about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 28mm f/2.8

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
46 172845 Sep 26, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
83% of reviewers $153.74
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.06
8.39
7.9
ef28mmf_28_1_

Specifications:
Highly portable wide-angle lens with a good price-to-performance ratio. Its light weight of 6.5 oz. (185g) makes it ideal as your standard wide-angle lens. The high-precision aspherical lens minimizes distortion and other aberrations for sharp and high-contrast images.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next
          
tjsimonsen
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6
Review Date: Aug 17, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Light-weight and compact, fairly cheap, sharp stopped down, fast and precise AF despite conventional micro-motor, good standart lens on a 1.6x body.
Cons:
Somewhat soft wide open, CA visible in critical situations.

For the prize this lens is a bargin!
It's small, light and compact, and corresponds to a 45mm on a 1.6x body (40-55mm was my preferred range for landscape and everyday photography on a film camera).
Wide open it's a bit soft (which off course can be desired in some situations), but between f4 and f11 it's very sharp. The buildt quality is pretty good, the lens feels solid and the focus ring is smooth, if not partucular dampened. The lens even survived that I dropped it on a concrete floor (with a thin felt carpet on), though I don't recommend this action ;-).
My only complaint is that there is visible CA in critical situations. And that can be fixed in PS, besides my guess is that it will only be visible on large prints (8*12'' and larger).


Aug 17, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tjsimonsen to your Buddy List  
docah
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 26, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $120.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Inexpensive, 50mm equiv on 1.6 crop camera, sharp center, build seems solid
Cons:
loud AF, soft borders at 2.8

The AF though loud is accurate, the manual focus ring seems a little gritty. The center is always very sharp, especially so from f4-8. The borders seem soft at 2.8 but pretty decent everywhere else. I haven't noticed a lot of CA or flare in my shots.

I know this lens isn't as sharp as the 50mm 1.8, but not many lenses offer that price/performance ratio. This will probably be my normal lens untill i can afford a good wide angle zoom.


Jul 26, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add docah to your Buddy List  
hedredm
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4
Review Date: Jun 21, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $160.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Price, weight
Cons:
Image quality not as good as you would expect from a prime

When I used this on film for landscapes, I didn't really notice many problems (maybe because I only made 4X6 prints), but when I got a digital SLR, I found out that this lens is pretty average.

It's OK when stopped down to 5.6 or a little bit more, which makes it decent for landscapes. But with the crop factor on digital, I wanted this lens to act like a 50mm on film. I don't think it's usable at all at f/2.8. It might be passable at f/4.0.

Not worth the money. On hindsight, I should have spent a little bit more and gotten the 35mm f/2 or maybe the 24mm f/2.8.


Jun 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hedredm to your Buddy List  
DaveEP
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 14, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3706
Review Date: Jun 20, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $100.00 | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: It's small, light & cheap
Cons:
Consumer quality

This is a consumer range lens, at consumer pricing. It works 'ok' (and only just 'ok') on a 1.6 crop camera (e.g. 20D), but it's really no better (or not much better) than the EF-S 18-55 kit lens.

Colours are reasonable, focusing in noisy (though it's a very short focus burst on a wide lens), CA was in the same range as the kit lens, but overall I would pass this one by.

I also tested it on full frame (1Ds2) and the results were very poor, especially in the corners. While there was some limited detail in the centre of the lens, the extreme corners were almost smooth (think gaussian blur!) due to the loss of any detail that should have been there, at any aperture you care to select.

Sharp is not a word I would want to use under any circumstances to describe this lens.

My advice is to skip this one unless all you are making is 6x4 prints from a 1.6 camera.


Jun 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add DaveEP to your Buddy List  
jhsymington
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 17, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 7, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Cheap, light, decent image quality
Cons:
Nasty buzzy AF, cheap construction, image quality not good enough for a prime

This lens takes decent pictures but when I buy a prime I do so to get excellent image quality. My copy certainly could not deliver sharp results in the corners at any aperture so I ended up getting a 24mm f1.4 L which certainly does.

Jun 7, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jhsymington to your Buddy List  
EveningSky
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 209
Review Date: Apr 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Wonderful little gem of a lens. Sharp. Contrast rich. Excellent color rendition. A wonderful lens for digital photography.
Cons:
F2.8

There is a Jewish expression: "A worm in horseraddish thinks that there is nothing sweeter." I am not able to compare this lens to Canon L lenses or other high end lenses. I own a series of Canon consumer prime lenses, and the Sigma 50/2.8 macro. I prefer to use this lenses with my Canon digital 10D. I find the resulting images stunning. I cannot recommend this lenses camera combination enough. I am a prime lens fan. I also believe the fewer pieces of glass, the better. FWIW, this lense confirms in my own mind the wisdom of that philosphy (be it true or not). IMO, this lens is an amazing value!

Apr 8, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add EveningSky to your Buddy List  
maniaxe2000
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 56
Review Date: Dec 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $179.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Nice and Cheap, just the way I like it.
Cons:
Not as sharp at my 50mm F/1.8. Too slow for a prime lens.

I had the Canon 28mm F/2.8 for about a month and am returning it. Going to get a Canon 35mm F/2 instead. I found that I needed the extra stop for night time/low light. Also the 28mm was not as sharp as my 50mm F/1.8. From the reviews the 35mm F/2 is a better buy.



Dec 22, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add maniaxe2000 to your Buddy List  
mnogueir
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 2, 2005
Location: Portugal
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 10, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: $225.00 | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: price, weight
Cons:
Noisy AF, my copy was quite soft

I bought this lens based on reviews i read. However, after some testing, it seems that this lens is softer than the kit 18-55 (which it should replace) at the same focal lenght. I guess i could have bought a bad copy, or my 18-55 is a good one. All i can say is i'm quite disappointed by the 28/2.8. I also compared the 18-55 to the 50/1.8 and, as expected, this last one was better in every aspect.

Dec 10, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mnogueir to your Buddy List  
Rtm86
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 2, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 2, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $179.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: small, light, great "everyday" lens
Cons:
Soft edges sometimes

I purchased this lens for its small size and weight. I needed a small lens so my 5D and lens could fit in my messenger bag so I could carry it around with me all the time. This lens it a great "everyday" lens for those candid shots that are often missed because carrying a bulky camera setup isn't practical.

Dec 2, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Rtm86 to your Buddy List  
Stefano II
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 18, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Review Date: Nov 19, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: pretty sharp even wide open, fast f/2.8
Cons:
Slow AF

Fantastic lens but sold it due to not requiring a WA.

Nov 19, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Stefano II to your Buddy List  
httivals
Offline
Image Upload: On

Registered: May 7, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 980
Review Date: Oct 14, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $160.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very sharp edge to edge by f5.6 on Canon 5D. Also very sharp at f2.8 with softness only in the extreme corners. Lightweight. Inexpensive.
Cons:
Corner softness at 2.8 through 5.6. This is only a minor drawback and does not come close to outweighing the tremendous advantages of this lens.

This is a tremendous lens. I just switched from a 6cm x 9cm baby view camera system back to Canon, now using only the 5D full frame digital. All lenses have compromises. This lens' compromise is that the extreme corners are very soft at f2.8. That problem is largely resolved, albeit still barely present by f5.6. The problem is only in the extreme corners. You can crop slightly, or leave it, no one should notice. Of course you can also just shoot the lens at f5.6 or smaller if you're obsessive about it. Coming from using view cameras, where you can shoot very few f5.6 lenses at wider than f11, and rarely want to shoot them wider than f16, I see this as a very small compromise. Other than the softness at the very extreme corners, the lens is uniformly sharp from edge to edge -- I can't see any variation at sharpness looking at unsharpened images (shot raw) in Photoshop at 100% magnification. Distortion is barely present if at all. The lens is well enough corrected to use for architectural images -- I have done so -- of course you need to keep the camera horizontal, etc. to avoid distortion, but that's true with every 35 mm wide angle lens except for the tilt shift lenses. Did I say that the lens is tiny and lightweight? You can walk around with just the lens on a 5D and feel like you're back in the 70s or 80s, with a great little camera that's great for street photography. The difference between this and my beginnings of using a fixed lens on a Minolta SRT 101 is all the automation and benefits of digital, and of course with the 5D now I have the ability to make Hasselblad size enlargements. Did I mention that the 5D and 28 mm f2.8 (and also 85mm f1.8) are getting me to fall in love with photography all over again. BTW, don't bother putting a filter on the lens. Treat it rough and have a great time. If you ever damage it just buy a new one. It will only cost you about as much as a filter would have cost anyways (a slight exaggeration but not far from the truth).

Oct 14, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add httivals to your Buddy List  
troutmask
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 22, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Review Date: Aug 10, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Realaivly cheap and light, A/F is good and wide on 35mm film,better than a cheap zoom.
Cons:
Poor build, not sharp and not wide on an APS digital sensor.

Brought it when I moved from cheap zoom's to cheap primes. The other primes I got at the time were the 85mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.8.
This lens is in the same league as the others. It was a real disapointment and not much better than cheap Canon zooms. When I got a 10D it stopped even being a wide angle lens!
I don't use wide angles that much so I sold it (for as much as I paid for it which is good) and brought a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 zoom for not much more. The sigma is sharper, wider and a zoom.
Canon does make some good lens other than L's, but this certainly isn't one of them.


Aug 10, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add troutmask to your Buddy List  
ohared
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 18, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 18, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 3 

 
Pros: It's a small lens that doesn't take up much space in the bag or bin.
Cons:
Very soft focusing. Chromatic abberation seems to give red fringes. Despite the low price, the image quality is disappointingly poor, especially in high contrast situations. Very random focussing that seems to go right to infinity for subjects at 15ft or over. Noisy motor (but who cares about that?)

I bought this 28mm prime lens mail order for a Canon 20D because I wasn't happy with the sharpness of the Canon 24-85mm zoom which I have been using for indoors situations and landscapes.
The 28mm f2.8 is cheap to buy but is certainly no little gem.
I've used it for just under a week and mostly for landscapes.
Any light from the sky seems to cause the edges of building to take on a red edged inner glow whilst small details are lost by the soft focussing.
During the same shooting day I used the same Canon 24-85mm zoom that I'd been dumb enough to be unhappy with before, and found the images to be noticeably clearer and crisper at the same focal length.
Perhaps it's down to QC variability but frankly, I can't recommend this lens, no matter how inexpensive it is. I've learnt my lesson and I won't be 'buying before trying', ever again!


Jun 18, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ohared to your Buddy List  
paparazzinick
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 8, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 7393
Review Date: Mar 16, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $100.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: light, small, very sharp
Cons:
no an L and not wide on drebel and d30 type censor cameras.

Overall a great lens for landscape work and wide shots. not so wide on a rebel but that is not the lenses fault. Focus is fast but loud, and this lens is just a great buy for the money.

Mar 16, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add paparazzinick to your Buddy List  
bellyface
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Mar 17, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 5093
Review Date: Jan 24, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $130.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Small, toteable lens. Sharp, F3.5 and onward, very useable at 2.8. Cheap filters (52mm) Build is pretty good. Very economical at $130 used.
Cons:
Focus is kinda loud, manual focus is OK, but the ring is small. In full frame, makes for almost "the best" wide (next to a 24mm) but not so on 1.6x bodies.

I relly liked this lens, for full frame or 35mm. It's very sharp and snappy focus can be loud at times but OK. I ended up selling it and getting a tokina AT-X pro 17mm, just to get wider on my 20D.

I really have no gripes about this lens, other than it is a pretty standard angle of view on 1.6x bodies.

It's a great lens that can be had pretty cheap!


Jan 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bellyface to your Buddy List  
mdwhaley
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 17, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3
Review Date: Jan 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $88.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Cheap, Small and light, sharp, contrast.
Cons:
loud AF motor

I got this lens used. It is nearly identical in size, weight, handling, and image quality to the 50 1.8. Great focal length on a 10d. I purchased this lens because the Sigma 24-70 2.8 I had was too big and heavy to throw over my shoulder while bike riding. The first batch of images I shot proved how much sharper this lens was than the Sigma. The images look alot like the 50 1.8. If you want to keep the camera light and like this focal length this is the lens for you. USM would be nice but at 28mm it seems difficult to get out of focus images. The speed of the AF is fine, its just noisy.

Jan 22, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mdwhaley to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 28mm f/2.8

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
46 172845 Sep 26, 2012
Recommended By Average Price
83% of reviewers $153.74
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.06
8.39
7.9
ef28mmf_28_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next