# Canon 28mm f1.8



## Dylan777 (Nov 17, 2011)

Hi guys,
Last weekend, I picked up a used canon 28mm f1.8 for $310 on Craigslist. The lens was purchasd new from BH on march,2010. Lens condition is like new, sale includes original receipt, box, blank warranty card, etc...

Seller didn't want to give away the filter that he bought for this lens. He asked for additional $60 for the filter, but I said no.

So far, I love this lens - it works great on my 60d, indoor low light, no flash.

1. Question- I need a filter for my 28mm, more like lens protector. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $30.

2. Question - I need a bag to fit my gear - like a backpack style. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $100.

This is my amature gear:
60d - will upgrade if/whenever 5d III comes out 
70-200 f2.8 IS version I
24-105
50 f1.4
28 f1.8
580ex

Thanks
Dylan

*Noted - Suggestions from CanonRumors Members:*
Flipside 400 AW 
B+W 58mm MRC UV
Hood 
202AW Sling 
LowePro Fastpack 300
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/248295-REG/Canon_6229A003_Deluxe_Backpack_200_EG.html
Lowepro Pro-runner 350AW


----------



## TexPhoto (Nov 17, 2011)

Without opening the debate, I am one of those people who shoots without UV filters all the time. I say protect your lens with a hood when shooting, a lens cap when not.

For a bag, i am rally a fan of the Lowepro Sling bags. I have a 200 and just moved up to a 300. I bought the 300 used on eBay for $44, but can't tell it from new. The 200s are great, i just needed a bigger bag. Lowepros lifetime guarantee is awesome, and the hideaway rain cover can save your gear. They have replaced 2 bags for me for free, no receipt required.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2011)

Dylan777 said:


> 1. Question- I need a filter for my 28mm, more like lens protector. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $30.



I am one who uses a UV filter for protection on all lenses. Don't get a cheap one, it's worse than no filter. Fortunately, your 28/1.8 uses 58mm filters, and they're not that expensive. So...how about $34? B+W 58mm MRC UV, from B&H or Amazon, with free shipping.



Dylan777 said:


> 2. Question - I need a bag to fit my gear - like a backpack style. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $100.



I second the recommendation for Lowepro bags - I have several. Personally, I use a Flipside 400 AW - that would hold all your gear comfortably, and allow room for another lens or possibly two (because you will buy more  ). I see some on buy.com for just over $100, although most retailers sell at $165. The Flipside 300 fits your budget, and would hold all your current gear if packed tight, probably better to leave out one prime or the flash (or get a SlipLock case for the extra piece and attach it to the outside of the bag). 

The thing I like about the Flipside series is that the opening is on the front of the pack, i.e. the side that rests against your back. That means extra security in an urban setting, and also with the hip belt, you can remove the shoulder straps and spin the bag to your front with the hip belt in place, giving you a platform for lens changes without neeting to remove the bag and set it on the ground, or juggle lenses in mid air.


----------



## EYEONE (Nov 17, 2011)

TexPhoto said:


> Without opening the debate, I am one of those people who shoots without UV filters all the time. I say protect your lens with a hood when shooting, a lens cap when not.



Same here.


----------



## KyleSTL (Nov 17, 2011)

TexPhoto said:


> Without opening the debate, I am one of those people who shoots without UV filters all the time. I say protect your lens with a hood when shooting, a lens cap when not.


Ditto


TexPhoto said:


> For a bag, i am rally a fan of the Lowepro Sling bags. I have a 200 and just moved up to a 300. I bought the 300 used on eBay for $44, but can't tell it from new. The 200s are great, i just needed a bigger bag. Lowepros lifetime guarantee is awesome, and the hideaway rain cover can save your gear. They have replaced 2 bags for me for free, no receipt required.


Same here. I have a 202AW Sling and it houses all my gear (see signature). A 300-series would definitely be needed to fit a 70-200mm (it was tricky to fit a 70-200 f4 in it when I borrowed it from a friend). I have been pleased with the bag, but I definitely agree with neuro about outgrowing bags, I'm close to the limits of my bag's capacity.


----------



## thejoyofsobe (Nov 17, 2011)

If you have to choose between a hood and a UV filter pick the hood first every time unless you've got a weather-sealed lens.

I've got a LowePro Fastpack 300. It's got side access so I can quickly access my camera like on the Slingshot models by taking off the second strap.


In the camera compartment:
Canon 60D attached to 70-300mm f/4-5.6L with hood on
24-105mm f/4 with hood on
50mm f/1.4 with hood on
580EX
Kenko extension tubes/battery charger and extra batteries

*note that the manufacturer say the center section where I have the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L in is big enough to handle the 70-200mm f/2.8
*also the pocket that i have the extension tubes, extra batteries and charger could definitely fit a 28mm f/1.8

plus there's an upper compartment for assorted things and a 17" laptop compartment


for what i'm carrying around it's very comfortable.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2011)

dilbert said:


> If you mainly do outdoor photography, you may as well just get a B&W polarizer and use that as your "lens protector".



I've got B+W 77mm and 82mm KÃ¤semann CPLs. Might work on my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II...but with the 100-400mm, I often can't afford the extra 1.67-stop light loss on top of f/5.6.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Question- I need a filter for my 28mm, more like lens protector. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $30.
> ...



Hi neuroanatomist,
For indoor shooting, am I going to lose any light if I put this filter( B+W 58mm MRC UV) on my lens?

Thanks
Dylan


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2011)

Dylan777 said:


> Hi neuroanatomist,
> For indoor shooting, am I going to lose any light if I put this filter( B+W 58mm MRC UV) on my lens?



Practically, no. Technically, yes - a little less than 1% light loss. 

The only meaningful possible impact is a potential slight increase in flare with the filter. Here are a couple of extreme examples, with the 24-105mm f/4L IS and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II (the latter is natively more susceptible to flare). In both cases, the MRC filter results in a very slight loss of contrast in the scene. This is something of a worst-case scenario - a small, very bright light source, a black background, and no extraneous features in the image to mask the flare. 

24-105mm f/4L IS @ 24mm





70-200mm f/2.8L IS II @ 200mm


----------



## ricker (Nov 18, 2011)

I own the Canon 28 1.8 and love it.

But...it is notorious for lens flare so a hood will serve you far better than a filter. Your images will thank you for it.
I stay away from really cheap filters because (besides the glass quality), they easily get stuck on a lens.
Prefer B+W but higher end Hoyas are fine as well.


----------



## 00ducky (Nov 18, 2011)

Here is a bag for only $40!
Its amazing! A friend of mine has one, and he loves it!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/248295-REG/Canon_6229A003_Deluxe_Backpack_200_EG.html


----------



## papa-razzi (Nov 18, 2011)

ricker said:


> I own the Canon 28 1.8 and love it.



Can anyone with a Canon 28mm f/1.8 comment on the autofocus accuracy and speed?

How is the image quality when at f/1.8? 

How much does it need to be stopped down to get really sharp in the center?


----------



## dr croubie (Nov 18, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Question- I need a filter for my 28mm, more like lens protector. Any suggestion? Please keep it under $30.
> ...



If you're spending under $30 for a filter, probably worth not getting one at all. I got a Tiffen for my EFs 15-85 and not it just sits around at home, not much better than car windshield glass (I could actually see an IQ-drop in some cases).
The only lens I do have a UV filter on is my 70-300L, a B+W MRC UV filter, no discernable IQ loss and no flare increase in real life so far (I never point at the sun). If it protects the glass against a stray rock, or even a well-aimed bird-poo from taking BIF shots, it's worth it for 5% extra on the lens cost.

For a bag, I've got the Lowepro Pro-runner 350AW, I paid $180, but that's australian retail prices. It'll fit all your gear and a laptop and tripod easily. The 300 has no laptop slot but is otherwise identical, B+H have them for $150, if you're lucky maybe you can find them on sale for $120, well worth the extra spend. Well built, nicely padded, and i'd have no qualms filling it with $5k of gear and throwing it across the room (but no, I'm not going to).


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2011)

papa-razzi said:


> ricker said:
> 
> 
> > I own the Canon 28 1.8 and love it.
> ...



Hi - i recently picked up this lens and love it so much. As an ameture point of view, the autofocus is fast and accurate. 

The lens will be little soft at 1.8, but I kinda like it - the softness. So far I use this lens to take pictures of my 8 months daughter. For me, this lens works best around f2.8 to f3.5. 

Dylan


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2011)

Hi neuroanatomist,
thank you for the info on the filter. Your camera gear looks GREAT


----------



## Bruce Photography (Nov 18, 2011)

00ducky said:


> Here is a bag for only $40!
> Its amazing! A friend of mine has one, and he loves it!
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/248295-REG/Canon_6229A003_Deluxe_Backpack_200_EG.html



I love these bags but not so much for carrying into the field. When I transport by car my gear to a site, I keep all my wides in one bag (they are so cheap but good padding), my normals in another, zoom teles in another and teles in another. One bag I use just for EF-S lenses. Since they all look alike I put big labels on the straps so I know what is in each bag without opening it. If I'm hiking, I select my lenses from the Canon bags and then put it into a Lowepro backpack that has all my other goodies for the hike.


----------



## branden (Nov 19, 2011)

I personally would not recommend a camera backpack. I have one, and I've stopped using it, because I neither liked carrying around camera gear on my back, nor liked having to find a table or other flat surface to set the bag on in order to get to the equipment inside. Now I use a shoulder bag, and am much happier. That switch was about a year ago.


----------



## KacperP (Nov 20, 2011)

branden said:


> I personally would not recommend a camera backpack. I have one, and I've stopped using it, because I neither liked carrying around camera gear on my back, nor liked having to find a table or other flat surface to set the bag on in order to get to the equipment inside. Now I use a shoulder bag, and am much happier. That switch was about a year ago.


Shoulder bag has one negative issue - assymetry. Not so good for keeping healthy posture, and photo gear can have considerable weight.
Finding table? No need to when backpack is "swing" typem or can be configured to be "swing" type.
I personally hate shoulder bags when using them for heavier loads.


----------

