Deal: Canon EF 28 f/2.8 IS for $549 at Adorama

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/02/deal-canon-ef-28-f2-8-is-for-549-at-adorama/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/02/deal-canon-ef-28-f2-8-is-for-549-at-adorama/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From Adorama

</strong>For a limited time on the <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA2828.html?emailprice=t&utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid64393" target="_blank">Canon EF 28 f/2.8 IS lens</a>. Adorama is selling them for $549, their latest sale price was $619 if you added it to cart.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA2828.html?emailprice=t&utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid64393" target="_blank">Buy the Canon EF 28 f/2.8 IS for $549</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[SwampYankee]

Anybody else think $550 bucks for a plain old 2.8 28mm lens is a bit pricey? IS or not this just cost too much.

 

[EchoLocation]

why would i pay anything for a 28mm prime when it's only F2.8? I guess it's nice to have IS, and this potentially could be a tad bit sharper, but really, there is nothing appealing about this lens at all to me, least of all the price.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

These primes are reportedly exceptional optically and are probably fairly exceptional for video use because of a amazing stability.

But yes, I think I will stick with my Tamron 24-70 VC.,

 

[Zlatko]

why would i pay anything for a 28mm prime when it's only F2.8? I guess it's nice to have IS, and this potentially could be a tad bit sharper, but really, there is nothing appealing about this lens at all to me, least of all the price.

There is nothing appealing to me about the 800mm lens, but that doesn't mean it's not a fine lens and worth over $13,000 to someone else. This Canon 28mm is a wonderful lens for stills and video. If you check out the list of features, it is more than a plain 28mm. It is improved in every way over the old 28/2.8. And it is delightfully compact, which is one of the virtues of it being only f/2.8. It is likely that relatively few photographers will need this lens, but for the ones that do, it is very welcome.

 

[Faxon]

One of the first lenses I bought for my new Canon digital system was the 17-40 f4. I am covered for a mid wide. I am, however, thinking about that crazy 8mm.

 

[ahsanford]

Anybody else think $550 bucks for a plain old 2.8 28mm lens is a bit pricey? IS or not this just cost too much.

Would you say that for the 24L? This lens is very nearly as sharp, and is spectacular handheld indoors:

From Bryan Carnathan at The-Digital-Picture:

"This is not Canon L Series Lens, but it has image quality that challenges these impressive lenses - and carries a price that make some of us wonder why Canon did not take the extra steps required to add weather sealling and put the red ring on it."

I have this lens and adore it. I shall count the ways:

• Sharp as all get out: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/06/the-other-canon-primes-why-did-they-do-that --> went punch for punch with the 24L
• Internal focusing -- nothing telescoping in or out that crap can get into.
• Other than lacking the WS gasket at the lens mount, this lens has the same build quality as the 100L macro. It's no 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, but it's very, very nice.
• F/2.8 plus 3-4 stops of IS absolutely beats F/1.4 to me. I am not shooting moving targets nearly so much as poorly lit things.
• Small, light, unassuming.

Love love love this lens. A steal at this price.

- A

 

[Zlatko]

I have this lens and adore it. I shall count the ways:

• Sharp as all get out: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/06/the-other-canon-primes-why-did-they-do-that --> went punch for punch with the 24L
• Internal focusing -- nothing telescoping in or out that crap can get into.
• Other than lacking the WS gasket at the lens mount, this lens has the same build quality as the 100L macro. It's no 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, but it's very, very nice.
• F/2.8 plus 3-4 stops of IS absolutely beats F/1.4 to me. I am not shooting moving targets nearly so much as poorly lit things.
• Small, light, unassuming.

Love love love this lens. A steal at this price.

I agree 100%. It is a delight. Photographers can have very different needs, and sometimes one photographer doesn't see the point or value of a piece of gear that another photographer absolutely loves. Also, some photographers don't see any value in compact sized high-quality gear, whereas others prize it. I think there is value in both 1.4 lenses and 2.8 lenses, and don't always feel the need for the maximum aperture lens (which necessarily brings with it much greater size & weight). I didn't want to buy the original 28/2.8 with it's old style noisy autofocus. So the new small high-quality primes are a dream come true. I'm very glad that Canon is updating & upgrading their little primes and meeting the needs of more photographers. Let's hope they update the 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 too.

 

[ahsanford]

I agree 100%. It is a delight. Photographers can have very different needs, and sometimes one photographer doesn't see the point or value of a piece of gear that another photographer absolutely loves. Also, some photographers don't see any value in compact sized high-quality gear, whereas others prize it. I think there is value in both 1.4 lenses and 2.8 lenses, and don't always feel the need for the maximum aperture lens (which necessarily brings with it much greater size & weight). I didn't want to buy the original 28/2.8 with it's old style noisy autofocus. So the new small high-quality primes are a dream come true. I'm very glad that Canon is updating & upgrading their little primes and meeting the needs of more photographers. Let's hope they update the 50/1.4 and 50/1.8 too.

Yes. The 50 IS is happening this year for sure. The big question is whether it will be F/1.4 like the mid-grade 50 prime that many use, or whether it will F/2. A lot of folks believe it will be a 50 F/2 IS.

And given all the reasons above (and I forgot focus speed, thanks), I will gladly retire my Canon 50 F/1.4 for it.

- A

 

[Mach9]

Any chance they have the same email deal on the 24 f2.8 IS ???

 

[ahsanford]

Any chance they have the same email deal on the 24 f2.8 IS ???

Wow, the 24 and 35 (albeit more popular lengths) are still $849 at B&H. That will change, give it time.

Had I known people were truly that picky about 24 v 28, I would have waited and gotten the 28 for song. Hell, the 28 is the sharper one from the data I've seen.

The one downside of the imminent 50 IS? Filter size:

24 2.8 IS --> 58mm
28 2.8 IS --> 58mm
35 2.8 IS --> 67mm
50 ?.? IS --> Likely to be 67mm, one would think? Given how highly similar the 24 and 28 are, perhaps Canon is going up in pairs for common subcomponents to save cost.

With that thinking, that might put the new IS 85mm and 100mm non-L primes at 72 or 77. I would think it unlikely they'd go 77mm for a non-L, but it could happen, right?

- A

 

[Dantana]

A great point by several of the posters here that all photographers are different and have different needs/wants.

I think it's very cool that Canon has released these lenses for those that was IS on relatively short primes.

For me, I would rather have the extra stop(s) of the very reasonably priced 50 1.4, 28 1.8 and, 85 1.8. At the moment, I only own the 85 (love this lens). I'm concerned that at some point the older lenses will be pulled and only the more expensive and slightly slower new lenses will be available, at least new with warranty. For those who can't afford to buy L glass that would be a shame. I might have to pick up a couple lenses earlier than I was thinking.

Like I said, I totally agree that everyone is different in what they value. I just hope that these new lenses are an addition to the Canon lineup, not replacements.

 

[sdsr]

These primes are reportedly exceptional optically and are probably fairly exceptional for video use because of a amazing stability.

But yes, I think I will stick with my Tamron 24-70 VC.,

That makes sense to me. I'm sure the new IS primes are good, but primes with IS that are no faster than 2.8 (or 2 in the case of the new 35mm) would have to make clearly better photos than the Tamron, which includes all three focal lengths plus much more at the same aperture and similar vibration control all for less than the price of two of the Canons - and, evidently, does a really good job in the process.

 

[TBenson]

Moot point now. Just clicked the link and the price in cart was $799.

No, I did not buy it.