Canon EF 28/1.8 USM

There have been lots of questions on this forum regarding this lens, including

several from me. The best information by far has come from Yakim Peled's

threads regarding this lens. So, after literally years of research and second

guessing, I finally bought one. These are my initial thoughts.

 

Mechanical handling and auto focusing response are superb. Focusing on my 10D

is fast and accurate. The lens provides a crisp, clear viewfinder image. I

must reiterate what other ACTUAL USERS OF THIS LENS have said. It is

optically on-par with other non-L primes in real world shooting scenarios. I

have several images that were taken using this lens posted on my photo blog at:

 

http://photonoir.blogspot.com/

 

All of the images taken on 26 September 2006 were made using the 28/1.8. I am

very satisfied with the 28/1.8 USM, and would recommend it as a

decent "normal" lens for a 1.6X crop digital SLR. I have yet to shoot any

film with it, but I'm now mostly a digital convert.

 

I doubt the Pulitzer committee will be rushing to my front door to bestow

accolades. That's not really why I posted the link. It is meant here to be

another source of information for those interested in learning more about this

specific lens. If you're considering it, buy the lens!

 

Michael J Hoffman

Michael: I think you're underrating the lens. I have been using it on a 5D for about 3 weeks now. I tested it against an excellent copy of the Canon 28mm f2.8, and two Nikon 28mm f2.8 AIS lenses, which are reputed to be one of the finest 28mm lenses ever produced, second arguably only to the latest Leica 28mm and the Contax Zeiss 28mm f2.8. Here is what I wrote in a review of the Canon 28mm f1.8 on the Fred Miranda site: "Pros: Excellent close focus performance. Excellent bokeh. Very good and even sharpness to edges on a full frame camera, and into the corners from f4 and above. Excellent performing autofocus. Cons: Chromatic aberration (which is easy to correct in Photoshop RAW). Microcontrast at infinity focus is good, but not on the level of a NIkon 28mm AIS (or the Zeiss 28mm I'm guessing). . . . I just got the Canon 28mm f1.8 lens, and am using it on a 5D. I pixel peep, and overall I'm quite impressed with the lens, although it's not at all perfect. I've been testing 28mms in general recently, and the Canon 28mm f1.8 is quite good. It's reasonably sharp in the corners from f2.8 (better than any other 28mm I've tested on full frame at that fstop) and excellent by f4 -f5.6. It is much better than the Canon 28mm f2.8 in the edges and corners at all f- stops. It equals the Canon 28mm f2.8 in the center of the frame. It trounces the 28mm Nikon f2.8 AIS I was testing (with a Fotodiox pro adapter) in the corners until f8. The Canon 28mm f1.8 doesn't have as good of microcontrast at infinity focus as a classic wide angle like the 28mm Nikon f2.8 AIS (one of the truly great 28mms) except in the extreme corners, but it's much better than its so-so reputation. The Canon 28mm f1.8 has very even performance throughout the frame, which is a big plus for wide angles. And it performs excellently for close-ups with nice bokeh. It lives down to its reputation for chromatic abberation. Chromatic aberration is a problem if you don't shoot raw. If you do, it's easy to correct in Photoshop ACR with a -20 adjustment to the red/cyan channel. It's of course a pleasure to have the ability to auto focus and not to need to use stop down metering. Not all Canon wide angle primes are as bad as their reputation. The 28mm f1.8 is an excellent lens if you want a fast 28mm lens. It excels for "environmental portraits," street shooting, and is quite good for landscapes, though perhaps not the best for landscapes. I suspect that it would not perform quite as well on a 1DSII or its rumored higher pixel density successor given the mtf charts. I suspect that the 5D is probably close to maxing out the resolution of the lens, but I have no firm data on which to base this suspicion. On a 5D, it's a very good value, and an excellent overall performer if you want a fast 28mm lens with autofocus. If you only want a 28mm for landscapes with maximum resolution at f8 or above, I'd look at the Nikon 28mm AIS, Contax 28mm f2.8, or maybe the Olympus 28mm lenses."

"Michael: I think you're underrating the lens."

 

How so? I described it as superb, fast, accurate, crisp and clear. I find it to be optically on-par with my other non-L primes, including the 50/1.8 Mk I and the 100/2 USM. The point I was trying to make is much the same as yours. This lens is not the dog that some claim. I doubt anyone who really trashes this lens has ever used it. Either that, or they got a bad sample. I'm completely happy with my purchase and highly recommend the lens. I thought that was clear in my first post; I know it is in this one.

 

Michael J Hoffman

I have tested this lens on APS-C and whilst it is not as sharp as my 17-40 and 25-105 in the corners it does very well in the centre. I also note is nicely made and has good AF performance, real world shots are very acceptable, particularly if you correct for the CA (I have some ACR corrections for APS-C for that can be downloaded for CA). Small amount of flare suseptability.

 

If you check out the lenses MTF performance it dips at APS-C edge of cover and then recovers so I would expect it to shine more on full frame.

 

Sharpness Tests:http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/EF_28mm_f1.8_USM/index.htm

 

Comparative Sharpness: http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/28mm/index.htm

 

Flare Resistance Tests: http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/EF%2028mm%20f1_8.htm

 

ACR CA Correction Files APS-C: http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/Downloads.htm

Lester: exactly my experience re the dip towards the edge of the APS-C sensor, but improvement for edges of full frame. Also, given that the APS-C sensor has higher resolution with the smaller surface area than the 5D, that dip is less, or not, noticeable on the 5D.

Michael: thank you very much! I really like that focal length on a full-frame camera, but had been hesitant to buy this lens because of various bad things I had heard about it. I think I shall go ahead and purchase one now, then. :-)

Hi,

 

funny, I just got mine on monday, after a lot of reading and a lot of questions.

 

I am very happy with mine on a 1DII, the handling is nice, although the manual focus ring is not as well damped as my 24-70L, but still very nice (I autofocus most of the time).

 

The bokeh is very nice, really creamy and smooth.

 

The biggest plus for me is the 1.8 aperture, which is really nice on my 1DII and you can isolate any point of a picture that you like.

 

Very nice lens, very happy with it.

 

PS: I have the Nikon 28 2.8AIS and it is a wonderful lens, one of the best I have tried.

 

Regards,

 

Radu D.<div></div>

I just realized I have written the word "nice" five times in a couple of lines only.

 

Wow, that's not nice at all.

I'm probably asking for trouble here, but any strong opinions vs. the Sigma 30 1.4? The Sigma seems to have quite a following, but of course it's not full-frame compatible (then again, neither is the EF-S 10-22, and I still bought that).<br/><br/>

 

(I have read every review I can find, but I'll never complain about having too <i>many</i> points of view!)

I've been using the 28 1.8 on my 5D for around nine months or so. I'm very happy with it. Mine is sharp to within a degree or so of the corners by f:5.6, and razor sharp to the corners at f:8. Even at f:4, it's sharp enough at the corners to only be an issue on a test chart.

 

Wide open, mine has a rather dreamy or misty character, which clears up nicely at f:2. By f:2.8, most for the frame is critically sharp, in the area taken up by a cropped sensor, for example. So most subject matter is very accurately portrayed by f:2.8.

 

The auto-focusing, which I must confess I rarely use, does work quickly and near silently. The construction is first rate.

 

I also have the 35L, f:1.4. The L lens is better than the 28 in the corners wide open, but also has a similar dreamy effect wide open, though not as strong as the 28. At f:2 the L lens is beyond belief in every respect. But by f:5.6, the two lenses, except for focal length, are indistinguishable.

 

It's funny to me how many of the 28 mm lens' detractors will never say a word against the 35L, even though the two lenses are fairly similar. You pay a whole lot of money for the modest improvement offered by the 35L.

 

I like both lenses and won't part with either. I use which ever one has the focal length I need, unless I'm doing something that requires the lens be used wide open. Then I use the 35L. If I need to travel small and light, I'll use the 28 as it's about 2/3 the size of the 35L.

I recently bought the 28/1.8 for use on my 5D & with film. These are my impressions of

some quick tests of a few lenses at 28 mm.

 

28/1.8: soft at 1.8, much sharper with higher contrast at 2.8

17-40 @ 28: soft at 4, improved sharpness & contrast at 5.6, better contrast at 8

24-105 @ 28: low contrast at 4, improved at 5.6, sharp throughout

 

I am comfortable using the 28 mm @ f/2.8 for just about anything & it is OK in the center

at wider apertures. I think it is a great lens for the price & it offers quick focusing, small

size, & light weight.

How does the Canon EF 28F1.8 USM compare with the 28F2.8 EOS lens? Or the Nikor 28F2.8 AIS lens?