Why no good wide angle fast low light options for crop?

Pretty much everything that is available and is good on the CANON side is designed for full frame. Wide angle photography seems to be pretty popular and yet there's no real good option in the f/1.4-1.8 range for the crop cameras. SIGMA has them, CANON doesn't. I'd love to have a 24mm or 28-30mm f/1.8 in the $500 range and the only "good" option is the SIGMA 30 f/1.4. Why is that?

Canon wants you to buy the 35L, that's why =) I also wouldn't consider that wide, especially on a crop. But I would like to see something along the lines of a 15/16 f/1.4. I bet it'd be expensive as hell...

But what's wrong w/ the sigma? It's a great lens if you don't see yourself jumping FF soon.

pixel_junkie wrote in post #5815561
Pretty much everything that is available and is good on the CANON side is designed for full frame. Wide angle photography seems to be pretty popular and yet there's no real good option in the f/1.4-1.8 range for the crop cameras. SIGMA has them, CANON doesn't. I'd love to have a 24mm or 28-30mm f/1.8 in the $500 range and the only "good" option is the SIGMA 30 f/1.4. Why is that?

Canon 28 f/1.8?

As you get wider and wider, it gets more and more expensive to create a lens with a very large aperture the wider the lens gets-- take the 14 f/2.8L-- not that huge an aperture, and it costs nearly $2k. Of course they have been working on crop lenses that can make a smaller lens and therefore need less glass to make an equivalent aperture, but it would be less than beneficial for Canon to undercut their other lenses and even the sales of full-frame cameras by bringing out such EF-S lenses.

runninmann wrote in post #5815612
Canon 28 f/1.8?

On a crop camera, it is standart length and at the moment, maybe the best option, but it isn't wide for sure.

They want you to move up to the 5D!

24 1.4L would be a little bit wider than the 35L.

Sigma also has a 20 1.8.

last i knew 28mm was wider than 30mm

the reason? because fast lenses get hard to manufacture once you stray away from the 50mm range. a 50 1.8 will set you back 80 bucks, but a 35 2.0 is 240, and a 28 1.8 is 420 (85 1.8 is 340). for some complicated reasons, 50mm is the easiest and cheapest to manufacture, and either direction from there gets more expensive. also, difficulty is greater than an exponential of 2, so a 25mm lens will be much more than twice as difficult to make than a 50mm, and 100mm will be more than twice as difficult to make as a 50 (in longer lenses, aperture plays the biggest role though, and with modern designs it's not as big of a problem as it used to be). canon makes several f2.8 and faster lenses between 14 and 50mm, , with every 8mm away from 50 (approximately, not perfect, but workes well between 20 and 35mm) doubling the price, and every stop doubling the price. so if a 35 2.0 is 200, a 28 2.0 would be 400, and a 28 2.8 would be 200. if you want fast primes, canon makes them, and there are a lot of them for under 500. however, your definition of a fast prime is nothing like the standard one, where anything 2.8 and faster is considered fast. look at most camera companies other than canon and nikon, their fastest glass is usually 2.8 or 3.5, with a few exceptions that go as fast as 1.4 (nowhere near as cheap as canon 1.4 lenses though)

edit: here's two links for you. you can find these lenses for less than 500, and used for less than 400.
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …3_Wide_Angle_EF​_28mm.html
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …_Super_Wide_Ang​le_EF.html

pixel_junkie wrote in post #5815834
On a crop camera, it is standart length and at the moment, maybe the best option, but it isn't wide for sure.

Last I saw in your post you were asking about a 24-30mm lens in f/1.8... what's changed?

tsaraleksi wrote in post #5816444
Last I saw in your post you were asking about a 24-30mm lens in f/1.8... what's changed?

Nothing. I'm using a 40D, a 28 1.8 isn't wide on my camera ...

Neither is 24-- or the 30 1.4 sigma, so I'm just confused why you seem dismissive of the options people are listing for you when you specifically asked about those lenses in the OP. If you want wider, there is a Canon 20mm f/2.8, a Sigma 20mm f/1.8. I think there is an old Tokie 17/3.5 out there as well. And the Canon 35/2 is supposed to be quite good, and the 35/1.4 is a fantastic lens, if you are looking on the longer end of things.

tsaraleksi wrote in post #5816505
Neither is 24-- or the 30 1.4 sigma, so I'm just confused why you seem dismissive of the options people are listing for you when you specifically asked about those lenses in the OP. If you want wider, there is a Canon 20mm f/2.8, a Sigma 20mm f/1.8. I think there is an old Tokie 17/3.5 out there as well.

I simply would like to see a lens designed for my camera that is wider then 30mm and is 1.8 or faster. That is it. I did look at the SIGMA 20 f/1.8 and I wished CANON made a lens like that. I would try the SIGMA but all reviews I've found for it say it is very very soft until f/4.

Canon 24 1.4. Nice lens. Used it the other day.

this is a big reason i moved to the 5d. although a 15-18mm f/1.x EFS is inevitable i would think.

SIGMA has the 20 f/1.8 for $360 average. It's a dog unfortunately. If CANON had one of these and was EFS, and was as good or better than the 28 f/1.8 wide open, I'd be all over it like white on rice.

pixel_junkie wrote in post #5817375
SIGMA has the 20 f/1.8 for $360 average. It's a dog unfortunately. If CANON had one of these and was EFS, and was as good or better than the 28 f/1.8 wide open, I'd be all over it like white on rice.

Why would it have to be EF-S?