Will there ever be a 28L?

the 24 is a bit wide, the 35 a bit long and no I do NOT want the sigma.

I'm thinking about getting the 28 1.8, but worry about the color and some of the negatives I've heard about corner sharpness, it not being sharp wide open etc... I would need this for very low light shooting (think dark bars where ISO3200 and f/1.4 is still a bit slow) Right now I have the 24 2.8 and love it for what I use it for (landscapes and some brighter indoor stuff,) not really wanting to spend the money to upgrade since what I have works for now. I've used the 35L and wasn't overly impressed. Sure it's an awesome lens, but the FL on the crop camera is a bit off.

So I'm really wanting an upgrade to the 28, or maybe an L. But I'm assuming it's not a popular FL anymore so they won't do anything with it.

Of course... Burton makes one and it is 70% off now.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I doubt it. Just get the Sigma 30.

Its weakness isn't corner sharpness or color...its the fact that it's supposed to be the bridge between the consumer 35/2 and the wide L primes, but its optics aren't definitively better than the 35/2.

I personally don't really care if there's a 28L, what I think is more important is that Canon actually bothers to upgrade the existing lens, along with other non-L primes.

I really like 28mm on a full frame camera as my go to wide angle, for years that and the 105mm were what I carried most with my Nikon fim camera. A lot of photojournalists preferred 28mm over 35mm back in the good old days, now I think they use a lot of superwide lenses up really close which is a really fascinating effect.

Will there ever be a 15L? 14L is too wide and 16-35L is too long...

If the 24L is too wide, just f...ing crop it in Photoshop or buy a zoom. Do you think they are going to produce dozens of lenses because someone needs exactly 67,318 mm?

gardengirl13 wrote in post #9957520
the 24 is a bit wide, the 35 a bit long and no I do NOT want the sigma.

I'm thinking about getting the 28 1.8, but worry about the color and some of the negatives I've heard about corner sharpness, it not being sharp wide open etc... I would need this for very low light shooting (think dark bars where ISO3200 and f/1.4 is still a bit slow) Right now I have the 24 2.8 and love it for what I use it for (landscapes and some brighter indoor stuff,) not really wanting to spend the money to upgrade since what I have works for now. I've used the 35L and wasn't overly impressed. Sure it's an awesome lens, but the FL on the crop camera is a bit off.

So I'm really wanting an upgrade to the 28, or maybe an L. But I'm assuming it's not a popular FL anymore so they won't do anything with it.

Probably not.

I'm gonna have to say a no on this one.

BTW I own the 28 1.8. IT's pretty good. Not soft wide open, but the shallow DOF can throw you if you're not careful (my copy back focused a little when focusing up close, sent it to Canon to get adjusted it came back the same, so I guess they do NOT have a real tight standard for the focus on this lens).

Still micro-adjust fixed it anyway.

That said, I wish I just saved more and got the 35L. The 28 is pretty light, which is good, but IMHO the 35L is worth saving a few more months for (YMMV).

So anyway, I plan to get the 35L one day (or a version II if it comes out in time).

I don't see why any manufactrer wouldn't make a 28mm f1.4. They feed us these consumer crop zooms with 27/28mm equivalent ends. That was my go-to landscape focal length. Had the 24LII. Hated it. Have the 35L love it, but it isn't wide. I want a "true" wide without the distortion that comes with 24mm and wide.

I want a Canon EF 28mm f1.4L USM made.

Non super tele Ls seem to be very conservatively spaced and featured, each with its own unique role. I don't see canon making a near equal new model.

kpjsy wrote in post #16141645
I don't see why any manufactrer wouldn't make a 28mm f1.4. They feed us these consumer crop zooms with 27/28mm equivalent ends. That was my go-to landscape focal length. Had the 24LII. Hated it. Have the 35L love it, but it isn't wide. I want a "true" wide without the distortion that comes with 24mm and wide.

I want a Canon EF 28mm f1.4L USM made.

I really don't get this. Similar to people with ziess lenses... oooohhh they have the 17 and the 21mm just not enough difference to me. hell 35/40 was really close i could hardly see a difference.

I have the 28 1.8 and the 24L II. I use the 24L when I want that extra bit of aperture or if I think I need to go as wide as possible at an aperture better than 2.8 - I can mount my 17-55 to my T3i if 2.8 is "good enough" and I have the flexibility of a zoom.

But I never mount my 24L and say to my self "wow, this is just too wide, I think I'll swap to my 28mm lens". If it is too wide at 24mm, I would think I want 35mm or 50mm (neither of which I have as Canon primes {I do have the SMC 50 1.4 MF}...need to address something there).

Still, YMMV, and I suppose one could say "a 20mm 1.4 lens is too wide, but my 24L is just perfect" and not be too irrational. It's whatever works for you.

shinksma