# Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS & EF 28 f/2.8 IS Quick Review



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 29, 2012)

```
<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/?p=10524"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10524" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10524"></a></div>
<strong>From LensRentals.com


</strong>Roger Cicala at LensRentals.com has put the two new Canon primes through a resolution test and compared them to other lenses in the Canon lineup.</p>
<p>A lot of people are still a bit confused by these two lenses, however their size and decent performance may find a place in the market.</p>
<div id="attachment_10525" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/imatest2428.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-10525" title="imatest2428" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/imatest2428.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="170" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">MTF 50 Resolution Test</p></div>
<p><strong>Conclusion</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>The bottom line is these are both nice, sharp lenses. Certainly sharper than the current 24-70 f/2.8 L zoom (we’ll have to see if they’re sharper than the 24-70 Mk II) and better than the 24mm and 28mm lenses that they – well, I guess replace. Although I have trouble considering a lens a replacement when the price has jumped 200% to 300%.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/06/the-other-canon-primes-why-did-they-do-that" target="_blank">Read the full review</a></strong></p>
<p><strong>Preorder from B&H: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843009-USA/Canon_5345B002_EF_24mm_f_2_8L_IS.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS $849.95</a> | </strong><strong><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843011-USA/Canon_5179B002_EF_28mm_f_2_8_IS.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">Canon EF 28 f/2.8 IS $799.95</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Axilrod (Jun 29, 2012)

Pretty impressive considering the numbers on the 28mm wide open are comparable to the 24LII stopped down to f/2.8. I bet that 28mm is damn sharp on an APS-C sensor.


----------



## Abraxx (Jun 29, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Pretty impressive considering the numbers on the 28mm wide open are comparable to the 24LII stopped down to f/2.8. I bet that 28mm is damn sharp on an APS-C sensor.



Sorry, but considering the price for a non L prime with 2.8, I would have expected an even better performance...

These are really niche primes, I wonder what type of videos these are good for? (where I do not have other options...)

Seriously, I can think of many other primes, who would have been due for a nice update.

my 2 cents


----------



## infared (Jun 29, 2012)

WHEN-O-WHEN-O-WHEN is the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II going to ship to the US???
Gotta see how sharp that lens is before I would consider these....
Does anybody know anything current about an arrival date??????


----------



## pdirestajr (Jun 29, 2012)

The old 24mm f/2.8 is an amazingly sharp lens, even on FF. Not sure why I would pay THAT much for an upgrade. USM & IS aren't really a priority at 24mm.

Not sure why the old lens doesn't get much love.


----------



## dstppy (Jun 29, 2012)

Abraxx said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > Pretty impressive considering the numbers on the 28mm wide open are comparable to the 24LII stopped down to f/2.8. I bet that 28mm is damn sharp on an APS-C sensor.
> ...



Honestly, that was everyone's gripe about the 15-85mm . . . I think this is the best (price-wise) we're going to get. Anything cheaper and it'll be that STM category.

These will move well (I think) when Adorama/B&H/Beach Camera etc. start packaging them in high-end camera bundles where you get them for a few hundred off.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 29, 2012)

A Disappointing Product that only has one real purpose. VIDEO. 8)


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Jun 29, 2012)

dilbert said:


> Or to put it another way...
> 
> Do you spend $800 on a 24/2.8 IS and another $850 on a 28/2.8 IS or $1300 on a Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC?



Indeed, with that one lens, Tamron has taken the wind out of the sails of four different Canon lenses, to one extent or another -- and two of the four are or have the potential to be legendary.

The original 24-70 L? More expensive than and not as good as the Tamron, plus the Tamron's got IS.

The new 24-70? Presumably better than the Tamron, but still no IS, costs twice as much, and still not yet available.

And each of these primes? Looks like they're in the same ballpark as the Tamron...but they're not that much cheaper, and the Tamron gets you the same focal lengths as both, _plus_ all the way out to 70mm.

For that matter, the Tamron's even (at least on paper) competing well with the 24-105. Sure, you lose out on the long end, but you get the extra stop _and_ you keep the IS.

Ouch.

Oh -- and add me to the list of those who don't see the point to a slow wide prime with IS. At ISO 100, 1/30s and f/2.8, you're already down to EV 8, which is "Las Vegas or Times Square at night. Store windows. Campfires, bonfires, burning buildings. Ice shows, football, baseball etc. at night. Interiors with bright florescent lights." ISO 3200 gets you to fireworks. 1/30s is already the rule of thumb for handholdability at these focal lengths, and it's too slow for people (mostly)...so the IS is only really useful for handheld moonlit landscape photography or (so I hear) for video. Compare that with f/1.4 which would get you up to 1/125s in the same scene where you'd be at 1/30s at f/2.8, and you can really see the advantage of fast glass over IS for low light.

I'm also not seeing enough of a difference between 24mm and 28mm to understand why Canon thought they needed both.

Ah, well. I wish Canon the best with these new lenses, but I'm much more excited by my brand new Shorty McForty than I'd ever be by either of these new primes.

b&


----------



## spinworkxroy (Jun 30, 2012)

These lenses worked in every department except one…PRICE…
i would've rather they made it in Malaysia like the 40, to keep the price down..or even to use STM instead of USM.
Make the price around the same as the old 24/28 lenses..then maybe they make good replacements..
But at these prices? I would have to agree with everyone who commented on them…


----------



## Razor2012 (Jun 30, 2012)

infared said:


> WHEN-O-WHEN-O-WHEN is the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II going to ship to the US???
> Gotta see how sharp that lens is before I would consider these....
> Does anybody know anything current about an arrival date??????



Last I heard sometime in July. I have mine on order.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jun 30, 2012)

+1 for the Shorty Fourty! I just picked it up, because at 199.00, why not?

These $800+ non-L primes are a little crazy.


----------



## sjp010 (Jun 30, 2012)

Really the only complaint you can make about these lenses is the price. They are a great size, useful focal lengths, IS always a good thing, look to be well built, and USM. If these were $400-$500, everyone would be falling over each other to get one.

Unfortunately, price is everything. An easy pass for me, which is too bad because I would really like these lenses otherwise. I'll stick with my 28/1.8 which still costs $400-$500.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jun 30, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Pretty impressive considering the numbers on the 28mm wide open are comparable to the 24LII stopped down to f/2.8. I bet that 28mm is damn sharp on an APS-C sensor.



24 and 28mm are different animals. The 24Lii is made to use wide open, and it does a great job too. Sharpnes is only one aspect to a lens.


----------



## gmrza (Jun 30, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Pretty impressive considering the numbers on the 28mm wide open are comparable to the 24LII stopped down to f/2.8. I bet that 28mm is damn sharp on an APS-C sensor.



What is interesting though is that Canon has allowed more spherical aberration. Presumably they are working on the concept that you can't get back lost sharpness, but you can more easily correct barrel or pincushion in post or in camera (admittedly still losing some sharpness).


----------



## Viggo (Jun 30, 2012)

I would love me 28 IS for video! I wonder how they MF...


----------



## AdamJ (Jun 30, 2012)

You would have thought Canon would have given these lenses STM, to make them properly video-friendly.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 1, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> The old 24mm f/2.8 is an amazingly sharp lens, even on FF. Not sure why I would pay THAT much for an upgrade. USM & IS aren't really a priority at 24mm.
> 
> Not sure why the old lens doesn't get much love.



Even on APS-C, my tamron 28-75 and 17-50 and even the kit 18-55 IS (although with some other aspects worse) were sharper than the old 24 2.8 prime. My copy, at least, didn't seem to do so well for shooting distant landscapes crisply corner to corner.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jul 1, 2012)

@AdamJ


> You would have thought Canon would have given these lenses STM, to make them properly video-friendly.



On the 650D... Notice the STM lenses were announced at the same time as the 650D, and although the 24 & 28 IS are just arriving in shops now, they were announced a while back.

At these prices they are niche products, and as such I think perhaps it will higher level video users who are buying them, if indeed video users go for them at all (faster primes seem to be the thing... plenty of solutions to stability out there already) and such high end video users will be using MF, and will prefer lenses with mechanical long-throw, tactile focus rings which have end stops.

AF & video - for serious use - is generally a no-no (you would struggle to find an ENG or PL lens with AF) especially combined with the additonal accuracy that large sensor cameras with their reduced DoF require.

@spj010


> Really the only complaint you can make about these lenses is the price. They are a great size, useful focal lengths, IS always a good thing, look to be well built, and USM. If these were $400-$500, everyone would be falling over each other to get one.
> 
> Unfortunately, price is everything. An easy pass for me, which is too bad because I would really like these lenses otherwise. I'll stick with my 28/1.8 which still costs $400-$500.



If at UK prices these were around £400-£500 then they would be a more viable proposition. I guess it's economies of scale. The obvious and extensive R&D that has went into these lenses is going to be recouped from quite a small user base. Do canon price them low to hopefully sell more, or do they price them with the assumption that if folk really need them they'll buy them? I don't the answer, just trying to figure the logic.

They are not fast enough for the focal length to give that shallow DoF look that everybody seems to be after (Samyang 24mm f1,4 may be genuinely better proposition for serious video users who shouldn't object too much to manual focus only and will positively embrace a manual iris ring)

I used to have a 28mm f2.8 non-IS, cheap, sharp, compact, and am currently deciding to go for either a canon 35mm f2.0 or a Samyang 35mm f1.4, just weighing up price difference and user experience difference. The 40mm f2.8 would be on there but I seriously object to the rip off UK price. I would sooner buy the voigtlander f2.0...

The 28mm f1.8 just never seemed to make my list, be it the extra cost or the indifferent, sometimes downright poor reviews. Maybe as a video lens it makes a bit more sense where folk don't pixel peep and the attention is generally going to be towards the middle of the frame.


----------



## tron (Jul 2, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > The old 24mm f/2.8 is an amazingly sharp lens, even on FF. Not sure why I would pay THAT much for an upgrade. USM & IS aren't really a priority at 24mm.
> ...


I understand that the 24 and 28 2.8 lenses are old and newer sharper lenses do exist but an apple to apples comparison wouldn't hurt. 28mm are not 24mm so the tamron 28-75 is out of the equation. Now I do not believe that the mentioned 17-50 and 18-55 lenses can be put on a FF camera. So I assume that you have put the 24 2.8 old prime on your APS-C camera and even there you had not crisp corners...


----------

