Canon low primes: any good?

[jaypie77]

I was hoping to get something a little wider than what I have and better than the kit lens and I noticed that the low primes are cheap: the 20, 24, 28, all pretty low price relatively speaking. Are these any good or are these a waste of time?

[shaun3000]

They are all excellent though not exactly cheap. (At least not when compared to the 50mm f/1.8)

I have the 24mm f/2.8 and it is on my camera 65% of the time. It works out to a FoV of a 35mm lens which is just a little wider than normal but not too wide. I can comfortably take pictures of several people across a table from me without having to contort myself too much, which I had to do even with a 50mm on my Elan.

[mbze430]

In truth. Every prime is "good". They are going to be sharp. As the Field of view gets wider, the "lower cost" prime will start to show CA. As opposed to the L series. Another advantage the L Primes has is the low-light situation with its wide apeture size.

[shaun3000]

The L primes aren't much faster than the non-L, maybe one stop. Canon's primes, except the 50mm f/1.8 II, are built very well and designed for a more serious photographer. Yes, the L primes are better but the non-L primes will still perform just as well as an L zoom.

Take a look at Canon promotional materials or advertisements, especially for their 1 series. Most of the ads and brochures I've seen have a 50mm f/1.4 mounted on the camera. (For example, www.canoneos.com)

[Andy_T]

Take a look at the ratings at http://www.photozone.de/bindex2.html


Best regards,
Andy

[johnbs]

The Canon 35/2 is excellent, if that is wide enough for you

For the wider lenses, if you want to handle low light, you should also look at the Sigma 20/24/28 which are all f1.8 lenses. They are a bit heavy, but produce very nice images from f2.0 onwards.

If you are using a 1.6 multiplier camera, Sigma has a 30/1.4 on the way (date and price not yet set). There is also the Sigma 18-50/2.8 zoom, which is very nice.

John

[davidwegs]

28/2.8 is a good one and the 35/2

[snibbetsj]

I have the 24 f2.8 and it is an excellent lens, very happy with it. The 35 f2 is on the way and I've heard lots of good things about it also.

[Vita Rara]

I have the 28 f/2.8 and I'm very happy with it. Right now it is the widest lens I have for my 1D and it serves well.

Mark

[jbradc]

I just got the 28 F1.8, see this thread for more info and sample images...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63859

[RDKirk]

I was hoping to get something a little wider than what I have and better than the kit lens and I noticed that the low primes are cheap: the 20, 24, 28, all pretty low price relatively speaking. Are these any good or are these a waste of time?

One disadvantage of the low-cost Canon primes with DSLRs is their lack of rear-element multicoating. It does make a difference in high flare situations. In fact, the modern "digitally designed" zoom lenses with rear element multicoating usually beat the older primes in resisting flare with DSLRs.

It would be nice if Canon did a slight redesign and reissue of their prime lenses (Tamron did...it can't possibly cost that much), but that doesn't appear to be Canon's view of how things should be.