Any opinions on 28mm 1.8 vs 28mm 2.8?

bubbygator wrote in post #12587289
I bought the 28/1.8 as my walk-around and indoor (poor lighting) lens. I've been well-pleased with it.

I've even shot some basketball towards the end of the game (where I've changed from 85 to 28 to be ready for the game-end gatherings and awards ceremony)... the /1.8 has great IQ; it crops well up to 4-6x, after that it's a bit noisy, but can go higher in center. It still has detail at 10x (100%).

Here's a shot and ~100% crop:

Ummm... I don't think that's a very good pic/crop to use as a means to demonstrate the IQ of the lens.

Here's an un-processed 28mm/1.8 action shot from a practice:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

samueli wrote in post #12587075
I'm getting tired of backing up into walls or falling off ledges trying to frame a shot with my 50mm on a crop. I have the tokina 11-16, but that is useless in most cases because of distortion. I don't want sigma as I don't have time for the buy/return/repeat process to get a good copy of a 30mm.

I think I know the answer since it's better to back off a bit from maximum aperture for sharpness, and I would be using this lens wider a good portion of the time.

I'm a bit worried though; I've already read plenty that says the 1.8 isn't so sharp. If I'm buying the 28mm 1.8, it should be as sharp as the 50mm 1.4 (especially for the money). I'm not worried as much about CA, since CA can be as much user error as lens trait.

The sample archive isn't helping much as far as sharp samples go, but I've only checked 100 posts or so.

So is the 28mm 1.8 worth over double the price of the 2.8? I've read lot's of good about the 35mm, but I can't seem to find it in stock.

ONce you are talking f/2.8 why not just get a Tamron 17-50 2.8 or something? It has better 28mm anyway plus more.

So I would say the f/1.8 or some zoom, be it tamron 17-50 or 28-75 or canon 15-85 or 17-55 etc. etc.

RobertMang wrote in post #12609730
So to piggy back onto this thread, how's the 28 1.8 for basketball? I found my 24-70 to be too slow to focus. With the 28's legendary AF, would that problem go away?

Not really sure. I have a 16-35L that I use for that. The 28 focuses about as fast as the 35L and not nearly as fast as the 24LII, which is very quick for a fast wide. The 28 is also about as fast as the Sigma 50 in terms of AF. So, in my estimation that makes the 28 borderline for basketball, depending on the age and skill level.

Do you know what lens you used for "the reach" shot in your profile?

kjonnnn wrote in post #12611568
Why not a 24mm 2.8 ?

Who are you asking at this point in the conversation?

RobertMang wrote in post #12609730
So to piggy back onto this thread, how's the 28 1.8 for basketball? I found my 24-70 to be too slow to focus. With the 28's legendary AF, would that problem go away?

The 28 would be a bad choice--the basic principal of shooting sports is "shoot tight and crop tighter"

As a credentialed MHSAA shooter under the basket from the baseline I use a 50 prime--85mm to 135 for front court to half court shots.

Not a problem with the 24-70 either using center point only with back button focus.

OP, Since you are using a crop lens, I'm gonna assume you are using a crop camera... you didn't say in your post...

On a crop camera 28/1.8 is fine because the camera only uses the central, "sweet spot" of the lens. If at all, the 28/1.8 is soft in the corners on a full frame camera. And it's really not all that bad... It's better stopped down, but usable wide open when needed.

The 28/1.8 is a USM lens. The f2.8 is not. USM gives faster, quieter and more accurate focus.

The build quality of the f1.8 is better, too.

Keep in mind that the Sigma 30/1.4 is a crop only lens, while the Canon 28/1.8 is full frame compatible.

You can compare test chart shots with each of these lenses here
Note: these are both shown on 30D, that's the only camera they had in common in the tests. You can check out other lenses there, too. Not all have been tested on all cameras, so sometimes you can't get precise head-to-head comparisons... but it can be helpful to see some lens performance samples.

RobertMang wrote in post #12611529
Do you know what lens you used for "the reach" shot in your profile?

135L on a 1.3x crop body, shot from near the corner of the court.