Compare Canon 28 F1.8 and 35 F2 - DPChallenge Forums

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

12/09/2007 01:59:43 PM · #1

I'm considering buying a prime canon Wide angle with low light capabilities. I want something in the area of 30mm with min F2. I'm considering the 2 lens in the title. Has anyone had both lens and can compare them? I realize the 35 is likely to have noisy AF and its going to be slower. This isnt for sports more for small groups and portraits without flash. Can anyone offer some help with my choice. Remember I'm on a 1.3 crop camera.

MattO

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

12/09/2007 02:05:12 PM · #2

The 35mm is close to a "normal" lens on the 1.3 crop: it comes out to about 47mm in 35mm equivalent. That's not especially wide for close-in groups. I'd be inclined to the 28mm for that reason...

R.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/09/2007 02:07:32 PM · #3

Originally posted by MattO:

I don't have the 35mm f2, but I played with it in the store. I'd compare it to the 50mm f1.8 in terms of focus speed, noise etc.

I bought the 28mm f1.8 and it's pretty much my walk-around lens. It's fast (both focusing and aperture), sharp and generally an all around winner. The only downside is that it's priced a bit higher than the 35mm f2.

12/09/2007 02:29:47 PM · #4

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by MattO:
I'm considering buying a prime canon Wide angle with low light capabilities. I want something in the area of 30mm with min F2. I'm considering the 2 lens in the title. Has anyone had both lens and can compare them? I realize the 35 is likely to have noisy AF and its going to be slower. This isnt for sports more for small groups and portraits without flash. Can anyone offer some help with my choice. Remember I'm on a 1.3 crop camera.

MattO

I don't have the 35mm f2, but I played with it in the store. I'd compare it to the 50mm f1.8 in terms of focus speed, noise etc.

I bought the 28mm f1.8 and it's pretty much my walk-around lens. It's fast (both focusing and aperture), sharp and generally an all around winner. The only downside is that it's priced a bit higher than the 35mm f2.

Did you buy new or used? Can you possibly send me a full frame shot not resized from your 1DMKII at 1.8? e-mail is matt at mattophotography dot com.

Thanks

MattO

Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM

12/09/2007 02:30:58 PM · #5

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

The 35mm is close to a "normal" lens on the 1.3 crop: it comes out to about 47mm in 35mm equivalent. That's not especially wide for close-in groups. I'd be inclined to the 28mm for that reason...

R.

Thanks Bear, I figured the 35 would be more "normal" then wider for small groups. I am really liking having very usable high ISO and I'm getting used to not having to use the flash indoors.

MattO

lentil

Canon EOS-5D

12/09/2007 03:15:34 PM · #6

Matt I am considering selling my Sigma 30mm 1.4.. i absolutely love it but I am using the 5d all the time now and get horrid vignetting. Whats your thoughts?

Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM

12/09/2007 05:58:07 PM · #7

Originally posted by lentil:

Matt I am considering selling my Sigma 30mm 1.4.. i absolutely love it but I am using the 5d all the time now and get horrid vignetting. Whats your thoughts?

I'm not surprised that you get vignetting on your 5d. According to the website

Note! (*) Not suitable for 35mm film SLR cameras or for any digital SLR camera with image sensor bigger than APS-C size, e.g. 1D series or Kodak Pro SLR/c.

Which tells me its not suited for the 1 series camera or full frame. One reason I hadnt even considered it.

MattO

lentil

Canon EOS-5D

12/09/2007 06:13:40 PM · #8

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by lentil:
Matt I am considering selling my Sigma 30mm 1.4.. i absolutely love it but I am using the 5d all the time now and get horrid vignetting. Whats your thoughts?

I'm not surprised that you get vignetting on your 5d. According to the website

Note! (*) Not suitable for 35mm film SLR cameras or for any digital SLR camera with image sensor bigger than APS-C size, e.g. 1D series or Kodak Pro SLR/c.

Which tells me its not suited for the 1 series camera or full frame. One reason I hadnt even considered it.

MattO

when i bought it I hadnt even considered the 5d LOL...

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

12/09/2007 06:19:34 PM · #9

Originally posted by lentil:

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by lentil:
Matt I am considering selling my Sigma 30mm 1.4.. i absolutely love it but I am using the 5d all the time now and get horrid vignetting. Whats your thoughts?

I'm not surprised that you get vignetting on your 5d. According to the website

Note! (*) Not suitable for 35mm film SLR cameras or for any digital SLR camera with image sensor bigger than APS-C size, e.g. 1D series or Kodak Pro SLR/c.

Which tells me its not suited for the 1 series camera or full frame. One reason I hadnt even considered it.

MattO

when i bought it I hadnt even considered the 5d LOL...

Snob! ;) :P

Prof_Fate

12/09/2007 08:19:09 PM · #10

I looked at the 35 F2, 28 1.8 and the Ls that are around this focal length.
I heard good things about the 35 F2, but I wanted USM for focus speed. The speed difference is insignificant, both are very low flare and sharp.

I got my 28 used and have been very happy with it. I don't use it as much as I might, but I knew that going in - I'm a zoom shooter. I love my 85 1.8 and wanted something similar in speed/quality on the wide end.

I am now deciding between the 50 1.4 and 1.2. Arrrgggh. It never ends!

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/09/2007 09:09:19 PM · #11

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by MattO:
I'm considering buying a prime canon Wide angle with low light capabilities. I want something in the area of 30mm with min F2. I'm considering the 2 lens in the title. Has anyone had both lens and can compare them? I realize the 35 is likely to have noisy AF and its going to be slower. This isnt for sports more for small groups and portraits without flash. Can anyone offer some help with my choice. Remember I'm on a 1.3 crop camera.

MattO

I don't have the 35mm f2, but I played with it in the store. I'd compare it to the 50mm f1.8 in terms of focus speed, noise etc.

I bought the 28mm f1.8 and it's pretty much my walk-around lens. It's fast (both focusing and aperture), sharp and generally an all around winner. The only downside is that it's priced a bit higher than the 35mm f2.

Did you buy new or used? Can you possibly send me a full frame shot not resized from your 1DMKII at 1.8? e-mail is matt at mattophotography dot com.

Thanks

MattO

I bought it new.

I'll just send you a a RAW file tomorrow.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

12/09/2007 09:27:09 PM · #12

if you can afford it, i've read in many places that the 28/1.8 is the better lens for several reasons. I almost bought it myself, but further reading led me to the conclusion that the focus system in the Rebel XT isn't accurate enough for that lens. I couldn't see spending the extra money only to miss shots to due hardware error.

I went with the 35/2 (which I owned previously and loved) and love it.

If I had your camera, i'd have bought the 28/1.8

both are good, can't go wrong really