24 f/2.8 or 28 f/2.8 for 10D

[dennykyser]

need a lens for family portraits and landscapes and have narrowed it down to these two. The only problem is that the 24mm f/2.8 is $110.00 more than the 28 f/2.8. Is this worth the extra $ for the 2mm?
The 17-40 f/4 L is a little out of my range right now. Thanks for any help

[Tom W]

I think that the easiest way to make the decision is to analyze the usefulness of your present lenses. You list a 28-90 lens. How is its range? Is 28 mm wide enough? If it is and you want a faster, sharper lens, then you may get the 28 mm.

But, keep in mind that there are two good lenses from Canon that you may get in the future (not "L" lenses but good lenses) - the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 and the 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS lenses. They are both pretty sharp, even at the wide end (though some might argue that point). If you think that you might get either one in the future, then the 24 mm lens is your best bet.

If you get the 24 mm and you find it too wide on occasion, you can always walk closer to the subject. But if you are indoors and you use the 28 and it isn't wide enough, you're probably not going to be able to move walls in order to move back.

So, after taking you through all of my thoughts, I would say that the 24 is worth the additional $$.

[mlfrancis]

For landscapes, I would want the extra 2mm. For family portraits, I wouldn't think there would be that much of difference. If it were me, I would probably ebay some junk out of the basement or garage to make up the $100 difference. ;-)

[dennykyser]

I would probably ebay some junk out of the basement or garage to make up the $100 difference.

Since my 10D purchase Ebay and I have become very close and my wife is starting to hide things. I have been hunting for the kids Xbox all week. :o

[slin100]

I had the 24/2.8 for about a month and I found that it was just a hair too wide for family photos. I always had the feeling that I had to get really close to properly frame the subject.

I ended up returning it because it was severely backfocusing on my 10D. It was also very soft compared to the 17-40 which replaced it. It's possible that I had a lemon, so take my experience with a grain of salt.

While I've not had the chance to try one, the 28/2.8 should make a great normal perspective lens.

[MediaMagic]

need a lens for family portraits and landscapes and have narrowed it down to these two. The only problem is that the 24mm f/2.8 is $110.00 more than the 28 f/2.8. Is this worth the extra $ for the 2mm?
The 17-40 f/4 L is a little out of my range right now. Thanks for any help

I think it would be 4mm, but who's splitting hairs here? I think you'd probably be glad you got the wider 24 since you already have the 28-90.

[dennykyser]

I cant beliee I put 2 mm, but oh well. Also my 28-90 is an old kit lens so really dont even count that. It is really poor quality and the only reason I have it is if I go to take pics in bad weather I will take that and my Elan 7.