost nothing is told here.
15 85 use 1 years is good and useful !
А вы 18-135 не пробовали?
Какой из них Вы бы сейчас выбрали?
LOL i love youtubers who have no clue, here is one of those.
I've never tried any of the two lenses, but what I hear in reviews is that the 15-85 is a lot better than the 18-135 in both build and image quality. It's more expensive for good reasons. The question is if it's worth the extra money.
What I'd like to see is an upgrade to the 15-85 making it a constant aperture of F2.8 (or perhaps even 1.8) with perfect corner-to-corner sharpness even wide open. I don't know if Canon (or anybody else) would be able to manufacture such a lens, and if Canon did it, the lens would probably cost a fortune.
I own both. Image quality is equal. I prefer the greater versatility of the 18-135.
And that would be a unicorn $3000 dollar lens that we all want.
I was misled by the title of this video. You did b
Agreed with Matt. Habeeb is using a crop sensor body (most Canon crop are crap IMO). None of the lenses mentioned are pro-grade, and there is very little difference (15-85 is very slightly sharper than 18-135, but it is not easily apparent in pictures - only in pixel-peeping with 100% crop with difficulty). So it is all about what focal length will suit his purpose.
To get better results he might have to look at third party (Tamron/Sigma) f2.8 lenses, or much costlier Canon L glass. To get even better results, he will have to move to Canon full-frame bodies (whole different set of lenses).
"most Canon crop are crap IMO"?? Did you ever try one with a Sigma Art lens for aps-c, like the 18-35 or the 50-100?
@@skakdosmer 50-100 is worth as FF
Would put my shots with a Canon aps-c against anything you have.
Aburrido !!!
Bored