Lens Help..EF 28mm f1.8 any good?

[SPL]

Hello,…always looking for people’s opinions, especially when it comes to buying new gear.
For a long time I have had an itch to pick up a Canon 24mm f1.4L II for my FF, but it is a pricey one.  I would like to do some static star shots and trails also, as well as have a nice fast wide prime for indoor and landscape.  Until the funds materialize,does anyone have any positive experiences with the 28mm f1.8?

[spot]

my 28mm seems OK,..a bit of CA sometimes,...have not used it for stars though..

[robbymack]

I liked mine more on ff than on crop, I never used it much so I did end up selling it. I think the lens gets a bad rap on line, which is good because you can generally pick one up used for a good price. I think it's more than acceptable for the price, especially when you compare it to the prices of the L's of similar length.

[The Bad Duck]

My copy is great! I feel it is as sharp as my 35 /1.4 L. If not sharper (or perhaps it is just more contrasty wide open than the 35 L is). However, I don´t really like the 28mm focal length as much as 35 so I don´t use it very much. That said, I knew I wanted the 35 /1.4 L when I got the 28 /1.8 and I really should just have bought the 35 right away. It was a waste of money to get the 28 that I seldom use though it is great.

But it is really good and has a bad reputation that it does not deserve. A theory is that f/1.8 is so shallow DoF that it is easy to mistake an out of focus photo with an unsharp lens. Also you should be aware that 28mm is a "boring" focal length (but that can also be seen as a challange!)

Have not used it for startrails.

So my advice is... although it is a good lens, DON´T buy it. Save for the 24 L that you really want - substitutes will not make you happy and you will end up loosing money. Or buy a used 28.

[RS2021]

I agree...this lens has unfairly gained a bad rep...typically from those who have read the reviews and haven't used it. Or have tried it, but with a biased view and an unrealistic expectation of L-quality. The CA issue is true but is overblown and is easily corrected. Even wide open the center is sharp and gets sharper still stopped down just to f2 orf2.8.

As for corners, if one is fair, some softness is to be expected with wide angles and my 35L is soft in the corners! And 28mm is even wider and this lens is not even an L.

The build is better than the other consumer lenses, while not as heavy as say 24II or 35L, this lens will feel solid if you handle it...it doesn't feel cheap. Again, some expect it to be the L build without paying for the L.

Ironically, "mood wise",  this lens comes into its own on full frame, corner issues notwithstanding. And you can't beat f1.8 at this wide a focal length.

Canon keeps this lens in production for a reason. In spite of all the armchair punditry, this lens is a steady seller and a good performer on FF and doubles as a normal lens on crop bodies.

Not perfect, but highly underrated.

[ablearcher]

I was always happy with my copy when I used it. Very sharp, light, small. Makes a crop or a ff body more portable and less noticeable. I do have a 35L now, so the 28 does not get as much use anymore. But every time I mount it on a body, I get doubts regarding selling it.  I'm not sure about your application for this lens, but it is a great take-along prime for indoor and poor light shooting.

[KyleSTL]

I've been searching around for a good used deal on one to replace my 35mm f/2.  The 35mm f/2 is kinda mediocre, and the 28mm f/1.8 USM seems like a good-sized step up (without a skyrocket in purchase price).  The CA issue is mitigated with the Canon lens profile in DPP, and the corners appear to be considerably sharper than the 35mm f/2, so the upgrade path is a no-brainer (you can always correct CA with PP, but you can't add detail or sharpness that just isn't there).

[SPL]

thanks everyone! great info to think about, thanks for your help!