Your Opinion on Canon EF 24mm f/2.8

What do you think this lens: Canon EF 24mm f/2.8. Thanks!

It's a quick and dirty f/2.8 lens, is fairly sharp, but the focus is slow due to it's lack of USM.

I don't use mine for action, so lack of USM focus is no problem. Mine is satisfactorily sharp all the way into the corners when stopped down to f/5.6. It seems to equal or better my 24-105L with much less curvilinear distortion.

(I'm selling mine btw...but that isn't for here)

Unless you need the focal length, the 35mm f/2.0 might be a better choice. Not quite as wide, but brighter and sharper.

How about the EF 28 f/1.8? It's not quite as wide but it has USM and it's a stop and a third faster.

Nice little lens.Very useful 35ish FOV on a cropped body.I don't use it very often but when I do it's always capable of producing something a bit special, even if I'm not.

Thanks for the help guys. I've read a lot about the 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/1.8, and 35mm f/2. The 24mm has the best review out of the 3, but it's older and AF is loud/slow. From the reviews online, the 28mm and 35mm have some image quality issues and I don't know if I would happy with them if I had them. I use my 50mm f/1.8 all the time and love the result it gives me, so I'm looking to get a wider prime which will allow me to shoot closer with the same image quality the 50mm could give me. What do you think I should do? Thanks again!

I bought one for car show stuff. Here are some I took at a couple shows. The only thing done to them was resize for web and a very small sharpen from the resize.


http://www.picturetrai​l.com/pyrocars

Here is one I liked

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by PICTURETRAIL

AiGTs wrote in post #2191541
Thanks for the help guys. I've read a lot about the 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/1.8, and 35mm f/2. The 24mm has the best review out of the 3, but it's older and AF is loud/slow. From the reviews online, the 28mm and 35mm have some image quality issues and I don't know if I would happy with them if I had them. I use my 50mm f/1.8 all the time and love the result it gives me, so I'm looking to get a wider prime which will allow me to shoot closer with the same image quality the 50mm could give me. What do you think I should do? Thanks again!

Huh?

What IQ issues are there with the 35mm f/2.0? It's sharper than the other two lenses.

Have a look at The Digital Picture for general reviews of all the Canon lenses.

IMO the 24mm lens is not really of much use on a crop body - it isn't very wide at all. so personally I'd go for the 28mm f/1.8 which has USM and FTM and is faster too.

The 20mm f/2.8 USM lens gets better reviews, is wider, and IMO more useful - it gives a 32mm equivalent FOV on a 1.6 crop which is pretty wide. And it's build quality is much better, and the lens has USM too. However it does vignette ( this will be less noticeable on a crop factor camera) and has some innate softness which is disappointing for a prime.

The reviewer at the digital picture actually felt it would be better to ave a bit more and get the 17-40L or preferably the 16-35L - but then he always does push for L lenses.

Double Negative wrote in post #2191686
Huh?

What IQ issues are there with the 35mm f/2.0? It's sharper than the other two lenses.

From the reviews online, the 28mm f/1.8 has chromatic aberrations issues, and 35mm f/2 has high vignetting and softness at larger aperture setting. I like to shoot at a relatively large aperture indoor, so if those lenses will give me soft and vignetting results I will be disappointed. This is why I'm asking for opinions on the lenses before I drop the money. Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

AiGTs wrote in post #2193625
From the reviews online, the 28mm f/1.8 has chromatic aberrations issues, and 35mm f/2 has high vignetting and softness at larger aperture setting. I like to shoot at a relatively large aperture indoor, so if those lenses will give me soft and vignetting results I will be disappointed. This is why I'm asking for opinions on the lenses before I drop the money. Any input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Reasonable enough... I don't recall any such problems with my 35mm f/2.0, it has always given me great shots. I used it mostly on a 1.6x crop camera (D30) and not so much on 1.3x. Don't know how it reacts to full frame.

http://litpixel.com/ee​/photo.php?photo=274
http://litpixel.com/ee​/photo.php?photo=572

At wider apertures my 35/2.0 will definitely outperform my 24/2.8 in terms of sharpness (especially in the corners) and falloff, and this is on a full frame camera. On a smaller sensor you should have no problem at all.

Double Negative: Those shots are beautiful. I have a 50mm f/1.8 that I use all the time. Do you think it's worth buying the 24, 28, or 35, or should I just spend a little more and buy a wide angle lens.

chtgrubbs: Thanks for the input. I have a 20D so the crop factor should take care of the corner softness at its widest apertures. If you have used the 50mm f/1.8, do you think the 24mm f/2.8 lens will give me the same image quality as the 50mm would?

Thanks guys.