Like to see a 24 and 35 mm prime with USM?

[cactusclay]

Would anyone, who doesn't already own a non USM 24 and 35 prime, like to see Canon make a non "L" USM model, with maybe more apature blades and both with at least F 2.0 maximum apature, or am I all alone on this one?:confused:

[scr7b]

What a great idea!! :-)

The 28mm f/1.8 is a nicely built lens, and it would be nice to see the other primes updated to the same standard.

[cactusclay]

What a great idea!! :-)

The 28mm f/1.8 is a nicely built lens, and it would be nice to see the other primes updated to the same standard.
Your killing me:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Pekka]

Why won't you just buy 35/2?

[CyberDyneSystems]

scr7b just agreed with your sentiment....

It's confusing that you would laugh at that. ???


I also agree with scr7b regarding the 28mm.
I love the 28mm f/1.8 USM,. it performs nearly on par with the 85mm f/1.8,. fast focusing,. sharp and lightweight. When I'm lugging big primes around and don't want to heft an extra heavyweight wide for those must have sunsets etc.. this is in my bag or pocket. It's smaller than some t-cons.

I can't see the big deal over the 4mm between 28mm and 24mm,. essentially the 28mm is exactly what your looking for,. minus 4mm.

Still,. it would be nice to have the choice of more of these mid range primes,. the 28mm, 85mm, 100mm etc.. are all very top notch and great values.

Personally the one I would really like to see is a 17mm or wider.

[chtgrubbs]

I'd love to see an upgrade of the prime wide angle lenses to a higher level of optical performance and build quality without the lens speed of the current L lenses. I'd like lenses that are razor sharp out to the corners of the full frame at f/4 and I would gladly pay double what the current lenses cost.

[lmitch6]

Another vote on the 28mm f/1.8. Wonderfully sharp, good color and contrast, and USM. It is very close focal lenght-wise to the 24 and 35. Consider it seriously, you won't be sorry!

[cactusclay]

Why won't you just buy 35/2?
I had one for one day it was defective, had a chunck of lens coating missing on the front element. But it was so cheasy feeling, like the 50 1.8 MK 1 and 2. I just want a small camera with a small sharp set of prime lenes that have USM and some what feel like the old mf lenses, for walking around with. Heck, I would even settle for the micro USM. I have the 35L, but it's so long
with the hood on that it isn't what I would consider a discrete street lens. I don't mean to sound like I'm whining, but it just seems like Canon should at least try to make the transition from film to digital as pain free as possible, by making the lens transition relativily easy. Maybe my problem is that I never had a AF lens till I switched to digital, so when I pick up one of these ark drive lenses, they just feel like a chuck of rattley plactic, with a focus ring that feels toyish at best. I don't have any problems with lenses like the 85 1.8 USM or lenses with simular build, but I just cannot get used to the non USM prime lenses.:D

[cactusclay]

scr7b just agreed with your sentiment....

It's confusing that you would laugh at that. ???


I also agree with scr7b regarding the 28mm.
I love the 28mm f/1.8 USM,. it performs nearly on par with the 85mm f/1.8,. fast focusing,. sharp and lightweight. When I'm lugging big primes around and don't want to heft an extra heavyweight wide for those must have sunsets etc.. this is in my bag or pocket. It's smaller than some t-cons.

I can't see the big deal over the 4mm between 28mm and 24mm,. essentially the 28mm is exactly what your looking for,. minus 4mm.

Still,. it would be nice to have the choice of more of these mid range primes,. the 28mm, 85mm, 100mm etc.. are all very top notch and great values.

Personally the one I would really like to see is a 17mm or wider.
I was just laughing, because of the direction the first thread took, which in retrospect, was my fault and how we both took a different approach on this thread. I would like to be happy with the 28 1.8, but I'm not. I don't see the big deal, before digital, people used 35 and 50 and 85 mm lenses, why would going to digital change that, or, why would going to AF change that. I just don't understand what Canon would not make those comparable focal lenghts in a nice package, with USM. In all reality the 50 1.4 should be ring USM, for the 1.6 crops, so you would have a really good portrait lenght, then if there was a 35 2.0 USM, that would cover the 50ish range and a 24 2.0 USM would cover the 35ish range and all would be Happy in Canon land. Just trust me on this one.:D