Normal-ish prime for crop bodies

I'd like to get a nice prime lens for low-light photography, and find the nifty fifty a bit too restrictive indoors. That, and its corners are very soft wide open, even on an APS-C body. Around the 24-35mm mark seems to be a nice fit for a "normal" lens on a crop body.

So my first question is, why doesn't Canon make an equivalent of the new-ish Nikon 35mm DX lens? It was a surprise when it was announced, but has gone on to be one of Nikon's best selling lenses now - it small, light, cheap, and has great IQ (even at f/1.8, or in the corners). The Canon EF 35mm f/2 is 20 years old, uses a micromotor, and has decent, but not spectacular IQ. In fact, the IQ is very poor wide open, to the point where you want to stop it down to at least f/2.8 or higher - might as well get the 17-55 or 24-70 instead then (cost permitting, of course).

My second question is - what other lenses are recommended in this range that are reasonably priced (i.e. not the 35L)? It seems the Canon 28mm is nice (USM at least), but suffers from relatively poor IQ (similar to the 35mm f/2). The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 gets mixed reviews, particularly with its autofocus (not to mention sample variation). Additionally, its corners are soft and don't tend to improve much as you stop it down.

Any other suggestions and/or personal experiences? FYI, I'm getting most of my info from lenstip and slrgear. Thanks!

The 35mm f/1.8 Nikon does make me jealous! Then again, I was happy with my 28mm f1/.8, the shots were more than usable. Same for the Sigma, get a good copy and your laughing.

Loved the Sigma 30 when I had the 7D. I didn't have any problems with its AF. If your body has microadjustments, then you don't need to worry too much about front/back focus issues.

The first 35mm 2.0 I bought had terrible IQ. In fact, I bought it used and actually returned it for a refund. A year later I bought another used one, and this time got a great copy. Decently sharp at 2.0, but very sharp at 2.5. I won't let this one go. Also, the little, much maligned 28mm 2.8 has outstanding center sharpness wide open.

My 28mm 1.8 is relatively poor but still very usable at 1.8 - you're not gonna have pixelpeeping goodness or jawdropping corners, but let's face it, 99% of the times, your corners are going to be out of focus with shallow DoF shots at F1.8.
At F2, it's really good and excellent focus. Beats the 30 1.4's I tried on my camera anyway. Compared to 35mm, I prefer the 28mm focal length for indoor shots anyway. What I'd really like is something like a 20mm 1.8 with the build quality and AF of the 28mm 1.8. That lens would be ideal on crop for me.

There is no EF-S 35 because there's already an inexpensive (or used to be) EF 35/2.

The best standard prime for APS-C is the Sigma 30/1.4.

24mm f1.4 is on my 40D

windpig wrote in post #10204446
24mm f1.4 is on my 40D

Me too.

...and I love it!

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my 40D

Haha, yeah...the 24mm f1.4 would be great! Too bad it's so expensive...

I took another look at the 28mm f/1.8. You're right TweakMDS - according to slrgear, when you stop down the 28mm down to even f/2, the whole image improves significantly. This might be a good bet in this category, though still not on par price-wise with the Nikon 35mm.

Has anyone else tried the Canon 28mm vs. the 30mm Sigma? Any thoughts?

I love my 30mm sig it hasn't come off my camera since I got it..except to mess with kenko tubes 7D here. My 50mm 1.8 $99 was the same but this focal length feels more comfortable.

Have you shot with the 35mm f/2 or are the cons you listed things you've read about it? I owned one and found the IQ very good even wide open.

K6AZ wrote in post #10206353
Have you shot with the 35mm f/2 or are the cons you listed things you've read about it? I owned one and found the IQ very good even wide open.

I'm sure you're right - the IQ is probably really great. Most of my info on these lenses comes from (albeit multiple) reviews and second-hand remarks. I was just hoping there was something with mostly universal praise regarding sharpness, a la Nikon 35mm f/1.8. I have a T2i and occasionally print very large (e.g. 20x30"), so I'm trying to make sure I get the most out of the 18MP sensor while keeping costs to reasonable levels.

The lenstip review on the 35mm f/2 is somewhat negative, but on slrgear it's great, so who knows. It's probably good enough, but I'm trying to do my research and make the right purchase off the bat, instead of going through a few different lenses.

Actually, going back through many different reviews, it looks like the Canon 35mm f/2 actually comes out on top, on average (and by a hair - they all have their strengths a weaknesses). The reason I'm posting on here is that there's always a difference between shooting test charts and actual subjects

So, thanks everyone for your help, and any other comments from people who have shot multiple of these lenses are appreciated!

manttium wrote in post #10206773
I'm sure you're right - the IQ is probably really great. Most of my info on these lenses comes from (albeit multiple) reviews and second-hand remarks. I was just hoping there was something with mostly universal praise regarding sharpness, a la Nikon 35mm f/1.8.

I'm not sure what you read, but I didn't hear/read universal praise for the 35/1.8.