Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 17 Feb 2013 (Sunday) 00:35
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Canon 28mm f2.8 IS -- sharp, sharp, sharp!

 
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,362 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 551
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 17, 2013 17:42 |  #31

shadowcat wrote in post #15620968 (external link)
I just looked at a review on both the 24 2.8IS and 28 2.8IS and both looked similar in sharpness the 35 F2 did not impress me.

Take a look at the lens rental comparison. Once you get past the condescension and the obvious bias against the new canon IS primes there is a pretty good comparison there.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,118 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Aug 2009
     
Feb 17, 2013 19:02 as a reply to  @ ed rader's post |  #32

I can see the value of the lens for low light. I am presently shooting a crop body. I already have the older Canon 35F2 and the Tokina 35F2.8 macro. My photos at this focal length are directed toward family/people shots. For that purpose, I don't really need the 28F2.8IS macro right now.

I wish the 28 and 24s were F2. I'd snap one up.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Feb 17, 2013 20:16 |  #33

ed rader wrote in post #15618532 (external link)
QUOTED IMAGE


Lovely tone on this one.


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Feb 17, 2013 21:30 |  #34
bannedPermanent ban

Still think $549 is overpriced...

If Canon can sell a 40 f2.8 pancake for $150 which is already damn sharp wide open, is IS really worth the extra $400??

It's a definite no for me...


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,362 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 551
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 17, 2013 21:46 |  #35

kin2son wrote in post #15621850 (external link)
Still think $549 is overpriced...

If Canon can sell a 40 f2.8 pancake for $150 which is already damn sharp wide open, is IS really worth the extra $400??

It's a definite no for me...

good thing we don't have to cosign each other's checks :D!

the pancake has small and small price going for it. but what would it really add to my camera bag? nada. my 24-70L II would scorch it wide open.

how come when someone buys an f2.8 zeiss prime for twice as much as a canon IS prime there isn't all this outrage and questioning of worth? the zeiss doesn't have IS or AF. oh but it's a special lens made by a special company and i would look like a fool if i badmouthed a zeiss lens!

yeah right. like i told Bobby i didn't make this post to convince anyone of anything.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,362 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 551
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 17, 2013 21:50 |  #36

artyH wrote in post #15621345 (external link)
I can see the value of the lens for low light. I am presently shooting a crop body. I already have the older Canon 35F2 and the Tokina 35F2.8 macro. My photos at this focal length are directed toward family/people shots. For that purpose, I don't really need the 28F2.8IS macro right now.

I wish the 28 and 24s were F2. I'd snap one up.

the 35mm IS is f2 but i can almost guarantee you i would mostly be stopping down to f2.5 or f2.8 with that lens.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Avatar
4,206 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois
     
Feb 17, 2013 22:33 |  #37

ed rader wrote in post #15621896 (external link)
the pancake has small and small price going for it. but what would it really add to my camera bag? nada. my 24-70L II would scorch it wide open.


What's the point of the 40mm when there's a 50 1.8 II for $100 that's faster?


6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montana (external link)/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgrounds (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,669 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6632
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 17, 2013 22:43 |  #38

shadowcat wrote in post #15620968 (external link)
I just looked at a review on both the 24 2.8IS and 28 2.8IS and both looked similar in sharpness the 35 F2 did not impress me.

not sure what would impress you then, this lens has super optics no doubt. Just wish it was faster and cost less. I'm also in the boat of not worth it, think it's work 350-400 tbh.... but I guess you cant have it all. The size is damn appealing... but I'm thinking that another form factor would be worth a look if I ever go for the size convenience.


Sony A7siii/A7iv/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic GH6 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,118 posts
Likes: 32
Joined Aug 2009
     
Feb 17, 2013 22:50 |  #39

With my old 35f2, the lens is OK at F2 and super at F2.2. I would only stop down more for depth of field.
If some pictures are not sharp enough at F2, it is because of motion. I did some tests with bounce flash to remove my hand motion and subject motion from the equation and the lens is fine at F2.2, and good at F2.
I don't know how much of typical blur comes from my failure to hold steady, and how much comes from subject motion in low light. I do know that even with the lens at F2, motion blur matters, along with the effect of body motion changing the effective point of focus.
Higher shutter speeds matter when photographing kids!
Of course, stopping down further helps to sharpen up the corners, but this isn't an issue in low light portraits on a crop body.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tjbrock42
Senior Member
944 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Indiana
     
Feb 17, 2013 23:08 |  #40

ed rader wrote in post #15618532 (external link)
on my way to deciding whether to buy the sigma 35mm f1.4 or the canon 35 f2 IS i discovered the canon 28mm f2.8 IS. everything i've read led me to believe that the 28mm f2.8 IS is the sharpest wide open of the three new canon IS primes.

i believe the f2.8 IS is sharper than either the sigma 35 or the canon 35 IS at f2.8. in fact it edges my 24-70L f2.8 IS at f2.8. when the 28mm f2.8 IS nails focus in the right light there's a certain "pop" that i just don't see with the other primes i have mentioned.

in fact the only lenses i've owned that were similar at f2.8 were the 300L f2.8 and the 100mm macro (non IS). the 35L is also close but lenses like the canon 50 1.4 and canon 28 1.8 aren't in the same ballpark at f2.8.

when i first got the idea to buy the 35 f2 IS i was hoping that it would be this sharp at f2. it's not. the 35 f2 IS is certainly useable wide open but i knew i would always be tempted to stop down at least a partial stop with that lens to improve sharpness.

if the 35 f2 IS were as sharp as the 28 2.8 IS wide open i would have bought it immediately at full price -- $849. but as it turns out i bought a lens that a little shorter than i prefered for $549. but it's also lighter and smaller and superb wide open!

Thanks for the write up Ed!

Just a couple questions...
Did you actually test/use either of the aforementioned 35mm lenses at f/2.8 to compare to the the Canon 28 f/2.8 IS?
Or do you just believe this to be true?

I am truly curious about this... Not trying to prove anything or convince anyone one way or another.


6D
24-105L, 50 STM, 135L, 430EX II
For Sale: 40D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cgb628
Member
152 posts
Joined Nov 2012
Location: North Carolina
     
Feb 17, 2013 23:59 |  #41

Mike55 wrote in post #15622022 (external link)
What's the point of the 40mm when there's a 50 1.8 II for $100 that's faster?

A lens that is significantly wider and better built for a few dollars more? Edit: And optically much better.


1DX - 1D3
24-70L - 135L - 300/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ed ­ rader
THREAD ­ STARTER
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,362 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 551
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Feb 18, 2013 00:34 |  #42

tjbrock42 wrote in post #15622128 (external link)
Thanks for the write up Ed!

Just a couple questions...
Did you actually test/use either of the aforementioned 35mm lenses at f/2.8 to compare to the the Canon 28 f/2.8 IS?
Or do you just believe this to be true?

I am truly curious about this... Not trying to prove anything or convince anyone one way or another.

i shot them all at f2.8. they are all very good at f2.8 so don't let that be the deciding factor. the canon has real pop at f2.8 in certain light but it is sharper wide open than i expected.

i have owned the 35L. i also rented it before i bought my copy. i recently rented the 35 f2 IS and the sigma 35 f1.4. i'll say all these lenses are excellent at f2.8. the sigma is excellent @ f1.4. the 35L lousy until f2 where it is very good. the 35 f2 IS pretty good wide open but not stellar. much better stopped down a partial stop.

so of the above the only lenses that i would use wide open without reservation would be the sigma and the 28 f2.8 IS. of course the 28mm is an f2.8 lens so you would hope it would be critically sharp wide open. it is.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jrscls
Goldmember
3,090 posts
Gallery: 158 photos
Likes: 1716
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
     
Feb 18, 2013 04:41 |  #43

ed rader wrote in post #15621896 (external link)
the pancake has small and small price going for it. but what would it really add to my camera bag? nada. my 24-70L II would scorch it wide open.

That is the point of the pancake to be "small" as opposed to the "big" 24-70 II, but small in this case doesn't sacrifice IQ. I have both of these lenses and while the 40 doesn't have anything else over the 24-70, IQ is certainly not an issue for the little pancake making it an ideal backup, travel or second body lens.


Sony A1, 20mm f/1.8 G, 35mm f/1.4 GM, 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II, 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II , 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS, 1.4X TC, Flashpoint flashes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tjbrock42
Senior Member
944 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Indiana
     
Feb 18, 2013 09:48 |  #44

ed rader wrote in post #15622318 (external link)
i shot them all at f2.8. they are all very good at f2.8 so don't let that be the deciding factor. the canon has real pop at f2.8 in certain light but it is sharper wide open than i expected.

i have owned the 35L. i also rented it before i bought my copy. i recently rented the 35 f2 IS and the sigma 35 f1.4. i'll say all these lenses are excellent at f2.8. the sigma is excellent @ f1.4. the 35L lousy until f2 where it is very good. the 35 f2 IS pretty good wide open but not stellar. much better stopped down a partial stop.

so of the above the only lenses that i would use wide open without reservation would be the sigma and the 28 f2.8 IS. of course the 28mm is an f2.8 lens so you would hope it would be critically sharp wide open. it is.

Good stuff... Thanks!


6D
24-105L, 50 STM, 135L, 430EX II
For Sale: 40D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jrscls
Goldmember
3,090 posts
Gallery: 158 photos
Likes: 1716
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
     
Feb 18, 2013 16:28 |  #45

Ed, Curious, what did you dislike about the Sigma 35?


Sony A1, 20mm f/1.8 G, 35mm f/1.4 GM, 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II, 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II , 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS, 1.4X TC, Flashpoint flashes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

15,481 views & 0 likes for this thread, 25 members have posted to it.
Canon 28mm f2.8 IS -- sharp, sharp, sharp!
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is monmon
389 guests, 127 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.