Canon EF 28 f/2.8 Disappears From Price List

[Woody]

I really really want to get the new 35 f/1.8 lens. Hopefully, it's EF too..

 

[c.d.embrey]

I keep hearing this and am wondering if Nikon really is better at focusing?

The Five Point auto focus on a Nikon F100 Film camera (1999-2006) is on par with my 40D. The 51 point auto focus on a D300, D700 and D3 is much better than the XXD and 5D/7D. The Nikon Matrix Metering is also better. The problem is that Canon has Consumer cameras (good focus), Prosumer cameras (better focus) and Pro cameras (best focus). Nikon only has Consumer (good focus) and Pro cameras (best focus), so the focus on a D300s is much better than a 7D. As mentioned by others, I use the center point only on my 40D.

 

[neuroanatomist]

RE Nikon vs. Canon AF. Both manufacturers need a way to differentiate their lines, pro from consumer. Historically, with Canon that is AF - to get their best, you need the 1-series. Nikon offers their pro-level AF in lower lines. OTOH, if you want a high MP sensor from Nikon, you pay for their most expensive pro body, whereas Canon offers a prosumer camera with the highest resolution they offer.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I bought a Canon 28mm f/2.8 for $15.00 off Craigslist about a year back. it was a nice lens for a low cost one and really small and compact for walk-around use.

Spokane, my friend, my buddy. You know I love ya. You are an exceptionally talented photographer and I've been amazed at some of the shots you've posted. Those pictures on the beach? The snow? Amazing! I'm just not feeling it from the morning glories, though. I really do think I'd rather carry my G12 around if I wanted "compact/walk-around." At least the noise wouldn't cause stray dogs to chase me and homeless women to ram me with their shopping carts!

No problem, they are Petunias, not morming glories.

I brought the lens home, and wanted to test it out, so took a photo of the first thing I saw, up close as well as far away. As you can imagine, I expected some issues with a lens selling that cheaply. I was taking closeups, more like macro shots.


Honeysuckle on our back porch with the 28mm f/2.8. It attracts lots of hummingbirds. I used my 5D MK II, this lens might have been very good for a crop body. it was taken wide open at f/2.8 to try and get a 3D look.

 

[moreorless]

As stated above, there are f/2.8 zooms of good quality, so I can't imagine the 28/2.8 is a popular lens.

Don't forget that in addition to the EF 28mm f/2.8, there's also an EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, a newer and more expensive lens. If this isn't just a temporary/regional change, and Canon actually is discontinuing the 28/2.8, they may be getting rid of the cheaper, poorer-selling lens and driving people to purchase the more expensive lens if they need the 28mm focal length as a prime.

The 28mm 1.8 is also priced to be within range of alot more people than the 24mm and 35mm 1.4 L's aswell so theres likely much less demand for a cheaper option at those focal lenghts.

 

[c.d.embrey]

RE Nikon vs. Canon AF. Both manufacturers need a way to differentiate their lines, pro from consumer. Historically, with Canon that is AF - to get their best, you need the 1-series. Nikon offers their pro-level AF in lower lines. OTOH, if you want a high MP sensor from Nikon, you pay for their most expensive pro body, whereas Canon offers a prosumer camera with the highest resolution they offer.

I prefer an APS-C sensor over a FF, but the 7D doesn't have the focus system and the metering I want/need. So I'm waiting to see what the D400 will be like. While I'm waiting I've bought a Sony NEX 5n, a great video camera but not much of a stills camera due to a lack fo a hot shoe. As soon a the Sony NEX 7 is available I'm buying one to test. I'm not a fanboy for any make of camera, I just buy what best fits my needs. And lately I'm not impressed with what Canon is offering. But a 7DmkII with Pro Focusing and Metering would impress me.

 

[psycho5]

Haha...Wow... What kind of person would 5 finger discount a sigma, let alone buy one?

 

[Quackator]

Plus one for the 1.8/35mm lens if FF and good build quality.
Distance scale mandatory, though.

 

[Gcon]

This lens has always been dead to me, given I own a 24-70mm f/2.8L. So it can go away quietly for all I care. I'm all for Canon removing the older clunky non-L EF lenses. I have no use for them whatsoever - I only shoot on L glass.

 

[smirkypants]

This lens has always been dead to me, given I own a 24-70mm f/2.8L. So it can go away quietly for all I care.

That's the point. Lenses like this are dead to us, but they are also dead to the masses. I really do think that almost all of the consumer grade primes, except for the gateway nifty-fifty—will disappear. There are too many options for consumer grade cameras and a DSL + cheap prime is a loser in the marketplace. People who know about primes know about the good stuff and are more likely to be willing to spend to get quality glass. People who don't know primes think they are some kind of weird, hobbled lens from the 1950s with no possible use. To an extent they are right. The 28-135 is f3.5 at its widest. That's only about half a stop, you get USM & IS, you don't pay a ton more and you have way more versatility.

Nice honeysuckle, though.

 

[squarebox]

This lens has always been dead to me, given I own a 24-70mm f/2.8L. So it can go away quietly for all I care.

That's the point. Lenses like this are dead to us, but they are also dead to the masses. I really do think that almost all of the consumer grade primes, except for the gateway nifty-fifty—will disappear. There are too many options for consumer grade cameras and a DSL + cheap prime is a loser in the marketplace. People who know about primes know about the good stuff and are more likely to be willing to spend to get quality glass. People who don't know primes think they are some kind of weird, hobbled lens from the 1950s with no possible use. To an extent they are right. The 28-135 is f3.5 at its widest. That's only about half a stop, you get USM & IS, you don't pay a ton more and you have way more versatility.

Nice honeysuckle, though.

Personally the sub $500 primes I think are great for people with rebels and who are JUST getting into photography and want to get a decent lens but don't want to spurge. I'm in this category. I figured out i wanted a 35mm prime lens but the f/2 is just horrible build quality ... and well f/2... If there was an f1.8 35mm for around $500 i'd have gotten that (i.e. to compete with the sigma 1.4 30mm). But instead i just got the 35mm L. Def. more lens than i need though.

The super low quality 1.8 50mm and this f2 28mm are really at the low end of teh spectrum, but you also forget that there are alot of kids that try out photography in HS and college and at that point those lens are great price points for them. They just need to be updated is all.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

People who know about primes know about the good stuff and are more likely to be willing to spend to get quality glass.

I disagree.

I own a 5Dmk2, want fast lenses to photographs band shows, am willing to spend on good lenses (e.g. I've bought a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II USM), but just can't afford to spend ~$1,500 on every prime.

If Canon upgraded it's non-L primes, I would be happy to buy 20mm f/2 USM, 24mm f/2 USM, 35mm f/2 USM, and possibly 28mm f/1.8 USM (all with IQ improved over the current non-L primes) for ~$700 each.

[Yes, I've thought about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L - it heavy & only 1 stop faster than the 24-105mm f/4 L.]

 

[neuroanatomist]

I would be happy to buy 20mm f/2 USM, 24mm f/2 USM, 35mm f/2 USM, and possibly 28mm f/1.8 USM (all with IQ improved over the current non-L primes) for ~$700 each.

I've thought about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L - it heavy & only 1 stop faster than the 24-105mm f/4 L.

Of course, if you add up the costs and weights of those three lenses, they'll be heavier and more expensive than the 24-70mm, and only one stop faster...

 

[jseliger]

This lens has always been dead to me, given I own a 24-70mm f/2.8L. So it can go away quietly for all I care.

That's the point. Lenses like this are dead to us, but they are also dead to the masses. I really do think that almost all of the consumer grade primes, except for the gateway nifty-fifty—will disappear. There are too many options for consumer grade cameras and a DSL + cheap prime is a loser in the marketplace. People who know about primes know about the good stuff and are more likely to be willing to spend to get quality glass.

I'm not at all convinced this is true: I like primes—or, rather, I should say that I like the prime I have—but can't justify spending more than $500 on a prime. And I can't be the only person in this position; I'd like an equivalent of Nikon's $200 35mm / f 1.8. Which is what I hope Canon is going to offer.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...I'd like an equivalent of Nikon's $200 35mm / f 1.8. Which is what I hope Canon is going to offer.

That wouldn't surprise me at all. But, it will be EF-S and won't have USM if it's in that price range. OTOH, people here are hoping for better quality EF primes with USM, but not L - and I don't think those are likely at all.

 

[sulla]

I won't miss this lens. It doesn't need to be replaced. There is absolutely no use for it, given the bare existence of the 28/1.8 (which I own).

The 28/1.8 is also a (rather) cheap and small lens, but faster and USM. (And yes, the 2.8 is a little bit smaller and cheper, but what is the differnce in real life? How much smaller and lighter than the 1.8 can you be?)

Slow (non-macro or T/S) short (<150mm) primes like f/2.8 have no real value (to me). This also holds for the 20/2.8 and 24/2.8. When there is enough light, zooms - that most people own anyway - will do, even if they're only f/4. When there is not enough light, FAST primes are needed, and in my view this translates to f/1.x.

And those fast primes should have a very good IQ wide open (because when I can afford to stop them down, I will be in a light situation when I will use a zoom instead). I use my primes practically always wide open, I practically never stop down more than 1 stop. I just like low-light photography.

And that's a bit of a problem for Canon (or better: for us), because most Canon consumer primes need to be stopped down too much to achieve good IQ. (the 28 1.8 does not have stellar IQ, sadly). Fast primes that deliver on IQ only from apertures that zooms have are no value to me, either.

Like someone said before, I would spend 700 on consumer primes given good IQ wide open any day.

Specifically, Canon should address wide-open IQ on the following lenses:

• 28 1.8
• 50 1.4 (i also own it and I love it, but still at 1.4 it is has too much halation)
• 50 1.2L (yes, even the L in my view does not perform too well wide open)

The following lenses should be replaced with faster ones, at least 1.4 would be good

• 20 2.8
• 24 2.8
• 35 2

Also, please, Canon, give me IS in the fast primes! I would buy a 50 1.4 IS or an 85 1.4 IS at any time!!!

 

[neuroanatomist]

• Specifically, Canon should address wide-open IQ on the following lenses:
  

  • 50 1.2L (yes, even the L in my view does not perform too well wide open)

  
  It depends on how you define 'perform well' and 'good IQ'. If you mean maximally sharp, then you're quire correct. But if you define 'perform well' as delivering a tremendous amount of OOF blur with a smooth, creamy bokeh, then the current version of the lens performs wonderfully. Canon intentionally undercorrected the spherical aberration in the design of the 50L, sacrificing wide-open sharpness for that creamy bokeh.
  
  

  The following lenses should be replaced with faster ones, at least 1.4 would be good
  

  • 24 2.8
  • 35 2

  
  There are already f/1.4 primes with excellent IQ at these focal lengths - the 24L II and 35L.

 

[smirkypants]

Canon needs to start doing what Sigma started doing with the 50/1.4 and continued with its 85; that is, design the lens to be at its best wide open. If you have to stop down the prime, what is the point of giving up the flexibility of a good zoom?

 

[SnapHappy]

Canon needs to start doing what Sigma started doing with the 50/1.4 and continued with its 85; that is, design the lens to be at its best wide open. If you have to stop down the prime, what is the point of giving up the flexibility of a good zoom?

Well said, smirkypants!!!

Sigma might, and I say might, have QC issues but you can't question the quality of their primes. My sigma 30mm/1.4 is fantastically sharp wide open. Once stopped down it blows away all but the highest quality lenses.

 

[c.d.embrey]

I like primes. Small, light and quick focusing primes. So this disqualifies the big, heavy L primes. A Canon 85mm f1.2 L weighs 1,025g and a Canon 85mm f1.8 weighs 425g. For comparison a Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4G weighs 660g.

IMHO, Canon should make a series of "85mm f1.8 quality" lens, not "consumer quality" lenses.

Primes work well for me because I usually work with only one lens. I can go for six month without talking the EF 85mm f1.8 off the camera.