wide prime lens: 24mm 2.8. Looks kinda problematic though..

[Sep]

so lately I've been using my rebel xt for stop motion videos. Probably is that I basically have the 50mm 1.4 since I've sold my other lenses. I was originally going to get a 24-70mm 2.8L which would have been awesome. My situation has changed, and other important things have come up so my budget isnt going to allow me to get that lens. I still need something in the 24mm range though. I've been looking at the 24mm 2.8 which is a lens that will reasonable fit my needs. I need something wider that the 50mm. It just doesnt cut it at times. With the 50mm I knew it was going to be a good lens right from the start. Good reviews, lots of sample pics. With the 24mm, well.. it's an older lens. Not as fast which I guess really isnt a problem, but I'm seeing a lot of reviews point out a lot of negative things. I can only assume the lens fills a market that pretty much doesnt exist anymore and canon isnt going to make a new and better model. Seems like a lens hood is actually going to be needed with this lens. But what I came here for mainly is to see if anyone had any hands on experience. Doesnt really seem like it's a lens that's justifiable by it's price.

 

[table1349]

The Canon 24mm f2.8 is the equivalent of the Canon 50mm f1.8.
Decent basic entry level lens, but not a real work horse. This would be the ideal 24mm, at a price of course.

 

[Derrel]

Might just as well go with a more-modern zoom lens design, one that was designed to be used on a digital sensor. The 24mm on 1.6x is not much of a wide-angle, and the optics of it are pretty pedestrian. It would simply make much more sense to get a wide zoom, like say a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8...that's a better lens by almost every single metric, since it is much, much newer, and because it's designed as a "digital" lens.

 

[Sep]

Might just as well go with a more-modern zoom lens design, one that was designed to be used on a digital sensor. The 24mm on 1.6x is not much of a wide-angle, and the optics of it are pretty pedestrian. It would simply make much more sense to get a wide zoom, like say a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8...that's a better lens by almost every single metric, since it is much, much newer, and because it's designed as a "digital" lens.

I was just kinda rolling with the old saying of how prime lenses tend to be better hands down compared to zoom lenses due to less glass, and all these other reasons floating around the internet. Plus I kinda like primes. But that was a good suggestion, I'm going to look into it. Thanks. Looks promising.

 

[Derrel]

Most wide-angle prime lenses designed 15-20 years ago are not all that good on digital sensors. OLD, average-quality primes, which the Canon 24/2.8 is, are not that hot; modern zoom lenses are typically notably better optics than such low-grade, film-era primes.

 

[Sep]

while at it, do u have any recommendations on a monitor calibrator?