The Perfect "Standard" Lens?

[Loupey]

Canon’s EF 28mm f/1.8 USM prime.

I know we get a lot of questions asking for the “right” lens for this and that. At an effective focal length of 45mm on the XT, XTi, 10D, 20D, 30D, I think the 28mm is that right lens for many applications.

I believe that it would be a great 2nd lens particularly suited for family-type shots or for those asking for a walk-about lens. Sure it’s not a zoom, but it is f/1.8 and built like a tank (perhaps even a smidgen too heavy for the XT and XTi). USM is fast and the resolution is superb.

Excellent for everyday stuff when handholding in low light situations are expected.

Why as a 2nd lens? Since it doesn’t give a wide angle field of view, I think it would pair nicely with a kit lens or the 17-40mm f/4L. Indispensable to have a low-light capable lens in the bag at times. I use my 17-40mm only when I need the 17mm end; otherwise, I can’t stand to use it. The 28mm prime is not cheap but not as expensive as the 17-40mm. I find the 28mm to be far sharper, less distorting, and better color rendering than the 17-40mm.

Some example images (full frame) with this lens on the 30D. Hope this helps some of you. Let me know if you want to see a section crop or other images from this lens.

[gryphonslair99]

To each their own. That's what makes photography so great. There is no one answer in my book. If there was, we would all drive Chevrolet's and live in identical tract houses.

For me the perfect "Standard" lens is the 50mm in the f1.4 version. Fast, well built and a good value. I can't quite wrap my brain around the cost vs quality of the f1.2.

Yeah I know your are going to tell me that it has an effective focal length of an 80 mm lens, however I would dispute that. It has an effective focal length of 50mm with a crop that is equivalent to an 80mm lens. There is a difference.

The 50mm is considered a standard lens from the old 35mm days because it's properties most closely resemble the way the human eye sees. In the second photo down, the totem poles all lean outward at the top. That is a property of a wider angle lens like a 28mm. I'm not saying that it is bad, it is just the property of the lens. 50mm's tend to see things a bit flat.

All focal lengths have their unique characteristics. I tend to buy lenses for their characteristics, not the focal length on a crop body camera. I can usually step a few steps forward or back if needed.

For me the perfect "standard" lens most closely mimics what the human eye sees thus the 50mm. The whole slew of other lenses I have range from 10mm to 200mm in both primes and zooms. They all have their uses for my more creative side and to create things that are not quite the way the eye sees them.

By the way. I like the photos. #4 looks to be especially fun if you could see the look of terror on the faces of the riders.

[DEvianT]

The perfect standard lens..? Depends on what I am doing. I use full frame. Some thoughts are below:

Street photography: Tend towards 50mm f/1.4 prime or 16-35mm f/2.8 L MK II
Portraits: 85mm f/1.2 L MK II
Weddings: 50mm f/1.4 or 24-70mm f/2.8 L on one body 70-200 f/2.8 L IS on the other. 16-35mm for groups.
Landscapes: 16-35mm f/2.8 L MK II
Fashion/Editorial: 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.2
Still Life: 105mm f/2.8 macro

If you mean a perfect normal lens then I'd say anything from 35mm to 50mm on full frame.

[Loupey]

Yeah I know your are going to tell me that it has an effective focal length of an 80 mm lens, however I would dispute that. It has an effective focal length of 50mm with a crop that is equivalent to an 80mm lens. There is a difference.

Then what is the difference? A crop of a 50mm image is the same as telephoto-ing it.

In the second photo down, the totem poles all lean outward at the top. That is a property of a wider angle lens like a 28mm.

I think that you're referring to perspective due to the lens being pointed slightly downwards. All lens do that - even supertelephotos

By the way. I like the photos. #4 looks to be especially fun if you could see the look of terror on the faces of the riders.

You can (see the mega crop below). That's the point of this thread (one of them at least).

Meant to be a fun thread. Just a friendly reminder that there are reasons why primes have stuck around :thumbsup:

[gryphonslair99]

Loupey]Then what is the difference? A crop of a 50mm image is the same as telephoto-ing it.

The difference is the characteristics of different focal lengths. The crop maintains those those characteristics of the lens. If it were a telephoto it would alter those characteristics. It often is a minor thing that is hard to see, but a 28mm fish eye lens on a 1.6 crop body is a crop of the center of the field of view of that 28mm fish eye. It retains those fish eye characteristics. It does not flatten the image like a 45mm lens would. Like I said, it is a minor difference, but if you are trying to achieve a certain look it can be important. I started in this when primes were the only decent lenses available and telephotos were just being developed. Over grown stove pipes with glass and were optically terrible. I never owned a zoom until I went digital a year ago. I have a closet full of great old Nikor primes including a couple of great ol'e 50mmf1.2's getting lonely with my now unused F2 bodies.

TS-I think that you're referring to perspective due to the lens being pointed slightly downwards. All lens do that - even supertelephotos

Could be, I do not know exactly what level the camera was at compared to the subject. Obviously not shot from the ground. A wide angle lens does tend to distort the image away from the center point of the lens. If you were pretty close to an even plain with the tops of the poles, I would still expect a slight distortion outward from a wide angle lens. I'm curious, was that taken at Great Wolf Lodge?

You can (see the mega crop below). That's the point of this thread (one of them at least).

I love the look on the faces of people that get on those things thinking it looks like a fairly mild ride. Nothing better than the look of real self inflicted terror.:yikes:

Meant to be a fun thread. Just a friendly reminder that there are reasons why primes have stuck around :thumbsup:

Yeah, my kit consists right now of 3 zooms that I consistently use. The 10-22f3.5, the 24-70f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8. My primes are a 28mmf1.8, 50mmf1.4, 85mmf1,8, 100mmf2.8 macro and 135mmf2.0L. My next two will probably be the 200mm f2.8L(best prime value out there IMHO) and the TS-24mmf3.5L.(Maybe not a true prime in the purist sense of the word, but it looks like a really fun lens) Like I said, I really love primes. :smile5:

[Loupey]

gryphonslair - you've got some nice glass. Nice meeting someone who still appreciates primes. I agree, that 200mm f/2.8L is a great value (I don't own one, only tested it).

Before I went digital, I used 3 different camera lines (Canon, Contax, Bronica MF) and among all of them, I only had 1 zoom. Hearing all the raves about the newer zooms, I started digital with only zooms. Here I am using primes again (9 times out of 10 I'd say). Of course the current crop of zooms are better than ever, just seems that I tend to use the zooms always at one extreme so it doesn't make sense for me to accept the compromises that come with them.

BTW, yes - Great Wolf Lodge in Sandusky, Ohio. Took the family for a day there and another day at Cedar Point. No crowds this time of year

[DEvianT]

I was a bah humbug zooms are best kind of a guy till I tried a 50mm prime a while back. Now I'm a believer.

A good exercise is to look at picture metadata and see, when you use a zoom, if you use it mostly at one focal length? Most people use them at one extreme or the other (except on stupid zooms like 28-300mm but less said the better on them...).

I did this experiment with the 24-70mm and found 80% of my shots where at 70mm with the foot zoom in action. I now use an 85mm prime instead most of the time. Much better results and more disciplined shots happen as a result also.

The only zooms that have really blown me away quality wise are the Canon 16-25mm f/2.8 L MKII which is really something to see! The Canon 70-200mm (any model). Lastly as I said somewhere else on here 24-70mm f/2.8 L is a beautiful lens however I prefer my wide aperture primes to it nowadays.

[Loupey]

DEvianT - thanks for the input.


A quick demonstation of the effect of the image sensor crop.

As long as the camera-to-subject distance remains unchanged, the crop factor is identical to using the equivalent longer focal length lens. In this example, if 50mm was "standard" and the image sensor was tiny so that a 17mm lens had the equivalent crop factor (2.94 in this case), the resulting 3rd image would be produced. Note that the spacial relationships remain unchanged.

Focal length merely multiplies (or divides) the magnification.

[gryphonslair99]

DEvianT - thanks for the input.


A quick demonstation of the effect of the image sensor crop.

As long as the camera-to-subject distance remains unchanged, the crop factor is identical to using the equivalent longer focal length lens. In this example, if 50mm was "standard" and the image sensor was tiny so that a 17mm lens had the equivalent crop factor (2.94 in this case), the resulting 3rd image would be produced. Note that the spacial relationships remain unchanged.

Focal length merely multiplies (or divides) the magnification.

Now we might be quibbling about words as I agree it is a crop factor as you state here. It is not a magnification but a crop of the view.. A good test to show the changes in image with varying focal lengths is a standard grid pattern. If I can find the site again that demonstrated it I will post the link. It was several months ago when I read the article.

Thanks on the glass collection. It is the one thing I alway recommend to people looking to get into DSLR's, to buy good glass. A 1Ds MIII still takes crappy photos with a poor lens attached to the front. I'm a firm believer that a lot of people would be happier if they looked at putting more into glass and less into the body. I am always amazed when people post questions asking about a $100 no name zoom lens they want to put on their 5D because they don't want to spend money.

[kerpal]

The perfect standard lens..? Depends on what I am doing. I use full frame. Some thoughts are below:

Street photography: Tend towards 50mm f/1.4 prime or 16-35mm f/2.8 L MK II
Portraits: 85mm f/1.2 L MK II
Weddings: 50mm f/1.4 or 24-70mm f/2.8 L on one body 70-200 f/2.8 L IS on the other. 16-35mm for groups.
Landscapes: 16-35mm f/2.8 L MK II
Fashion/Editorial: 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.2
Still Life: 105mm f/2.8 macro

If you mean a perfect normal lens then I'd say anything from 35mm to 50mm on full frame.

Now this is indeed perfect

[Liz]

I recently purchased the 28mm/f1.8 and I really like it. It's sharp - and the color rendition is good. I sold my heavier lenses (except for the 17-40) due to back problems. At any rate, I got the 28mm for indoor and/or small groups. It works like a charm. I also have the 50mm/f1.4 which is one of my favorites.

Nice shots btw.

Liz

[drg]

Another serious contender for non-full frame sensor Canon D-SLR's is the 35mm F2 if one is considering fixed focal length. It generally makes better pictures for most uses than the 28mm F1.8. It also is lighter weight.

A real light catcher in the in the sub 30mm focal length are the three (20, 24, 28) F1.8 lens from Sigma. They are not as sharp wide open but by F5.6 or so they compete nicely and are even closer focusing Macros as I recall. I've a 28mm F1.8 that I've use on my EOS 1-v (film) as well as on various D-SLR's with great success. They are big lenses be forwarned with 77mm filters (or an 82 I think with the 20mm)

The best thing about various 20something to 70something zooms in constant 2.8 varieties is that you are not changing lenses all the time and introducing dust. As the sensor cleaning technology becomes more widespread this will admittedly be less important.

Low light characteristics of the lens aside, higher ISO w/lower noise is beginning to overcome the need for that tiny fraction of stop. Combined with more and more units having IS (such as the new EF-S 18-55IS)the big light catchers are not as needed.

Bang for the buck is a 50mm. Works with film or digital. With the Canon lens 1.8, 1.4, or 1.2 doesn't matter for MOST users. That includes most of the pros I know. The 1.8 is noisy and slow to focus under some circumstances. It makes great pics!

The 50/1.8 is perhaps the best and most useful body cap made!

[readingr]

My standard lens is the 24-70 F2.8L which is on the camera most of the time. Unlike most people my zoom is used to compose the pic and the zoom varies a lot but would probably be 24/35/45-55/ 60/70 with the 45-55 range used a lot. Perhaps its because of my film days where the 50mm was always on the camera.

My other lens which is purely used for nature at the moment is the 100-400 F4.5 L IS, but not used that often.

Plan is to get a 50mm F1.8/1.4 lens to complement the rest of the kit

Camera is the 5D.

Roger

[Loupey]

Low light characteristics of the lens aside, higher ISO w/lower noise is beginning to overcome the need for that tiny fraction of stop. Combined with more and more units having IS (such as the new EF-S 18-55IS)the big light catchers are not as needed...

The 50/1.8 is perhaps the best and most useful body cap made!

I agree that the low noise of future sensors will probably render practically ALL lenses fast enough.

I have the 50mm but I find it too long on my 30D and 10D - especially at indoor parties and such. I keep finding myself trying to back up all the time. Probably comes from the fact that I came from the 35mm film camp which considered the slightly wider 35mm as "standard" as opposed to the 50mm camp

Last examples with this 28mm lens. Of course I would have to throw in a macro shot with it (at minimum focus at less than a foot).

[readingr]

I agree that the low noise of future sensors will probably render practically ALL lenses fast enough.

I have the 50mm but I find it too long on my 30D and 10D - especially at indoor parties and such. I keep finding myself trying to back up all the time. Probably comes from the fact that I came from the 35mm film camp which considered the slightly wider 35mm as "standard" as opposed to the 50mm camp

Last examples with this 28mm lens. Of course I would have to throw in a macro shot with it (at minimum focus at less than a foot).

Totally disagree the F1.4 has exceptional DOF and will therefore never disappear regardless of the lack of noise from the sensor.

Roger