huh?

[StreetShark]

Well I was searching on henry's photo today and I was rather amazed to find a canon EF 28mm F/2.8 for just $300.00. Is this a good deal? and is this a good lens? I like shooting landscapes so im trying to find a good prices wide angle.

 

[photogincollege]

Looks good to me, though im not positive, just remember the crop factor. So it wont actually be 28mm unless you have a camera with a full frame sensor.

 

[StreetShark]

Yeah I know so its about 45mm on my camera.

 

[photogincollege]

Yeah thats still a pretty wide angle. Hmm my old wide angle lens had was well it says f=28 MM but then another place on the lense says 52 mm, not sure which one. For 300 bucks even if you dont like it you could probably get a decent resale on it.

 

[Iron Flatline]

I assume the 52mm means the width of the front end of the lens. You need to know that for such things as filters that you might want to screw on the front of the lens.

 

[Iron Flatline]

I just wanted to learn more about the lens, to read some reviews and see what it's worth. Good reviews, and it sells for [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Canon-28mm-2-8-Lens-Cameras/dp/B00006I53T"]new at Amazon for $175[/ame]

But I'm sure you've done your own quick Google search and have come up with the same info by now...

 

[StreetShark]

yeah I also read the sharpness is bad all the way up to f/5.6 or so

 

[JIP]

Yes 52mm is the filter size. As far as the price $300 is a bad deal check B+H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12096-USA/Canon_2505A002_Wide_Angle_EF_28mm.html

 

[Don Simon]

As JIP pointed out, $300 for a 28mm f/2.8 is far from a good deal, in fact it's a very bad one. $300 would be a decent but still not amazing deal for an f/1.8 in the same focal length, since that retails for under $400.

As for wanting a wide-angle... honestly, I would not consider a 28mm on a APS-C camera a real wide-angle by any stretch of the imagination. As you say it's similar to a 45mm lens on a 35mm film camera, which is really not very wide at all, being pretty much the "standard" focal length rather than either wide or telephoto.

For under $300 you could get the Canon 24mm f/2.8 instead... but even this would only be a very moderate wide-angle if used on the APS-C sensor. Personally if looking for a real wide angle then I would be looking for at least something around 18mm (as covered by a "kit lens" or standard zoom) or ideally something even wider.

 

[Garbz]

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_28_28/index.htm Border performance should be better for a 2.8 lens. Centre isn't that hot either. Also what the hell the CA figures on this lens are worse than many zoom's I've seen. But the 1.8 is even worse:
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_28_18/index.htm

Also 28mm is not a very good landscape lens on a digital APS body in my opinion.

 

[WDodd]

This would be a nice wide angle: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351542-USA/Canon_9518A002_EF_S_10_22mm_f_3_5_4_5_USM.html

I think Sigma or Tamron makes a cheaper alternative too.

 

[Big Mike]

First of all, Henry's doesn't have good prices...unless you buy from their E-bay store. I'll recommend B&H (link at the top of the page).

Secondly, the Canon 28mm F2.8 isn't a good lens, that's why it's so cheap. It might be OK, when stopped down to F8 or smaller...but so is your 18-55 kit lens. It's certainly not very wide on a crop camera. You have the kit lens, do you not? Try setting that lens at 28mm and have a look through it.

What are you looking for, that the kit lens isn't doing for you? The kit lens is slow (small maximum aperture) but the lens in question isn't much better (not for a prime lens anyway)...and anyway, you don't usually shoot landscapes at wide apertures.

If you want a wide angle lens for landscapes, I'll 2nd the recommendation for the Canon 10-22mm, it's a great lens. You can comparable lenses from Tamron, Tokina and Sigma. If those are too wide, the Canon 17-40 F4 L is a fantastic lens in terms of image quality.