Canon RF 28mm f/2.8 STM : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Andrea874849

sent on 15 Marzo 2026

Pros: Weight, size, sharpness

Cons: For what it costs no one

Opinion: I bought this lens almost for fun, to complement the various zooms that already included this focal length. I was positively impressed by the sharpness of the images and the speed of the autofocus, also considering the price range (especially in the used one) and use (amateur / advanced amateur, but not L series). In addition, the dimensions also make the R6 a light and inconspicuous car even for street riding in the city. Super recommended!

Peppe Cancellieri

sent on 21 Agosto 2025

Pros: Dimensions

Cons: Nothing

Opinion: If I spend less than 300 euros for a 28mm/2.8 I don't expect the moon but this is a good lens and the only one (at the moment) that transforms an R6 or (even better) an RP into a compact but still FF. The focus is in line with the STM system and the sharpness is good even at full aperture and excellent when closing down a little. On the road with an RF 16mm/2.8 and RF 50mm/1.8 it's a treat.

Lorenzobusetto

sent on 29 Aprile 2025

Pros: Size, Speed, Brightness all

Cons: maybe the parasol is missing...

Opinion: I mounted the 28th on my brand new R6II and for a whole week of travel to London (without work commitments) I never took it off... I didn't really feel the need for anything else. Very fast, he does his job and he does it very well. The super small size makes it really good even for street music.

Ale Z

sent on 27 Marzo 2025

Pros: Excellent optical quality; lightness; extreme compactness; Control Ring

Cons: There is no weather sealing, but from this level it is normal.

Opinion: I've owned it for some time now and so I think I can express my opinion. I am really satisfied with this perspective from all points of view. You buy it first of all for its lightness and compactness: mounted on the Canon R, it fits in the pocket of your jacket. This being so inconspicuous makes it interesting in situations where you don't have to be very intrusive, such as in the street. The optical quality is very high in terms of resolution up to the corners, already at TA and constant up to f/8. Distortion and vignetting are present but it is known that this generation of lenses was created to be corrected via software which in this case corrects very well. See the review of Optical Limits. The presence of the programmable ring nut is also very interesting despite the compact size of the whole. The final grade, considering the sense of such a compact lens in the RF optics park, is a nice 10.

Matteod88

sent on 11 Febbraio 2025

Pros: Tiny, fast and crisp

Cons: few, perhaps the lack of stabilization

Opinion: It is a more than honest lens in all its characteristics but its strength is undoubtedly the very small footprint. Little more than a cork.. I mainly took it as a "backup" lens to have in my bag in case the all-rounder zoom broke when I'm away for work, and luckily I never had to use it. So I loved it for light outputs on the RF (almost pocket-sized pair) and video on the R6, I would say excellent, it never disappoints. Maybe a bit expensive as much as I paid for it (more than 400 as soon as it came out).

Sirovai

sent on 25 Ottobre 2024

Pros: Small, light, razor-sharp, fast AF

Cons: 7 blades, nervous bokeh

Opinion: By now together with my R8 I carry him and the 35. In this way I cover all situations both in terms of light and setting. When I'm with friends and family I wear the 28mm because I think as a focal length it is more suitable for conveying a sense of intimacy. Performance is excellent already at f2.8. The bokeh is a bit jittery with difficult backgrounds, I think because of the 7 blades. Apart from that, a very good lens, to have.

Valerio Tagliabue

sent on 06 Giugno 2024

Pros: Small, well built, sharp, great colors, very little flare.

Cons: nobody

Opinion: Tried in various situations by now, we must commend Canon for the realization of this small lens. Also tested with the R5 it solves it very well. For street photography, combined with auto AF with subject recognition, it's perfect (with the R8 it also fits in a pocket). You can also easily take selfies since it is so small. I also took away the satisfaction of trying it alongside other much more famous and expensive 28mm and I must say that the result really surprised me in a positive way. The colors are excellent even against the light. The three-dimensionality of the image returned is good. Also interesting is the AF-MF-CONTROL lever that allows you to keep all the functions of the ring in a very small space. So for me, considering everything, since I could never have expected more, I rate 10.

Edobette

sent on 11 Marzo 2024

Pros: Compact, crisp, properly built.

Cons: Not received

Opinion: 28mm is my favorite focal length. With the RP it's a "Street Fighter" pairing. You go completely unnoticed. Very light and very compact, it reminds me a lot of the EF 40 f/2.8 STM, another gem. Canon colors and sharpness even at f/2.8. Slow AF? I don't think so. However, in the street I use the hyperfocal. Combined with RP or R8, it's a best buy.

Giallo63

sent on 29 Settembre 2023

Pros: Compact and lightweight; Medium diaphragm resolving power - minimum M.A.F. distance - 3 control/fire ring modes

Cons: A bit of flare - af not lightning fast - unobtainable hood - not stabilized (but what do we want, then?)

Opinion: Among the Canon "not L" vulgarly defined "povery", I think that this 28 pancakes is the one that best competes - at least, in terms of sharpness - with the most famous brothers with the red line. Always waiting confidently for a wide series with fixed focal length, however, I believe that the most appropriate quality comparison term for Canon's wide-angle is the RF 15-35 / 2.8 L IS: the performance of the professional zoom compared to the various fixed wide non-L (35, 28, 24, 16) at focal length 28 are in my opinion equaled by the very small pancake, to intermediate diaphragms (f:5,6-8). Everyone else gives way, albeit with dignity. Beyond the first home tests, I took it with me on several South Tyrolean walks, obtaining respectable results that did not make me regret having left the aforementioned L zoom in the hotel. Of course, I operated in ideal conditions, beautiful days, clear atmosphere, and of course I tried to keep the front lens in the shade, exposed and without an untraceable hood that exists only in the Canon price list. But this little guy turns the R5 into a "compact" without the demanding 45mpxl sensor highlighting qualitative limits of the optics that, in those circumstances, are not there. Excellent results. Different is the case at the most open apertures (2.8-4) in which the lens continues to behave very well, but does not remain at the level of 15-35L, at least at the edges of the format of an R5 file. Probably a lower resolution (20-24mpxl, maybe even 30) would not allow to perceive the slight peripheral drop. In the backlight you have to be rather careful, both for the absence of the hood, and because, given the structure of the lens, the front lens is very exposed and inevitably some phenomenon of flare (halos) occurs, even if the general contrast remains good. That on such a lens lacks a stabilization system I do not see it as a problem, because it is part of the game: a one-ounce wide-angle with L-series performance cannot also have the stabilizer: either it becomes bigger and heavier (and expensive) or it remains what the designer wanted to offer. Distortion and fall of light at the edges: usual speech. These RFs are lenses born for digital, designed ab origine according to ex post corrections. Does the game work? Yes, and very well. It is more a mental annoyance to think that "but if there was no sw downstream it would suck". I, although an old film who loves old-fashioned optics, I made up for it. And then, here too: I think there is a gradualness in the compromise optical correction / electronic correction. With 16/2.8 this compromise leans "a lot" on the second, with 50/1.2L hangs almost everything on the first. Yet the 16/2.8 does more than well and allows you to have a light and cheap bright superwide. And how does our 28/2.8 fit into this "philosophy"? I think it is the most correct "of its own" of the group formed by 50/1,8-35/1,8-28/2,8-24/1,8-16/2,8. I have them all and it seems to me so, which does not mean that the fw / sw intervention is not there: it is simply not felt, and the results, even if in the optimal conditions described above, are extremely convincing.