Low light 17-85is vs 18-55

[Skipraider]

I'm just wondering which of the following lenses would be better shooting at the widest angle in low light condition?


The Canon 17-85 4-5.6 with IS or
The Canon 18-55 3.5-5.6 without IS


Does the IS really work that well to compensate for the f-stop?

Sorry if it's a silly question :bonk:

[sidxms]

well you can't freeze motion if thats what you are asking

You can shoot statics fine at 1/10ish easily though

[Chaz Photos]

Yes the IS will let you shoot at a slower shutter then with out so you get a beter EV from it

[pete.rush]

Either aren't great at wide angle

18-55mm and 17-85mm, both pretty similar in performance, although 17-85mm slightly better image quality. Center sharpness is very good at all focal lengths and improves very little when stopped down. Some corner softness is present at most focal lengths and apertures. Light fall-off is noticeable until stopped down or zoomed out to 35mm or so. Distortion is very noticeable at 17/18mm and is also mostly gone by 35mm or so. CA (Chromatic Aberation) is noticeable in wide angle shots.

[Chaz Photos]

Either aren't great at wide angle

18-55mm and 17-85mm, both pretty similar in performance, although 17-85mm slightly better image quality. Center sharpness is very good at all focal lengths and improves very little when stopped down. Some corner softness is present at most focal lengths and apertures. Light fall-off is noticeable until stopped down or zoomed out to 35mm or so. Distortion is very noticeable at 17/18mm and is also mostly gone by 35mm or so. CA (Chromatic Aberation) is noticeable in wide angle shots.

That was NOT the question OP is asking about low light

[pete.rush]

I'm just wondering which of the following lenses would be better shooting at the widest angle in low light condition?

he did ask which worked best at wide angle, and the answer is neither really and personally would probably use a tripod over IS if I could for low light conditions.

[HoppyUK]

Difference between f/3.5 and f/4.5 is 2/3rds of a stop. You should get about three stops improvement with IS, so 17-85 will be better provided the subject doesn't move.

[Chaz Photos]

he did ask which worked best at wide angle, and the answer is neither really and personally would probably use a tripod over IS if I could for low light conditions.

Why are you trying to defend yourself you got it wrong OP asked
“better shooting at the widest angle in low light condition?”

You took it out of contacts

[Dylanlewis2000]

i Upgraded from the kit to this lens and its been good. Yes the IS is good and has helped, but as said it will not freeze time, it is good however if you are in a fair ground and want to have a picture of a wheel going around, providing you are reasonably still and the ride is going at a far pace then you will get some good results.

[Skipraider]

Cheers guys, i've bought a 17-85 as an upgrade to the standard 18-55 (haven't got it yet though) and was just wondering whether the 18-55 would still come in handy for low light situations. I guess not though, so there's no point in keeping it :thumbs:

[rsloman]

Cheers guys, i've bought a 17-85 as an upgrade to the standard 18-55 (haven't got it yet though) and was just wondering whether the 18-55 would still come in handy for low light situations. I guess not though, so there's no point in keeping it :thumbs:

Nah, get rid of it. You'll get better results from an IS lens in low light.