EF 20mm f2.8 vs EF 24mm f2.8 IS vs EF 28 f1.8

Hi folks,

My question is regarding the three lenses listed above. My intended use is dual:

1. Use on an EOS 400D body for inconspicuous street photography - this is the primary intention.

2. Use of the lens on a full frame body (most probably 6D, yet to be purchased) for indoor low light photography, size is less of an issue here. This also means that EF-S or third party crop-only lens are out of the question.

Requirements:

1. Fast lens (at least f2.8)

2. Small as possible (preferably similar in size to the 50 mm f1.8 which I own)

3. Wide angle field of view up to effective 40mm (meaning 28mm lens on the 400D), preferably in the vicinity of effective 28-35mm.

4. Budget up to 700 USD.

I am inclining toward the 20 mm due to the effective FOV (32mm) - I can say that most of my shots in 2017 (40%) were at the effective 28mm (17mm on a 17-40L I have). My dilemma is regarding the lower IQ at the center of the 20mm (less of an issue for corners as I will be shooting street), size, and some extent vignetting (though I shoot RAW so can lens profile and fix it in LR). The 24 IS f2.8 has none of the above, smaller in form factor, but is a bit narrower in terms of angle of view (workable) as well as more expensive by roughly 140 USD. The 28 f1.8 will take me to the 44mm effective focal length, faster prime with a bit more shallower DOF, cheap as the 20mm but might be a bit tight for my liking. I can always go backward several steps, but the FOV difference can have a difference in terms of perspective and feel of depth.
I am wondering:

1. How were your experience with either lens for street photography? I am debating whether to comprmise FOV for image quality or vice versa.

Thank you in advance for the help!

Chen

i say, go with the best of the lot, the EF35IS, and adjust to that focal length.

Abu Mahendra wrote:

i say, go with the best of the lot, the EF35IS, and adjust to that focal length.

the second choice would be clearly the 28IS.

Alan GT wrote:

Hi - why don't you just buy the ultra cheap EF-S 24 2.8 pancake lens for your 400D? You won't get any real image quality advantage on the 400D with the much more expensive EF 24 2.8 IS other than it having IS. The pancake is cheap enough not to worry about the fact that it is APS-C only, and you can easily sell it. If you upgrade to FF you could always get the similar EF 40mm pancake or as someone else sugggested the EF 35mm f2 IS.

Alan

Ditto. HIts the bullseye on all your requirements:

1. Use on an EOS 400D body for inconspicuous street photography - this is the primary intention.

Nothing is smaller, lighter, less conspicuous

2. Use of the lens on a full frame body (most probably 6D, yet to be purchased) for indoor low light photography, size is less of an issue here. This also means that EF-S or third party crop-only lens are out of the question.

I reject this out of hand. Buy lenses optimal for the camera system you have. You'll spend more for a suboptimal solution if you buy lenses for a camera you don't have.

Requirements:

1. Fast lens (at least f2.8)

Check.

2. Small as possible (preferably similar in size to the 50 mm f1.8 which I own)

Check, none smaller.

3. Wide angle field of view up to effective 40mm (meaning 28mm lens on the 400D), preferably in the vicinity of effective 28-35mm.

Check.

4. Budget up to 700 USD.

$150 USD retail, $120 from Canon USA Refurbished with free shipping (but add state sales tax) and same 1yr Canon USA warranty as new).

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/ef-s-24mm-f-28-stm-refurbished

I have 28mm IS. Great lens. Almost L quality.

Abu Mahendra wrote:

i say, go with the best of the lot, the EF35IS, and adjust to that focal length.

Hi Abu Mahendra

Thank you for your reply. The 35 on a crop sensor will be ~56, way beyond the focal length I am looking for. So this is not an option.

Chen

Alan GT wrote:

Hi - why don't you just buy the ultra cheap EF-S 24 2.8 pancake lens for your 400D? You won't get any real image quality advantage on the 400D with the much more expensive EF 24 2.8 IS other than it having IS. The pancake is cheap enough not to worry about the fact that it is APS-C only, and you can easily sell it. If you upgrade to FF you could always get the similar EF 40mm pancake or as someone else sugggested the EF 35mm f2 IS.

Alan

Hi Alan

You've got something there. Since i will be using a FF in the coming month or two, I will want to have the 24mm handy for both bodies, thus i am opting for the 24mm.

The "sell later" aspect is not that attractive for me, I prefer to buy and keep. When selling equipment you loose money, no matter what you do.

Chen

arty H wrote:

If you want to shoot in low light, you need F2. The Canon 35F2 IS was my choice on crop and later on full frame. F2.8 may be a problem when lighting gets low, unless you are on full frame, but F2 is still desirable.

The older 28 may be sharp in the center, but you will need to stop down to get the corners OK, at least according to reviews. I would recommend the 35 F2 IS. It is an excellent lens for your needs. If you think you will be going full frame in 10 years, it might be silly to only buy full frame lenses. However, if you know what the time frame might be, and it is short, It is a different story and it makes sense to avoid putting lots of dough into crop lenses. If you are OK with F2.8 then don't rule out the new Canon 35 F2.8 macro lens.

For shooting in low light, I prefer at least F2. This way you can keep shutter speeds up for people photos. Fast AF is also a help, and you get that with the Canon 35.

Also, unless finances force it, you don't necessarily have to get rid of a crop camera and lenses when you go full frame. There are lots of times when I still use a crop body, since this gives me additional options with field of view.

Hi Arty,

Thanks for your comment. Your case is good for the 35. Reading your post I would say that my requirements priority would be:

FOV>Form factor>lens speed>Budget (on FF sensor)

The FOV of 35 is a bit too narrow (56mm equiv.) which is beyond my shooting style. Speed is indeed critical (also to have shallower DOF), however, I have less issue with shooting at ISO3200.

The 35 macro is actually EF-S and with that LED ring (even when turned off) it will be conspicuous.

Your comment, as well as the other members, helped me focus my intentions on the 24mm f/2.8. Thanks for the help and support!

Chen

Alan GT wrote:

Chen Guttman wrote:

You've got something there. Since i will be using a FF in the coming month or two, I will want to have the 24mm handy for both bodies, thus i am opting for the 24mm.

The "sell later" aspect is not that attractive for me, I prefer to buy and keep. When selling equipment you loose money, no matter what you do.

Chen

Just in case of any confusion the 24 2.8 pancake lens I mentioned is EF-S mount and cannot be used on FF. The 24 2.8 IS lens is EF mount and can be used on either FF or your 400D.

I find 24mm too wide for general street use on FF. It is wider than you get with your 17-40 on the 400D.

Alan

Hi Alan,

Thanks for the clarification, that's the reason why either pancake lenses were on the list  - one is too long for street (my style) and the other is limited to crop only sensors.

Thank you for the support, it helped me select - I will go for the 24 f/2.8 lens.

Chen

snigs wrote:

I have used the 24 2.8 IS USM and the IS is fantastic and useful. It is small lens which has IS and USM.

In this shot, I had the shutter to 1/6 second to capture some movement

John Lennon Wall, Prague. Sony A7II + Canon 24 f/2.8 @ f/8, 1/6, ISO 50

Hi Snigs

Nice shot and impressive hands (with the IS)

I have noticed you use Sony body with Canon lens.

1. How it the compatibility with the adaptors? I understand AF is working but slower.

2. How is the transition to EVF instead of OVF? Is it that good? How's the operating time of the camera, that you have live view in the viewfinder?

Thx for the input,

Chen