28mm 1.8

[J-Chan]

hardly see this lens popping up in discussions..

thinking of getting this lens as a "normal" lens on my 40D.. quite used to the 50mm perspective on film, and the 28mm approx replicates that..

is this lens worth it for its price? or should I just stick to the cheaper 35mm f2 or its 2.8 sibling..

[FilterFunk]

stick with the 35 f2.. it has lesser CA than the 28 f1.8 i think..

[Halfmoon]

I did a research on 28 F1.8 & 35 F2... and seems like the 35mm F2 get better rating, and I got the 35mm instead... no USM, a bit noisy, reasonable focusing speed but it is ok for me... IQ is more important..... Plus on FF, I prefer 35mm to 28mm.....

[calebk]

I actually considered this and a 35 f/2, and got the 35 in the end. I think there's detailed reviews and comparison of both these lenses on www.the-digital-picture.com

[J-Chan]

so it seems the 35mm f/2 is better?
also read theres also the Sigma 30mm 1.4 which is supposedly very sharp.. but then can't be used on film..

[calebk]

Originally Posted by J-Chan so it seems the 35mm f/2 is better? also read theres also the Sigma 30mm 1.4 which is supposedly very sharp.. but then can't be used on film..

Nope that can't be used on film. It's a DC designated lens, which means it can only be used on APS-C sensor sized cameras.

[Halfmoon]

Originally Posted by J-Chan so it seems the 35mm f/2 is better? also read theres also the Sigma 30mm 1.4 which is supposedly very sharp.. but then can't be used on film..

Personally, I recommend going with Canon lens instead...... You will be assured that there will be no problem when new body comes out.....

I will not be able to say the same for third party lens done by reverse engineering....

[Halfmoon]

Also, 35mm F2 is much cheaper than the 28mm F1.8.....

[spartacus.ret]

the 35/2 hunts like nonsense in low light. if you're going to be shooting a lot in low ligtht (which is why you would buy a fast prime in the first place), forget the 35/2. i had both for a period of 8 months, and was deciding which one to bring to europe last year. i'm glad i chose the 28/1.8 as i used it in some very low light where i'm certain the 35/2 would not have been able to lock focus.

[spartacus.ret]

Originally Posted by Halfmoon Also, 35mm F2 is much cheaper than the 28mm F1.8.....

yea, but you pay for better build and ring usm. plus, the bokeh is much much better!

also, while the 35/2 turns in better center sharpness, it turns in worse corner sharpness performance:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...=9&FLI=0&API=1

and here's another review:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/28mm-f18.htm

[Halfmoon]

Originally Posted by spartacus.ret the 35/2 hunts like nonsense in low light. if you're going to be shooting a lot in low ligtht (which is why you would buy a fast prime in the first place), forget the 35/2. i had both for a period of 8 months, and was deciding which one to bring to europe last year. i'm glad i chose the 28/1.8 as i used it in some very low light where i'm certain the 35/2 would not have been able to lock focus.

Compared to the 50 f1.8, the 35 f2 in low light focusing is much better..... I have not tried the 28mm f1.8 so I cannot do a fair comparison....

So far.... the low light situation I am have used, it is still reasonable for me... maybe I have not shot in clubs, etc......

Seems like 28mm is the sharper of the 2 in the corners.....

[Kalas]

Originally Posted by J-Chan hardly see this lens popping up in discussions.. thinking of getting this lens as a "normal" lens on my 40D.. quite used to the 50mm perspective on film, and the 28mm approx replicates that.. is this lens worth it for its price? or should I just stick to the cheaper 35mm f2 or its 2.8 sibling..

if u like to try the 28,
come on to bugis area,
got a sharp copy that u can test
just pm me.

jude