On a budget - 28mm f2.8 vs. 50mm f1.8?

Hey folks,

I am on a pretty tight budget, but would like to add a larger aperture prime lens to my kit. I checked the FAQ and tried searching the forums for an answer, but without much luck. I also looked at the images from the lens pictures section, and of course, they all look great!

The lens would be mainly for doing some portraits (family, pet, etc.) where a shallow depth of field is desired to get the nice blurred backgrounds.

My question is, which of these two lenses are better for an XTi camera?

1. Canon EF 28mm F/2.8
   
2. Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 II

Really, it just depends on which focal length you like better. On an xti, I would personally prefer the 28 over the 50. But, get what you like best. Try setting your 17-85 to around 28 mm and take some shots and then do it at 50 mm. See which you prefer.

I bought the 50 1.8 because I thought it was going to be a good all around lens on my Xsi

It's not

Buy the Sigma 20mm

I think the 50mm maybe better, especially if you are interested in in blurring out the background. It would be a good focal length for headshots and half body shots.

The 28mm may be wider and more useful for general purpose use but f2.8 is not that fast for a prime and would not allow for as much blurring of the background as a f1.8 lens.

I've owned both the 28 2.8 and 50 1.8 II

For general usage, I would pick the 28mm f2.8. It is moderately fast, focuses well and has a great "normal lens" focal length on a crop body like your XTI. It is also built much better than the new model of the 50 (it is the same as the original 50 1.8)

But, since you said you are looking for a portrait lens, I would go with the 50mm 1.8. The 28mm is good for full body portraits, but for closeups, you have to get TOO close which can cause distortion in facial features. Also, the wider the lens, the less background blur. The 28mm 2.8 does not really blow away the backgrounds. They blur, but not THAT much. The extra focal length and f1.8 vs 2.8 really gives the 50 an advantage here.

f2.8 isn't that fast in my book.

I am a fan of the 50mm. I had it on my XTI for more then a half year. I liked it a lot, but it was a bit to long.

I vote for 50 1.8 as well. It will give you the longer focal length, resulting in more separation between the background and the subject. Plus it's a bit faster than the 2.8, so you'll be able to get nicer shots in low light than the 28mm. It's also cheaper than the 28. If you had wanted a wider focal length for indoors or whatever reason, the 28 would be better; but since you want it more for portraits, I'd go with the fiddy.

All signs point to the 50! Good luck

I love the 50. but for alot of people 50 on a cropped sensor is a little to telephoto.

dank ink wrote in post #7925060
. Plus it's a bit faster than the 2.8, so you'll be able to get nicer shots in low light than the 28mm.

I actually found that not to be true. I needed 1/80 shutter for steady shots on the 50mm 1.8, but I could use 1/15 pretty easily on the 28mm f2.8. For some reason, the 28 was really easy to keep steady, and the 50 was not. The f-stop advantage was lost. Even if you take the 1/FL rule, You can handhold the 28 at 1 stop slower than the 50.

I would pick the 50 because it ends up being a better focal lenght for portraits, but it was not any better in low light. The 28 also focused more accurately in very low light.

If you're on a budget then get the cheaper lens. 50mm f/1.8

Chopper Al wrote in post #7923875
The lens would be mainly for doing some portraits (family, pet, etc.) where a shallow depth of field is desired to get the nice blurred backgrounds.

My question is, which of these two lenses are better for an XTi camera?

1. Canon EF 28mm F/2.8
   
2. Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 II

I bought both a couple of years back, I still have the 50 f1.8 and use it fairly often however I px'ed the 28 f2.8 within a few months. The focal length was quite useful but the image quality was shockingly bad, nowhere near as good as the 50 f1.8 (but then I may have got a dud).

Thank you everyone for all of your replies.

This is going to be a tough one to decide on. Wish I had a 28mm to try out first, but I am starting to lean towards the 50mm. I have the 17-85 so if we were doing any family shots indoors where a wider angle was needed, I could use that with a flash.

One thing I did notice while playing around with the 50 indoors and comparing it to the 17-85 set on 50, was when a flash was used, the shadows in the distance were much darker and harsher with the 17-85. I am assuming that has to do with the smaller aperture not letting in as much light as the 50 1.8. That was a very pleasant surprise with the 50 1.8!

I've noticed posts on the 50 1.8 II, talking about getting the lens anywher from $75.00 and up. They were slightly older posts from 2008, but I have been unable to find anything close to that in Canada. I have seen the 50 going from $129 CAD all the way up to $170.00! Talk about a wide range and this has all been in the past week! I do have a lead on a used 50 bought in January for around $100 CAD though, and it is local. Hope to check it out after work tonight.

Thanks once again...
Al

postcardcv wrote in post #7926586
[/LIST]I bought both a couple of years back, I still have the 50 f1.8 and use it fairly often however I px'ed the 28 f2.8 within a few months. The focal length was quite useful but the image quality was shockingly bad, nowhere near as good as the 50 f1.8 (but then I may have got a dud).

I would say you had a dud. My 28mm was every bit as good as my 50. Perhaps pixel peeping, the 50 would be a touch sharper at F5.6-8, but both were excellent.

Chopper Al wrote in post #7926608
This is going to be a tough one to decide on. Wish I had a 28mm to try out first, but I am starting to lean towards the 50mm.

I think that is a smart choice for your stated usage. I would look in the buy/sell forum on this site for a used 50 if you are having trouble finding one locally. They frequently are sold for USD $75-95.

tkbslc wrote in post #7926410
I actually found that not to be true. I needed 1/80 shutter for steady shots on the 50mm 1.8, but I could use 1/15 pretty easily on the 28mm f2.8. For some reason, the 28 was really easy to keep steady, and the 50 was not. The f-stop advantage was lost. Even if you take the 1/FL rule, You can handhold the 28 at 1 stop slower than the 50.

I would pick the 50 because it ends up being a better focal lenght for portraits, but it was not any better in low light. The 28 also focused more accurately in very low light.

That may be true since the 50 has trouble focusing in low light sometimes. I don't know if it's been getting worse or if it had an off day for some reason, but my 50 has been having some slight focusing problems lately. I don't remember it being this bad when I first got it.

I haven't used the 28, so I can't speak from experience, but I know that the 50s are so cheap because of their build quality. Could it be the 28 is easier to keep steady because it's not so light? That may have nothing to do with it, but just a thought.