adam_kern Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Hi all, I've been reading the recent posts below regarding wide angle primes with great interest. Many people have experience with the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, which gets high marks. I am thinking about buying the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 prime. How does the image quality of the EF 28mm f/1.8 prime compare to the Tamron 24-75 f/2.8 zoom set at 28mm? (Obviously aside from the difference in lens speed.) Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_kern Posted November 11, 2004 Author Share Posted November 11, 2004 P.S. I am shooting on 35mm film (Elan 7E), so if the Tamron lens distorts, it matters to me! Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 I don't know the answer to that question but the common knowledge is that the optical quality of the humble 28/2.8 is much better than the 28/1.8. HTH. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 I've no idea what Tamron zooms are like, but the EF 28f1.8 is one of the nicest lenses Canon makes. It's perfectly usable wide open, it focuses fast, it's compact, and it's reasonably priced. It gets a bad rap on photonet but it's very popular with photographers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_c. Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 28mm f1.8 is something I would not get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam_kern Posted November 11, 2004 Author Share Posted November 11, 2004 So some people say the 28mm f/1.8 is the best lens canon makes, and others say it's horrible and trumped by the f/2.8. Please explain! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Explain? I believe I did. Mr C, why don't you like the lens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_foiles2 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Boris: "but the EF 28f1.8 is one of the nicest lenses Canon makes." I have been using and researching Canon EF lenses since 1998 and that is literally the first positive comment I have seen about the 28/1.8. Do a search on this site, or any other photo site, check Photodo or photozone, check the mtf curves that Canon publishes. The consensus is that the 28/1.8 is an OK lens and if you absolutely need the 1.8 then OK but otherwise the 28/2.8 is clearly better. Many of Canon's lenses are "nicer" than the 28/1.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 I have heard from many who say that the 28 f/1.8 is great! I think the problem is that at f/ 1.8, the DOF is very shallow, and the corners are going to be a bit softer than the center (like ANY really fast lens). Stopped down to f/2.8 it'd probably compete well with the 28 f/ 2.8 wide open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Peter, have you actually used the lens? Or have you just read about it on photonet? I'll reiterate that it's a lens that has a good reputation with photographers. I know many people who use it as a fast aperture backup to a 16-35mm. It isn't spectacular wide-open but it is usable, and by f2.8 it's better than the zoom at that aperture. People pay way too much attention to MTF charts, the reality is that lenses have been good enough for many decades. Look at pictures taken in the 60s and 70s (taken on lenses with dismal MTF performance compared with the 28mm f1.8 or any modern lens) by any decent photographer and you'll struggle to see any deficiency in technical quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Peter: "I have been using and researching Canon EF lenses since 1998 and that is literally the first positive comment I have seen about the 28/1.8. Do a search on this site......." Sadly for you Peter I've taken up your suggestion and searched this site. What did i find? A thread around two months ago that you participated in - here are some of the comments on the lens in question.......... Stephen Lutz: "I actually have the 28mm 1.8......The lens....has exceptionally fast autofocus performance......The 1.8 max aperture is very valuable.....the 28 1.8 has a very close minimum focus distance......When stopped down, the 28 1.8 is exceptionally sharp.....If you need the extra stop and a half over the 28 2.8, the 28 1.8 is an excellent choice. I highly recommend it......." Julian Love: "I have a 28 f/1.8......By 2.8 it seems to be very good and at f/4 and smaller it is excellent......the 28 f/1.8....has FTM, a nice manual focus movement and lightning fast autofocus." Paul Szwajkowski: "I can say that ef 28/1.8 has one of the best bokeh and beautifull background." Hmmm, all of this from a single thread that you actually participated in. Care to comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_c. Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 28mm f1.8...? no no no... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 To the ever articulate Derek C: why? why? why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard thompson www.fotoz Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I currently have both of these lenses in at the moment (for sale) and will do a quick test for you. Look back here on Sunday. Neither of the lenses are fantastic wide open at 28mm. The tamron is very sharp at the middle to long end. Its still very usable at 28mm, especially once you get down to f3.5 / f4 though. The 28/1.8 is great stopped down, but requires very precise focusing. Its a tricky lens to get good result from wide open. I would recommend the 35/2 if you don't mind it being slightly longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derek_c. Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I have 35mm/f2.<br> My next lens will be 24mm.<br> I also have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8. (this is my only zoom, also my only non-canon lens)<br> There must be millions of photographers who take better pictures than I do with 28/1.8.<br> But, it's not for me. No no no no....<br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_tan Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I chose the 28 2.8 over the 1.8 for several reasons. When I reviewed the lenses, almost all reviews of the 2.8 were positive while there were mixed reviews of the 28 1.8. Most had complained that the 1.8 was not as sharp at the same apertures as the 2.8. Also figure in that the 2.8 is less than half the price of the 1.8, and there was no question for me. Of course if you need the speed, then 1.8 is the way to go. I opted to buy a 28 2.8 and the 50 1.4 for low light. In low light nothing can match the 50 1.4 (well, except for the 1.0 but if you could afford that....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boris_chan1 Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 "The 28/1.8 is great stopped down, but requires very precise focusing." I'm not understanding this. Why does this lens, stopped down, require unusually precise focusing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now