wide primes?? 28 f1.8 vs 28 f2.8??

[That One Guy]

Hello everyone, I am the new guy on the block...

I was looking into getting some decent non-L prime lenses simply because I am beginning to hate just about everything I get with my 17-35L..

I used to own the 20mm f2.8 and I'd say that it was noticably better then the zoom lens at 20mm... and now, I am looking into buying one back.. along with a decent 28mm lens and perhaps a 35mm f2..

Does anyone have any experience using the two of these 28's??

I am looking for sharpness and resolution....these things are more important than cost, or brightness... I need them for commercial client's images...not snap shots of kids or what have you..

Thanks ahead!

JP

[PaulB]

Welcome to the confusion zone!

I think a change from the 17-35/2.8L to a 16-35/2.8L or 17-40/4L would restore your faith in zooms.
However, I used to be a prime lens man before I changed to Canon and know exactly what you mean.
You probably won't notice much difference in quality between the two 28mm's when stopped down to 5.6 or 8 but the 28/1.8 should make a good 'standard' lens on a 10D = 45mm equivalent, it all depends on whether you need the aperture wide open.

[wolverine]

I owned the 28 1.8 and sold it to buy a 20 2.8. I have the 28 1.8 before I went digital and only started noticing its lack of sharpness when I got my D60. The 28 2.8 rates higher, but I cannot comment on it myself. Personally, I think if you don't need a fast lens, I would go with the new 17-40L. It packs a real bang for buck!