24mm f2.8 stm vs 24mm f2.8

<p>hi guys im sorry if I post in the wrong topic (im new to this forum :) )I have a question. I search around the internet and I found a secondhand canon ef 24mm f2.8 (not the USM one) at around $180. I think the new one is around $430. It still good, even come with a canon hood. Is it still worth the money or I should just go with canon 24mm f2.8 stm? the stm one downside that I know is its only for crop sensor but I think I wont upgrade to full frame anytime soon<br /> Should i go with canon 24mm f2.8 stm at around $130 or o with the secondhand 24mm f2.8 (older version, not the USM one). I need wide angle lens for my crop sensor camera (canon 60d) and only this two option fit in my budget. <br /> thanks guys</p>

<p>This test chart comparison shows that the newer STM lens has better image quality:<br>

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=960&Camera=736&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=246&Sample=0&CameraComp=736&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0<br>

<br />Given that, plus the other advantages of smaller size, faster and quieter autofocus, it's a no-brainer to buy the new lens at the cheaper price rather than the more expensive used one.</p>

<p>The pricing in your post is confusing: which was more expensive? I would go for the STM one as that is smaller and was designed for the crop sensor, but the original 24mm f2.8 is a good lens too (although it is an older design), and if you ever think you will go to a full frame camera, it might be the better choice.</p>

<p>FWIW, I suspect that the test chart I linked to understates the difference in image quality between the two lenses. If the similar 40mm pancake lens is any guide, the newer 24mm STM lens will also have more punchy colours than the older lens; I suspect Canon use better coatings on their newer lenses, even those which are not "L" branded.</p>

<p>the older one is more expensive at $180. With the budget I have, I personally would prefer buying the STM one. but you know, a $430 lens that you can buy only at $180 is somehow tempting lol.<br>

thanks guys. I think I'm gonna go with the STM one. thanks for the responses. I appreciate it alot</p>

 

<p>I used to own the EF 24 2.8 and it was okay optically by F4 but I had a lot of trouble getting AF to lock in even mildly dim light so I mainly used it in MF mode. The EF-s 24 2.8 STM focuses much better, is sharper at F2.8 and is so light it feels like I forgot to mount a lens on my camera.</p>

<p>The chart that Ed referenced is an excellent guide. Wide open and stopped down at f/4 and F/8, the STM is a clear winner. Just for fun, compare the 1.4L to see the difference between good and excellent.</p>

<p>I would hardly call it a clear winner. I was amazed how similar they are. I'm not sure you would notice the difference as referenced on the charts. A touch of contrast adjustment and they'd look the same. The STM is slightly better in the center, but not by much: I would have anticipated the new STM would be markedly better. Neither are a patch on the 24mm f2.8 IS, for example. As much as I like the TDP charts, they are often not really sufficiently sensitive to show differences between lenses. Then you have to consider they represent images shot at one distance only and so on.</p>

<p>What's clear to some of us is not to others. If you don't see a difference, buy the cheapest.</p>

<p>Just looked at ebay regarding used prices. The older non STM 24mm is going for just over $100 used, the STM version is selling for as little as $85 to $95. Either one of these is a bargain. I would probably choose the STM version being that it's a little cheaper and a newer smaller model.</p>