User comments on Canon EF 28-2.8 lens needed.

I recently saw this lens for $120....LN condition. The 28mm (AKA:45mm in 35mm

terms)is a good focal length, it's a prime lens, and a faster/wider aperture

than my other lenses other than the 50 1.8 II lens. But I've read very little

about it; causing me to wonder if it's not a very highly regarded lens as I

would almost expect it ot be by it's stats. So...can you folks fill me in

about the pros and cons of this critter? Thanks

I used that lens long ago - I didn't find anything wrong with it - it's a good lens for the money. Same for the 24 f/2.8 prime.

 

Now, I just use my 24-70L...which of course is much more $$$

<p>There's an ongoing debate about whether it or its faster sibling, the 28/1.8, is the better lens. Most people think the 2.8 is rather good, it seems; opinions are split about the 1.8. Like your 50/1.8, it lacks USM, though it does offer a distance scale. There's a review of it over at photozone.de which might be useful to you.</p>

 

<p>If an f/2.8 normal lens is going to be useful to you, then yes, I suspect this one is well worth getting at that price (assuming the condition is as advertised).</p>

I had this lens and used it with Elan IIe. It's light, small and yield very good result even wide open IMHO. I don't have pics to post with this as all of them are on film. I replaced this with the 28/1.8 not due to image quality issue, but things like 58mm, USM etc, faster etc.

 

I still think that slower 2.8 lens has an edge in IQ compared to the 1.8.

I'm another happy 28/2.8 owner. Small, lightweight, sharp, reasonably fast, resistant to flare, good build quality. AF speed is fast (if a little noisy). 52mm thread means quality filters are cheaper than for most lenses, and can be shared with your 50/1.8II. It's a useful wide on film and a useful normal on digital. The 28/2.8 and the 135/2.8 are all I carry with me anymore. I vote to go for it.

I travelled with it in Spain last year and loved it. Light, fairly sharp, just like the good old days when one had only one standard lens.

 

But then my versatile every day zoom (17-70) was not available, being serviced. Now that I got it back, I don?t use the 28 f2.8 anymore.

 

So it depends what other lenses you have.

 

JPD

Fredmiranda.com is your friend when it comes to user comments on lenses!

 

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=23&sort=7&cat=2&page=2

It is a good lens and good value for money, but I sold mine as I didn't use it much as I have a Sigma 18-50/2.8 which is as fast, and sharp and covers the same focal length.

 

If you like working with primes it is a fine lens, but probably not high on most people's buying list due to some fairly affordable third party 2.8 zooms that are around.

Simply put its not worth getting a 2.8 prime when zooms fall in that range. This is a very old

lens and it does not have USM. Probably good if your on a tight budget or looking to carry

something really small and cheap.

I had one for film when my lenses were the classic 28/50/135 prime selection. Sold it long

ago when I got the 28-105 zoom. I remember it being a good lens, but with the same flimsy

feel as the 50/1.8. I think it would still be a useful lens today either if you don't have a good

zoom covering that angle, or you wanted a set of lightweight primes for travel, especially

backpacking.

I do have a Tamron 28-75 2.8 zoom which seems to perform better (in lens tests)at both 28mm AND 50mm, then the 28 2.8 and 50 1.8, in recently discovered on line tests. So, I guess I might already have a better tool right now.

Thanks for your comments.