Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM vs Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens Comparison

When Canon introduced their new Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM lens it was inevitable that it would be compared to the original Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM lens that has been around for years. The original 28mm f/1.8 lens was generally pretty well regarded but a common wish list item was for image stabilization. With the new 28mm f/2.8 lens users got their wish, but they lose some light with the slower f/2.8 vs f/1.8 aperture. In this article we take a look at the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM vs Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM lenses and how they compare side-by-side.

The lenses are pretty close in size with the newer f/2.8 lens coming in slightly smaller and lighter than the f/1.8 version. However, that is to be expected since the f/1.8 needs more glass to let in 2/3-stop more light. However, some of the size and weight savings are offset by the addition of the image stabilizer in the newer f/2.8 lens.

Neither lens includes a lens shade as is typical from Canon non “L” series lenses. Both lenses do feature distance scales with hyperfocal distance although the original f/1.8 has markings for f/22, f/16, f/11 and f/8 while the newer f/2.8 lens only shows markings for f/22 and f/11. Both lenses have the infrared focus indicator as well.

As far as overall build quality, both lenses feel very similar in hand. The newer f/2.8 focus ring felt a tad smoother, but both lenses focuses smoothly and accurately.

The 28mm focal length is well suited for landscapes, indoor architecture, weddings, concerts (up close) and other events. Thanks to the small and lightweight size of these lenses, they make for a great travel/backpacking option when you want to go light. Throw int he 40mm pancake and the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM II lens and you have a 3 lens kit that gives you excellent coverage without breaking your back or the bank.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM vs Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM lenses – the images have been scaled (as best as possible) to match their size relative to each other: