Canon EF 28 f1.8 USM

This lens interests me a lot as a fast "normal" prime on a 1.6 DSLR -

faster than anything I have, 58 mm filter size, USM, compatible

with film too. On thing that worries me is the few posts that are

avaliable seem to report only middling optical performance. Photodo

rates it a 3.3 which is quite low for a fairly expensive prime.

 

So I am interested in what users thing of it? In particular, how

does it stack up against the 24f2.8, 28f2.8, and 35f2 for sharpness,

focus speed and focus accuracy?

Well, lens choise is a very subjective thing...

I like this lens a lot on the 10D. I find it's angle of view much more interresting than that of 50mm on the film body (very subjective, of course).

The focusing speed is fast as you would expect from the USM lens.

It has very beautiful bokeh (once again - subjective thing) and very nice picture.

It is sharp enough for me, although I have read that many are not quite happy about its sharpness wide open.

Ditto what Eugene said. This lens has beautiful bokeh and is a gem. It is my second favorite prime (right behind the 50/1.4). Very good at 1.8, excellent at 2.0, and from 2.8 and above, I haven't seen any differences against my EF 28/2.8. Frankly this lens causes me to think that the Photodo rating is either in error or their infamous "one" sample test was subpar or botched. In any event, my 2.8 only serves as a backup now. Which is to say, I haven't used it since the 1.8 is always on my camera. You'll be very pleased with it.

I really like it as a normal lens on my 10D.... I wouldn't worry too much about the photodo tests, etc..

 

I had a 28mm f/2.8 and I got rid of it after getting the f/1.8 model, I have never been disappointed with the f/1.8 model. Nice color, it manages to get background blur just fine, it's a pleasure to work with and it's small.

 

Nothing to complain about.

I recently bought one for my film camera. I find AF very fast, silent and precise with the

camera nailing the subject dead on every time even in low light. One thing I really like is

the colour rendition and the background blur is excellent.

 

It flares wide open with strong sun (i.e. midday) in the frame but on the other hand, the

Greek sunsets I

shot last week on holiday had no flare at all in them. One thing is that it vignettes a bit at

f/1.8-f/2.8 but it is gone from f/3.5 down. Of course, that is in a film camera, on your

dSLR you won't even be seeing the corners.

 

I haven't done any scientific tests for sharpness but the overall feel is very good. Generally,

I really like it, a lot better than my previous 28/2.8, which was sharp but the colour

rendition was not as pleasing and the bokeh was simply crap. I really don't know why there

is all this negativity, but from all the posts I've seen so far, all real users are happy but all

non-users complain about it!

I have it and the lenses you mention above, and I like the 28/1.8 the best. USM and reasonable sharpness wide open are it's best features. If you know how to use a fast prime, you will probably like it too. I have not heard one complaint from an actual owner of this lens.

Has anyone compared it to the new Sigma 30/1.4 lens?

 

Pierre

The Canon EF 28 f/1.8 USM will be my next prime lens purchase.

I too wanted to purchase one as a normal lens for my 20D, but this lens has received bad ratings, and I've then started thinking of the new Sigma 30/1.4 lens, and now everyone seems to say that the 28/1.8 is a great lens...

 

Is there any valid comparison somewhere between the two lenses?

 

Pierre

<p>Variations on this topic have come up every week or two since the Sigma was announced. Some examples, some of which include links to other threads or to offsite resources discussing/reviewing one or both of these lenses:</p>

 

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00D0fI">Sigma 30 f1.4 vs Canon 28 f1.8 as a fast normal on digital.</a>

<li><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CqBq">Canon 24mm f2.8 vs. 28mm f1.8 - 20D Body</a>

<li><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CdRb">Questions on the 28/1.8 USM</a>

</ul>

 

<p>There are lots of other discussions of the 28/1.8, alone or in comparison to the 28/2.8 and/or Sigma 30/1.4, in the archives.</p>

Pierre,

 

From what I can tell, the "bad reviews" came from a few prominent NON-USERS who kept badmouthing the lens through hearsay and conjecture rather than experience.

 

As you can readily see, ACTUAL USERS of this lens love it. No lens exists without a bad review somewhere on the internet ;-) Try it, you won't be disappointed.

I don't have the 28/1.8 but I own the 24/2.8 and 35/2. I like the 24's FOV on the 20d but find the 35 a little too long. Check out <a href="http://www.pbase.com/vincentbenoit" >this</a> guys gallery for some stunning shots taken with the 28/1.8.

It's a fine lens. Don't believe the negative hype.

To add another vote in favor of the 28/1.8 I own or have owned all of the alternatives that you mention and my only regret is that I believed all of the negative press on the web and delayed buying the 28/1.8 as long as I did. Yes, at 1.8 it is not the sharpest but few fast lenses are best wide open. But it does improve rapidly and by 2.8 is at least equal to and usually better than the other you mention.

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful responses. It would seem this thread has probably changed the balance of opinion from negative hype to positive. I guess I'll have to go out and try it.

 

Cheers

 

Geoff

I think this lens is OK. It is not sharp to the extent you can take pictures of small prints on newspapers. But it is REALLY sharp if you take pictures of people. The people are sharp in their eyes.

 

I think it's what for. I like to take full- or half-body portrait with the lens. Also I like to use it for snapshot at night. Overall, I'm very satisfied with it. I got it for less than $250 secondhand.

As it's now starting to look like the Sigma 30/1.4 is not so great, I'll also be looking again at the Canon 28/1.8, comparing these two if possible, unless the new Canon EOS 30D (I'm not starting a rumor...) has a full frame sensor, then my 50/1.4 would be OK.

 

Pierre

I also bought this lens as a 'normal lens' solution to a 1.6 DSLR crop. I also looked at many of the other lenses that are listed above.

One of the end games for me was that it?s an ambition of mine to upgrade to a 5D (oneday) and I kinda see the sigma 35 and other crop lenses as being just a bit 'wrong' somehow for long term lens investments.

I was also afraid of the many bad or average reviews online. I'm so glad I paid attention to the user reviews instead!

 

I'm also one of the many fools who bought a collection of zooms before I discovered the joys of Prime lenses ? someone should really do something about that modern trend, but that?s a topic for another post.

 

I?d recommend this lens to anyone as a great normal lens with excellent performance in low light situations. I use this lens when photographing at concerts, and I also get a lot of enjoyment from using it indoors or in garden scenes with children. I?d liken its quality to that of my canon 17 ? 40 L. I bought this lens for a great price, new from adorama.com through this site.