35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

Started Mar 22, 2011 | Discussions
IlliniNation Regular Member • Posts: 133
35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

Need a good indoor prime lens.. I think the 50mm will be a bit to long..

Which is sharper, faster AF and iQ, etc..

This is going on a 7D..

Thanks..

 IlliniNation's gear list:IlliniNation's gear list
Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +2 more
Rakumi Veteran Member • Posts: 6,259
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

Between those 2 I hear the 35mm is sharper edge to edge while the 28mm is sharper in the center (I do not know how true this is). The 28mm focuses faster with FTM focusing. I was looking at those 2 lenses plus the much raved about 30mm 1.4 Sigma (which is made only for crop bodies). Its tough when each lens has something the other does not. I tried to go with what was most important to me in order of high to low. So first was wideness. 28mm was the widest, the 1.8 gives me a tad better low light than 2.0, and the USM gives me great fast focusing in low light. I went with the 28mm 1.8. I like this lens a lot. It is pretty wide on a crop for indoor shooting and the FTM focusing is great for video. Its about $100 more than the 35mm but what you get for that $100 I feel is worth it. 7mm extra wide, .2 aperture boost, USM focusing, better build quality.

The 35mm is not with out its positives. It may have better IQ by a tad bit and is less expensive. Good luck.
--

Darkness is the monster and your shutter is your sword, aperture your shield and iso your armor. Strike fast with your sword and defend well with your shield and hope your armor holds up.

Joe Photo Lover Veteran Member • Posts: 3,040
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

IlliniNation wrote:

Need a good indoor prime lens.. I think the 50mm will be a bit to long..

Which is sharper, faster AF and iQ, etc..

Sharper 35mm f2

Faster AF 28mm f1.8

IQ depends, the sharpness of the 35mm f2 is somewhat offset by the lousy five blade aperture design.

35mm f2 is cheaper.

28mm f1.8 is a better focal length on a Canon 7D but this is subjective and depends on what other lenses you have.

PhillipA Veteran Member • Posts: 5,505
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

IlliniNation wrote:

Need a good indoor prime lens.. I think the 50mm will be a bit to long..

Which is sharper, faster AF and iQ, etc..

This is going on a 7D..

Thanks..

I had the 28 f1.8 and sold it as I didn't think it was any sharper at f4 than my 17-40 and 24-105, and I didn't need the low light capability.

I recently bought the 35 f2, and while the build quality is cheaper and the A/F noisier, it's as sharp at f2 as my zooms are at f4 and noticeably sharper at the same aperture as the zooms.
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '

fras23 Regular Member • Posts: 147
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

i've actually had the 28, 35 and the sigma 30.

After going through 4x copies of the sigma I found one that focussed correctly on a chart but it had poor focus consistency in what I would describe as average light and below (I have a 7d and 550d so the bodies aren't old). I desperately wanted f1.4 but had to give up in the end.

The 28 1.8 I liked. I liked the focal length the best on crop, and the USM and size were nice, but I came to the same conclusion as Philip, it just wasn't optically good enough. In the UK it's almost double the price of the 35 and at least with the copies I had the 35 was clearly better in the center and especially the edges.

I know some people say 'edge performace doesn't matter on a wide aperture prime' because of it's 'intended use'. I've never fully understood this arguement, having my subject center of frame the whole time doesn't appeal to me.

The conclusion regarding the optics of 28 vs 35 also goes along with the reviews on photozone and the digital picture.

So I stuck with the 35 & it's become one of my favourite lenses, the focus motor is buzzy, but it's really quite accurate down to very low light levels. In another ball park completely from the Sigma.

Regarding the 5 aperture blades I find myself most often either using it wide open (plenty sharp enough there), or stopped right down so it's never an issue. Perhaps I do this because of the 5 blades I don't know, but I really have no problem using it this way; I'm happy with the results.

Erik00 Regular Member • Posts: 243
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

From all rewiews I have read, the 28mm 1.8 is soft in the corners even stopped down.

I have a 550D and I am planing to buy the 35 mm f:2.0. The f.l. suits my needs on the cropped body, and the lens is very small, light and pretty cheap.

I know that the focusing system is pretty loud, and the bukeh often is far from good.

My real consern is the focusing speed and accurasy. It would be very helpful for me, if someone could tell me about there experience with the lens mountet on a 550D.

Best regards

fras23 Regular Member • Posts: 147
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

see my answer below regarding focus accuracy, I have a 550d too.

Regarding speed I would say it's half way between the 28 1.8 (or other usm lenses) and the 50 1.8. The focus motor sound is higher pitched than the 50 1.8, and I think this is primarily down to the speed the motor is turning (faster). The speed of focussing has never bothered me, there are times in a quiet environment where the noise has, but it's not the end of the world.

Another nice feature of the 35 which you may already know is the minimum focus distance, it will focus really quite close & the IQ is good close up. It's a real bonus for a walk around prime, the Sigma MFD is terrible, and the 28 somewhere in between.

Erik00 Regular Member • Posts: 243
Re: 35mm on a 550D

Thank´s for shareing your experiences.

I will stick to my plan and buy the 35 2.0

Best regards
Erik

ecka84
ecka84 Contributing Member • Posts: 624
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

And this is why sometimes I envy N -users. They have their normal prime for crop bodies (AF-S 35/1.8G). Shame on you, Canon.

 ecka84's gear list:ecka84's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +1 more
graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
The 28mm is better in every way

... but neither is stellar.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=253&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=253&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=122&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=253&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

The build quality and focusing of these lenses is simply not comparable, and the 28mm is optically better. Pure and simple. Of course, the situation changes a bit on a crop camera.

The edge performance of a prime truly does not matter wide open; the reason is that you will generally not place a face or other subject at the very edge of the frame, half cut-off, etc., and the performance typically drops off very steeply when you get to the very edge or the corner, but a small distance in improves greatly.

This fact is intensified when using full-frame lenses on a crop camera, since the actual edges and far corners are discarded on every shot.

For these reasons, the center/outer center performance is far more important than corner performance on such lenses (notice the 28mm has better corners anyway). The listed results agree with my first-hand experience owning and using multiple copies of each.

Based on these hard facts, you should buy the 35mm f/2 if some combination of the following factors makes it more advantageous to you:

  • you don't need the speed and accuracy advantage of USM focusing

  • budget is an extremely high priority

  • small size and light weight are a high priority

  • the 35mm focal length suits your shooting style better than 28mm

You should buy the 28mm if some combination of the following factors makes it more advantageous to you:

  • speed and accuracy of AF is a high priority

  • optical quality is a high priority

  • the 28mm focal length suits your shooting style better than 35mm

AdamT
AdamT Forum Pro • Posts: 59,334
Why envy them ???????

And this is why sometimes I envy N -users. They have their normal prime for crop bodies (AF-S 35/1.8G). Shame on you, Canon.

Why envy them - its a plastic toy built lens with a Micro USM motor which is tied to crop sensors and doesn't cost that much less than the 35 F2 , a full frame lens which is only a fraction slower .. Nikon NEEDED the cheapo AFs lens because their 35 F2 relies on a body motor and won't AF on a D40-D5000 series cam whereas the canon 35 F2 will AF and work perfectly on everything from a 1000D to a 1DS-III including all EOS the film cameras - a far better investment, especially as it rocks on full frame

Pity the Nikon owners who have to buy a new 35mm lens if they go from something like a D5000 to D700 or have both in their arsenal - if the D5000 had a body motor, they could have two very useful Fields of view depending on the camera they have .. D50,70,90,7000,300 etc camera owners can use the proper Nikon 35 F2 (performs the same as the canon optically)

-- hide signature --

A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge

 AdamT's gear list:AdamT's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Sony RX10 III Nikon D610 Sony a6000 Nikon D850 +1 more
Rakumi Veteran Member • Posts: 6,259
Re: 35mm f2 vs 28mm 1.8

I also heard the 28mm was only sharp in the center... but I chose to read buyer reviews on sites like amazon and B&H and most people are happy with this lens giving it an average score of 4.5.

I bought this lens and I find it great for shooting people and indoor stuff. It is great low light with a great focal length and the USM for fast focusing.
--

Darkness is the monster and your shutter is your sword, aperture your shield and iso your armor. Strike fast with your sword and defend well with your shield and hope your armor holds up.

fras23 Regular Member • Posts: 147
Re: The 28mm is better in every way

if you read the review of the 35mm on the digital picture he states his findings are different to others. Whatever you say about the 35mm I wouldn't say it takes 'washed out' pictures, even wide open it's one of my most contrasty lenses. I would question if he had a typical copy of the lens, and he seems to be hinting at this himself.

If you check the crop review of the 35mm & the 28mm on photozone the 35 is clearly sharper (which goes with mine and Philips opinion above). Also lenstip has the 35 sharper in the corners on a 20d vs a 28 1.8 on a 50d.

I would also say performance away from the center is important to me, I do not want all of my subjects center of frame. Please exclude me from your all encompassing statement

arty H Senior Member • Posts: 1,505
Re: The 28mm is better in every way

My 35f2 is sharp at f2 and has better contrast than my copy of the 50f1.4 at that aperture.... and my copy of the 50 is good.

It is a really good lens. It will do close shots, but is not sharp in the corners at 1 foot if you shoot a brick wall. At normal distances, it is sharp across the frame.

Stopping down to f2.2 brings a clear improvement, but the lens is good at f2. Focusing is fast and accurate. I don't mind the motor noise at all. If I had to choose between my 50f1.4, 85f1.8 and the 35f2 for my crop, I'd keep the 35f2. I prefer the focal length to the 28 on a crop. Image quality is similar to that of the other primes I mentioned.

steve szenkovics Contributing Member • Posts: 797
have both - on x1.6 and x1.3

I bought the 35F2 first and after a year of use I notice the focus is hit and miss at larger apertures so I bought the 28 1.8 since it has USM.

The 35F2 in my case is sharper overall but the 28mm gets the photos is focus far more often

So far small aperture shots I say 35F2. Nice and light lens and sharp too.

For low light indoor stuff the 28mm is better.

I tested these 2 lenses on Xsi/60D/20D and also on 1DMk2 and its always the same outcome.

IlliniNation wrote:

Need a good indoor prime lens.. I think the 50mm will be a bit to long..

Which is sharper, faster AF and iQ, etc..

This is going on a 7D..

Thanks..

graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: The 28mm is better in every way

fras23 wrote:

I would also say performance away from the center is important to me, I do not want all of my subjects center of frame. Please exclude me from your all encompassing statement

My statements went over your head. And the 35mm is simply fairly soft wide open, and terrible in the corners. The 28mm is better optically; so show the actual test charts, and so goes my own experience with multiple copies of both , shooting on crop cameras to boot. In fact I would rate the 35mm f/2 as barely usable at f/2.5.

graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: The 28mm is better in every way

arty H wrote:

My 35f2 is sharp at f2 and has better contrast than my copy of the 50f1.4 at that aperture.... and my copy of the 50 is good.

This is impossible.

PhillipA Veteran Member • Posts: 5,505
Well, if you say so ...

graphikal wrote:

My statements went over your head. And the 35mm is simply fairly soft wide open, and terrible in the corners. The 28mm is better optically; so show the actual test charts, and so goes my own experience with multiple copies of both , shooting on crop cameras to boot. In fact I would rate the 35mm f/2 as barely usable at f/2.5.

... then it must be true ! The rest of us that have owned both lenses are obviously deluding ourselves for some reason - the same goes for the reviewers at Photozone
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '

graphikal Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: Well, if you say so ...

PhillipA wrote:

graphikal wrote:

My statements went over your head. And the 35mm is simply fairly soft wide open, and terrible in the corners. The 28mm is better optically; so show the actual test charts, and so goes my own experience with multiple copies of both , shooting on crop cameras to boot. In fact I would rate the 35mm f/2 as barely usable at f/2.5.

... then it must be true ! The rest of us that have owned both lenses are obviously deluding ourselves for some reason - the same goes for the reviewers at Photozone

The interesting thing about Photozone is the high incidence of questionable results, coupled with the lack of actual test charts for comparison.

I've already posted the actual charts from the-digital-picture. Here are figures from lenstip, showing similar results; the 28mm is simply optically better shooting at wider apertures, no ifs, ands or buts, though the 35mm is certainly more even and though it picks up a slight advantage in the edges stopped way down (though its center resolution remains lower). Lenstip's resolution figures, first the 28mm and then the 35mm:

ecka84
ecka84 Contributing Member • Posts: 624
Re: Why envy them ???????

AdamT wrote:

And this is why sometimes I envy N -users. They have their normal prime for crop bodies (AF-S 35/1.8G). Shame on you, Canon.

Why envy them - its a plastic toy built lens with a Micro USM motor which is tied to crop sensors and doesn't cost that much less than the 35 F2 , a full frame lens which is only a fraction slower .. Nikon NEEDED the cheapo AFs lens because their 35 F2 relies on a body motor and won't AF on a D40-D5000 series cam whereas the canon 35 F2 will AF and work perfectly on everything from a 1000D to a 1DS-III including all EOS the film cameras - a far better investment, especially as it rocks on full frame

Pity the Nikon owners who have to buy a new 35mm lens if they go from something like a D5000 to D700 or have both in their arsenal - if the D5000 had a body motor, they could have two very useful Fields of view depending on the camera they have .. D50,70,90,7000,300 etc camera owners can use the proper Nikon 35 F2 (performs the same as the canon optically)

Oh, well, I forgot to say "cheaper, sharper and lens hood included" in my last post :D.

However, when (if) I will go full frame, I won't be using a cheap 35mm on my new expensive FF camera anyways. So, FF compatibility isn't something I would pay extra for it. I like 28mm FoV on crop, it's just not sharp enough for me. It is decent in the center, nice for indoors stuff, but for the price I expect better optical performance.

 ecka84's gear list:ecka84's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads