Canon 28mm f2.8

B

baz83

Messages
324
Name
Barry
Edit My Images
No
Has anyone got the Canon 28mm f2.8 prime? If so what do you think of it? Reviews seem to vary alot for the quality of it.

I want it for family and car/bike shots. It will be going on my 550d, I had the 50mm f1.8 but found with it I couldn't get back far enough with alot of times to get everything in the frame.
 
I have one on my 30D which I got for exactly the same reason you give the 44mm eqivalence is really usefull. I can't really fault it it in my experience the images it produces are just as nice as those from the 50mm f1.8 and it feels nicer as it's not such a plastic fantastic. I picked mine up on here second hand for what seemed a reasonable price so it might be worth putting up a wanted add.
 
I had a look at one a while back, the thing that stopped me getting one was the fact that it was only f2.8, the money the prime will cost you is a good way towards a Tamron zoom with constant f2.8.
 
Last edited:
A pretty pointless lens on APS-C IMVHO, unless you can bag one very cheap, as a quality "standard" f2.8 zoom will be much more flexible. A f1.8 would be wonderful but f2.8 isn't for me.

I've been looking at the Canon f1.8 recently but reviews seem mediocre at best and it's a decade or more old design so the Siggy f1.8 looks a better buy to me but it lacks USM.
 
woof woof said:
A pretty pointless lens on APS-C IMVHO, unless you can bag one very cheap, as a quality "standard" f2.8 zoom will be much more flexible. A f1.8 would be wonderful but f2.8 isn't for me.

I've been looking at the Canon f1.8 recently but reviews seem mediocre at best and it's a decade or more old design so the Siggy f1.8 looks a better buy to me but it lacks USM.
Click to expand...

I'm in the market for a low light normal prime but whats turned me off the Sigma a bit(besides the normal QC talk) are the claims that its AF isnt very reliable in low light.
 
irelanst said:
I had a look at one a while back, the thing that stopped me getting one was the fact that it was only f2.8, the money the prime will cost you is a good way towards a Tamron zoom with constant f2.8.
Click to expand...

Having used both the prime and a budget 2.8 zoom the image quality of the prime is much more pleasing to my eye. Second hand they are not bad value and they retain value so should you not like it you could sell it on for a very small loss.
 
Moreorless said:
I'm in the market for a low light normal prime but whats turned me off the Sigma a bit(besides the normal QC talk) are the claims that its AF isnt very reliable in low light.
Click to expand...

Dunno about that. I have the similar 20mm f1.8 and it's a very good lens. The only thing that makes me want the Canon 28mm f1.8 is that it has USM which is a nice thing to have.
 
a1ex2001 said:
Having used both the prime and a budget 2.8 zoom the image quality of the prime is much more pleasing to my eye. Second hand they are not bad value and they retain value so should you not like it you could sell it on for a very small loss.
Click to expand...

It might beat a budget zoom (?) but it'll have more competition from a quality 17-50mm f2.8 which will possibly actually be cheaper, not sure that that makes them budget though. I've owned a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and it was a really sharp lens.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It might beat a budget zoom (?) but it'll have more competition from a quality 17-50mm f2.8 which will possibly actually be cheaper, not sure that that makes them budget though. I've owned a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and it was a really sharp lens.
Click to expand...

That Tamron is exactly the sort of lens I was comparing it to, I find the prime to be sharper but it's more than that there is something in the colours contrast and punch of the prime that just has a nicer feel to me.
 
I have a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and found totally the opposite in comparison to the Canon 28mm f2.8! I couldn't find anything that the Canon did better than the Tamron (except maybe physical size and weight).

I guess it's a case of 'try before you buy'
 
a1ex2001 said:
That Tamron is exactly the sort of lens I was comparing it to, I find the prime to be sharper but it's more than that there is something in the colours contrast and punch of the prime that just has a nicer feel to me.
Click to expand...

Well, one thing's for sure... the Tamron is sharper between 17 and 28mm and between 28 and 50mm.

For me colour, contrast and punch are mostly down to processing.
 
Thanks all for the opinions and advice, still not sure on which one I should get. 28mm F2.8 seems quite good value for money. All I've got at the minute is a 18-55mm is and a 70-200m L. So want a nice sharp wide ish prime.
 
woof woof said:
I've been looking at the Canon f1.8 recently but reviews seem mediocre at best and it's a decade or more old design so the Siggy f1.8 looks a better buy to me but it lacks USM.
Click to expand...

I was recently deliberating over the Sigma 30mm 1.4 and the Canon 28mm 1.8. The deciding factor for me was the AF speed, so I had to go with the Canon lens. Can't comment first hand on the Siggy's AF performance but the USM on my 28mm Canon is truly beautiful. I honestly thought it wasn't working when I first tested the lens cos it was so quiet :LOL: Very quick and silky smooth AF, just what I needed.

Sorry for digressing from the thread subject (Canon f2.8) but since the 1.8 was mentioned I thought it was relevant. :)
 
woof woof said:
Well, one thing's for sure... the Tamron is sharper between 17 and 28mm and between 28 and 50mm.
Click to expand...

Very true so if you want a zoom don't buy a prime!

woof woof said:
For me colour, contrast and punch are mostly down to processing.
Click to expand...

See I generally do no processing to my inages I have a couple of different pre-sets in my camera and those usually sufice. I don't like spending time sat in front of the PC it reminds me too much of work so I guess I probably notice those things more than others I was really impressed by the colours and contrast that the 100-400mm L I rented gve me straight out of the camera.
 
baz83 said:
Thanks all for the opinions and advice, still not sure on which one I should get. 28mm F2.8 seems quite good value for money. All I've got at the minute is a 18-55mm is and a 70-200m L. So want a nice sharp wide ish prime.
Click to expand...

It will blow your kit lens out of the water but I would as others have suggested seriously consider replacing your kit lens with a tamron 17-50 f2.8 or similar as you will probably see a greater benefit accross your photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top