28mm f1.8 - comparable to 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8?

I've got the 50mm f1.4 and 28mm f1.8. Its a wonderful semi-wide focal length on my 5D. Its 98% as good as my 50mm, just a little soft in the corners; but nothing you'll notice or gripe about unless you're pixel peeping. Of course, it outperforms any zoom lens in terms of sharpness and bokeh.

Also thinking about selling or keeping the 50 and getting a 28 1.8.

thank you for this thread. ive been considering a 28 f/1.8 instead of the 35mm f/2 that i have. this thread is enlightening.

ive been told that the 85mm is a good lens to get but i dont know how much i would shoot it since im shooting a crop and that might be a bit too much for me

I have the 28 1.8, I use it with my 50D for indoor shooting. It works well for situations where 50mm is too long indoors and I can't complain about the pictures. The price is reasonable as well.

I don't think it's as good optically as the 85mm (I love the 85mm) but it's a real nice lens. The focal length is a bit wide for what I shoot, but I use it exclusively when I shoot video.

I've owned all 3 and I don't think the 28 is nearly as good optically as the other two. I found the lens pretty disappointing wide-open and don't see the point of having to stop down to 2.8 to get a decently sharp image when there are zooms on the market that do just as well. Build is on par with the 85, which is pretty darn decent.

so would you recommend sticking to the 35mm f/2 that i currently have and then getting a say 10-22 SWA lens if i wanted something wider? just not sure i want to spend the extra on the 28mm if its not that much better than what im already shooting with the 35mm

shooting on a crop body if it helps any

tokina 11-16 2.8 if you want wider and shoot allot indoors without a flash.

shoturtle wrote in post #11991153
tokina 11-16 2.8 if you want wider and shoot allot indoors without a flash.

over the 28mm?

chantheman wrote in post #11991142
so would you recommend sticking to the 35mm f/2 that i currently have and then getting a say 10-22 SWA lens if i wanted something wider? just not sure i want to spend the extra on the 28mm if its not that much better than what im already shooting with the 35mm

shooting on a crop body if it helps any

Based on my personal experience, I'd recommend sticking with the 35 you already have and putting the funds towards something else, like a UWA.

The 35 and 28 are very close in range, and f2 vs 1.8 is really close also. The 28 is faster to AF. It is a bit soft form 1.8-2.5. So if you are getting it just to shoot wide open, you really are not gaining much. I like to walk around with primes, and stopped down to 2.8-3.5 it is a very sharp lens. As shooting outdoors with 1.8 is not that feasible on a sunny day.

On crop bodies, 28 is not very wide either. So if you want to shoot wide, the uwa would be a better option.

chantheman wrote in post #11991168
over the 28mm?

I am happy with my 35f2. I am not planning on replacing it, and certainly not with the 28f1.8. If I want faster, I'd consider the Sigma 30.
My 35f2 is sharp wide open, and is certainly in the same league as the 50f1.4 and 85f1.8.

shujert wrote in post #11991092
I've owned all 3 and I don't think the 28 is nearly as good optically as the other two. I found the lens pretty disappointing wide-open and don't see the point of having to stop down to 2.8 to get a decently sharp image when there are zooms on the market that do just as well. Build is on par with the 85, which is pretty darn decent.

Lenses tend to be sharpest a couple of stops down from their widest aperture, so a sharp f/2.8 on a 1.8 lens is more useful to me than a sharp f/5.6-8 on my f/4-5.6 zoom.

If you choose an f/2.8, you'll occasionally be forced to use a higher ISO as the faster aperture isn't available to you. Aperture has a direct effects on depth of field, so your creative options are impacted toobut all of this is a personal choice in the end, one that usually balances shooting style/options vs price you're willing to pay.

I have a Canon 28 1.8, Sigma 50 1.4, and Canon 85 1.8. I think the Canon 28 1.8 is the weakest of the three, but still a decent lens.

It's sad that these kinda lenses are not being updated by Canon.

Their EF = L only policy for lenses in the past 5 years is troubling.