Canon 28 F1.8 First Impressions

[jbradc]

I posted a thread yesterday when my 2 new lenses came (28 F1.8 & 85 F1.8 ). There seemed to be several people interested in what I thought about the 28mm F1.8 so I thought I would post my first few images for review.
I went Downtown armed with only my 10D and the 28 F1.8 for the sole purpose of testing the lens. I purchased this lens because I wanted to find something that would be close to (but not over) the field of view of a 50mm on a full size sensor. With the 1.6 crop factor of the 10D the 28mm is close (28 x 1.6 = 44.8 ). So this lens "feels" a lot like using a 50mm. The lens is well built and feels very solid on the camera, focus is fast and silent thanks to the USM. Sharpness is really good, even wide open. Although better in the center than near the edges wide open. Most of the shots were taken at F4, then at F1.8 for comparison. Just click on the "More Photo details" link below each image to view the EXIF data. I shot in RAW and adjusted levels and basic sharpening in PS CS.

Follow this link to view the images...
http://shp.smugmug.com/gallery/450187

[Dante King]

looks like a nice purchase to me!

[drisley]

jbradc, thanks so much for the post! :)
I too have been contemplating buying this lens for the exact reasons you state.
I want a walk around lens that gives low light ability, fast and silent focusing, and of course great optics with a 50mm equivalent focal length.
I've heard so many conflicting stories about this lens, it's nice to see some samples.
Apparently at it's best, this lens is sharper than the 16-35L, and even the 24-70L. This seems to be mostly in close up shots. But, for some reason the same users say this lens really seems to lack sharpness and detail in landscape shots, or in detai of objects that are far away. That really mistifies me.
Your images look great, but there is some slight softening as you move from the center.
Perhaps this is unavoidable with a lens like this?
I think your post has just sold me on this lens :)

[Redbird_xo]

Great photos and thanks for sharing.
Last time I read about this lens was when I was deciding whether to buy the 28mm or 35mm. I remember reading reviews on FM, and some of the users indicated that the 28mm is soft until stopping down. I think taking shots of buildings will expose the softness of a lens a bit more easily.

[drisley]

Good point Redbird (about the buildings).
I generally would use it for "people" photography, which generally doesnt mind softer corners.
Heck, the 50/1.8II has incredibly soft corners, much worse than many cheaper zooms like the tamron 28-75. But, since it has such sharpness in center, and is used mainly for portraits, this is never seen unless you perform specific tests.

[Redbird_xo]

drisley, it's interesting that you think 50mm f/1.8 MK II has incredibly soft corners because that's not what my experience with this lens. please see the attached pix. the 100% crop is part of the bottom left of the original image. speaking of tamron 28-75, it's so good for its price that i simply think it's such a bargain to pass on.

to the original poster: please accept my apology if i'm, in anyway, have hijacked your thread.

[drisley]

Well, I've actually never noticed it on my lens, but I usually shoot wide open.
I just read a review yesterday that showed corner and center crops from the 50/1.8II, the tamron 28-75/2.8 lens, and a sigma consumer lens. The corners on the 50/1.8II were horrible in comparison to the other two zooms, even stopped down. Perhaps he just had a bad copy.
If I can find that review again, I will post.

[Redbird_xo]

i must have missed the point. i used to shoot wide open using the 50mm f/1.8 but the results were less than satisfying. i might have gotten into a habit of shooting f/4 or above, that's why i "forget" about the softness when shot at wide open.

how does the tokina 17mm ATX-Pro performs at f/3.5? which aperture is the optimal in your opinion? appreciate your comments.

[Miika]

I also have the 28/1.8

I have also noticed "lack of sharpness" in landscape shots with this lens. When I told about the "problem" to a friend of mine who has had this lens for a long time and used it with a film camera, he replied:

Did you:
- stop down to at least f8?
- use a sturdy tripod?
- use mirror lock?
- use remote shutter release?

...followed by a lecture why all this is required for a succesful landscape shot.

[johnbs]

I just read a review yesterday that showed corner and center crops from the 50/1.8II, the tamron 28-75/2.8 lens, and a sigma consumer lens. The corners on the 50/1.8II were horrible in comparison to the other two zooms, even stopped down. Perhaps he just had a bad copy.
If I can find that review again, I will post.

I think JoJo Ma's test is flawed for this purpose - the edges were horrible because they were out of focus on the 50/1.8 because the depth of field at f/1.8 is *very* small compared with f/2.8 which was the aperture for the other lenses.

Please do not go around concluding that 50/1.8 edges are bad based on that test, they certainly are not on my copy.

John

[drisley]

John, the test I saw had all the lenses stopped down to the same aperture, so that is not the reason.
For example, he first tested wide open, then all lenses at 2.8, then at 4.0. So, they were all at the same aperture and length, so DOF was exactly the same. I ruled out DOF when I saw that.
I can only conclude that either 1. 50/1.8II has soft corners or 2. His copy is flawed

Redbird, the Tokina 17 is one of those lenses that has about equal sharpness at all stops. There is slight improvement going to F4, and a LITTLE bit more going to F5, but overall the sharpness is about the same. I usually use the lens at F4-F5.6. The contrast on this lens is great at all apertures. This lens gives great sharpness close up, but much like I heard about the 28/1.8, it can seem to lack detal on distant objects. However, I am fairly sure this is just because SO much detail is crammed into a small space that the appearance of softness is more due to a limitation of the digital sensor. It's been known that digital cameras can't quite match film when it comes to landscape shots (with the exception of a few).
The article that I read about the 28/1.8 specifically said that this lens often beats lenses like the 24-70L and 16-35L when objects are close, but for some reason seems to fall behind on distant objects. That is what I found weird.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-28mm-f-1.8-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Miika, after you made the changes your friend suggested, did your landscape shots improve? Btw, how do you like the lens otherwise.

[johnbs]

John, the test I saw had all the lenses stopped down to the same aperture, so that is not the reason. For example, he first tested wide open, then all lenses at 2.8, then at 4.0. So, they were all at the same aperture and length, so DOF was exactly the same. I ruled out DOF when I saw that.

Ah, but *wide open* is *very* different for a 50/1.8 from a 18-50/2.8 lens let alone a 18-125/3.5-5.6, so the DOF was not the same for those wide open pictures which were the ones where the 50/1.8 looked bad.

I think you will find that the 50/1.8 looks great at 2.8 and 4.0 in his tests.

Anyway, it is not helpful to compare edges on objects that are not at the point of focus.

John

[drisley]

John, no, wide open was only ONE of the tests.
Even when they were all set at the same aperture, say F4, the 50/1.8II performed much worse at the corners than any of the other lenses. Not just a little, but a LOT.
The 50/1.8II corners at the same aperture as the other consumer zooms looked like complete mush in comparison.
I dont think you are talking about the same review I'm talking about.
Again, it may just be a bad copy that the reviewer had. Either way, I'm not too worried about it as I like the image quality of my 50/1.8II, and I am the weakest link, not the lens.

[drisley]

Oh, I found this page that has alot of full size images from the 28/1.8USM.
http://fine.tok2.com/home/nakae/smp/10D/ef28f18.htm

[Redbird_xo]

Redbird, the Tokina 17...but much like I heard about the 28/1.8, it can seem to lack detal on distant objects.

drisley, thanks for your insights. this is an area of ultra wide / wide-angle lens that would let me down. my primary need for wide-angle lens is landscape, which mostly comprises shots of cityscape and buildings. i guess i just have to learn taking panoramic shots more effectively.

[johnbs]

I dont think you are talking about the same review I'm talking about.

Sorry, I think you are correct, I meant his outdoor test here:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/image/41560163

Here he tested wide open and at f/5.6. The 50/1.8 looks rubbish at the edges wide open, and I believe it is due to the much smaller DOF

Did you mean this test of newspaper text:
http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/image/41487367

Here the 50/1.8 looks poor at f/1.8 and good at f/2.8

I agree that his copy of the 50/1.8 looks quite poor

John

[drisley]

You know, I did see that review.
But actually, I was refering to another review I came across around the same time.
There were pictures of books, and on the 50/1.8II, you couldnt even make out the letters on the books in the corner, at any aperture. However, again, this may be due to bad copies of the lens.
If not, it's not a problem I've ever noticed before.

[drisley]

drisley, thanks for your insights. this is an area of ultra wide / wide-angle lens that would let me down. my primary need for wide-angle lens is landscape, which mostly comprises shots of cityscape and buildings. i guess i just have to learn taking panoramic shots more effectively.

Redbird, I will try to post some sample pictures for you to gander.
In the meantime, here are a few pictures I have taken with the Tokina.

http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/11102004
http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/10222004
http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/10242004

[drisley]

Woohoo. EF 28/1.8USM is on the way! :)

[Redbird_xo]

drisley, thanks for the links to your pictures. and congrats on your final decision.

[jbradc]

Woohoo. EF 28/1.8USM is on the way! :)
Post some shots when you get a chance. I have been using the 28 F1.8 on my new 1d Mark II and with the 1.3 crop factor it makes a very nice, fast 35mm (36.4) F1.8. Be sure to get the Canon hood for it as well. Enjoy.

[drisley]

Will do, jbradc :)
I absolutely got the hood. I always use hoods on all my lenses, and never use UV fitlers.
However, I forgot to get a lens pouch. Argh, Canon should include those!
I mean, my Tokina 17mm cost less, and it includes an amazingly nice lens CASE (http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/miscellaneous/MG_3299.jpg), not just a pouch. And, the hood was inlcuded too!

[Miika]

Miika, after you made the changes your friend suggested, did your landscape shots improve? Btw, how do you like the lens otherwise.

I haven't really done a good test run yet altough I've had the lens since the beginning of November. When I got it I immediatly took few shots from my balcony (hand held), and I didn't stop down enough that led to my question... obviously the results will be better.

I have mostly used the lens indoors, and I have been very satisfied with it.

However, it seems that you need to be more careful with it compared to 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 (they also belong to my collection).

Miika

[drisley]

However, it seems that you need to be more careful with it compared to 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 (they also belong to my collection).
What do you mean by careful?

[drisley]

Redbird,
HERE (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/tokina.jpg)is a 100% crop taken with the Tokina at F5, ISO400

[accord]

The sample pictures are very impressive. However, it makes me a hard time to choose between 35 f/2 and this one.

Apart from the obvious differences of
1) wider (44.8 vs 56 in 20D)
2) faster (f/1.8 vs f/2 and ring USM vs micro USM)
3) heavier
4) higher price (1.6x)
there seems not many people using this lens.

The optical score from some sites give much higher grade for 35 than this one. This may be the reason thwt people stay away from this lens.

It would be nice If there are some side by sider comparison between these two lenses.

[drisley]

The main reason I didnt get the 35/2 lens is because it is supposed to have a LOUD autofocus, probably the loudest of any lens out there.
Also, the 28/1.8 has a much nicer build, and I intend to use this lens a lot, so I would rather pay a bit more for something that is built better.
Optically, the 35mm is supposed to be slightly sharper. But the 28/1.8 is supposed to have better contrast and colour, as well as better bokeh due to it's 7 blade diaphram vs only 5 for the 35mm.
Then again, the 28 costs a lot more too.

[Redbird_xo]

Redbird,
HERE (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/tokina.jpg)is a 100% crop taken with the Tokina at F5, ISO400

Great! Thanks for the sample. ;)

[Miika]

What do you mean by careful?

I can't prove this any way, but I feel 28/1.8 is more sensitive to camera shake than 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, especially with background details, (details far away).

Miika

[drisley]

That is interesting. Its something that others have pointed out (soft details on distant objects).
If anything, I would think it should be less prone to shake since it is a wider angle lens.
Unless it truly doesn't resolve well, and you are fooled to believe it does on close up shots somehow.

[Miika]

I may have got a wrong first impression of this lens!

I have actually had two copies of this lens. I bought the first one second hand, fortunately the dealer gave it a money-back guarantee. I had to take it back after a couple of days of testing.

It appeared that it wouldn't focus to infinity, some kind of mechnanical fault with the focus ring or autofocus engine. I put in some more money and got a brand new one.

So, my first impression of problems with soft pictures can be also explained with a true focus problem.

Here's one example shot with the brand new one:
10D (no sharpening/shot RAW converted DPP 1.5) monopod - ISO800 - F4 - 1/20s (http://www.saunalahti.fi/masunta/miscpics/CRW_0958.JPG)

[drisley]

Wow, thanks for sharing! That image sharpens up very nicely too!
I can't wait for my lens anymore. I was hoping it would arrive today, but I guess I have to wait until next week now :(

[Miika]

Another one from today:

Handheld ISO-100 - F8 - 1/250s
Link to JPG(converted from RAW to JPG with DPP 1.5):
(Again, no sharpening. Only adjusted dynamics - no other processing)

Partial rainbow over city (http://www.saunalahti.fi/masunta/miscpics/CRW_1217.JPG)

Resized, PS: slightly added saturation (+30) + unsharp mask (0,2 pix @ 500%)

http://www.saunalahti.fi/masunta/miscpics/CRW_1217-small2.JPG

[drisley]

Nice rainbow!
The picture shows good contrast, and also no Chromatic Abberation at all.

[Miika]

Unfortunately I didn't catch the rainbow on its very best.

I think the full size picture shows all the weaknesses discussed earlier in this thread - on the other hand, what is the amount of detail required for a good print?

Also, I think it can't get mcuh worse than this...

Miika

[roanjohn]

Drisley - CONGRATULATIONS!!! Another prime in your arsenal!!! Use it well.

:-)

Ro1

[drisley]

Well, I got my lens today!
First impressions weren't great. Why? Because the post office rememberd to charge both taxes this time! Argh! ;)

Second impression was the this lens is physically very nice. It looks exactly like the 85/1.8's smaller, heavier brother. I've always loved the build of the 85, so I am happy in this respect.

My first impressions of the optics were that they were not as sharp as my other lenses. It's probably close to the Tokina in the sharpness department, even when stepped down. However, the colour and contras of this lens really makes up for the slight lack of sharpness. It's very similar to my 135F2L in these departments. And the bokeh is creamy smooth. The lens has the potential to produce some very dreamy images indeed. I think the combination of colour, contrast, bokeh, and not quite tack sharpness would make this an ideal wider portrait lens. First Test Shots (http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/28mmtest)

[jbradc]

Drisley,
Funny you should mention that this lens would make an ideal wider portrait lens. Here is a bridal portrait I took this weekend with the 28 F1.8 and 1D Mark II. With the 1.3 crop factor it was like shooting with a fast 35mm (36.4mm) lens.

http://sevenhillsphotography.com/shots/090405_O9W0360_small.jpg

[drisley]

JBRadc, WOW, that is beautiful!
So sharp,and the colour is fantastic! I think you may have a real good copy of that lens.
I'm still in testing mode.

[roanjohn]

WoW!!! The bokeh at f2.2 is lovely!!! Much better than the 35 f2 as far as I can remember.........and at least you have the option to open up at f1.8 if you're strapped for light. Would be interested to see more real world images....have not really heard a lot about this lens.

JBRAC - GREAT SHOT!!!!

This lens is becoming more and more attractive!!!

Ro1

[jbradc]

JBRadc, WOW, that is beautiful!
So sharp,and the colour is fantastic! I think you may have a real good copy of that lens.
I'm still in testing mode.
I think some of the credit goes to the camera, the 1D mark II at ISO 50 produces wonderful color :D

[drisley]

Hehe, yeah, the bokeh is impressive.
This lens is teaching me that sharpness isn't the be all and end all as far as quality is concerned.
Here is my first "people" shot of a victi.. uh errr, passer-by.

F2.8 ISO200
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/28mmtest/Dragan_B.jpg

[jbradc]

Drisley, don't forget to update your signature to reflect that new lens :-)

[drisley]

Thanks for that. I almost forgot.
Btw, I fixed the direct link control so the image above should show now.

Here is another bokeh test shot taken at 1/10s F1.8 ISO1600
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/28mmtest/IMG_7414.jpg

[jbradc]

Very nice shot, this lens has been a pleasent surprise for me. I hope you find it to the same.

[roanjohn]

IMPRESSIVE SHOTS!!!

..............now I'm wondering if I need this lens..............

:-)

Ro1

[drisley]

I hope so too. There really isn't much choice in this focal range though, so this lens will have to do.
I give it a 9/10 for colour, contrast, bokeh, and build.
Sharpness I would give it a 7/10, and chromatic abberation I would give it a 6/10.
I also have to give it a 10/10 for close focus distance. This lens has the best close focus distance of any lens I have. This is a great bonus for a wide angle.
I have a funny feeling though that the more I use it,the more I will like it. It just seems like one of those lenses.

HERE (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/IMG_7422.jpg) is the sharpest image I've taken with it so far.
Taken at F3.5 ISO400

[drisley]

Ok, I keep posting :)
Here is a comparison between the 28/1.8 and 50/1.8II.
It's not a perfect test but it gives me a good indicator.
Both shots were at F2.2, an aperture I use a lot on my 1.8 lenses. This is where my 50mm and 85mm seem to start to shine.
The images were handheld so that the subject appeared the same in the frame, ie, the 50mm shot was further away. This gives approx the same dof. Images were Raw, and converted in PS CS with the exact same parameters, wb, etc.
I can honestly say that the 28mm lens blows away the nifty thrifty in contrast and colour.
The 28mm shot also looks sharper. It definately shows more detail in the center. However, there is definately the chance that my slight change in position between shots could add to this.
But, I wasn't trying to be totally scientific, but I wanted a general idea. Since the 28mm atleast matched, if not beat the "Thrifty Fifty" in sharpness in this test, I am very content.

Full Images Reduced In Size By 50%:
50mm (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/50mm.jpg)
28mm (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/28mm.jpg)