April 21, 2014, 04:43:22 AM

Author Topic: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II  (Read 11422 times)

JVLphoto

  • Administrator
  • EOS M2
  • *****
  • Posts: 218
  • Whatever clicks
    • View Profile
    • JVLphoto
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #30 on: March 23, 2013, 10:45:26 AM »
So it's unclear from the review if the reviewer really likes his focal length on the cropped frame 7D used for all the shots shown in the review or for full frame body. Certainly there are lots of people who love the 35L on a full frame body so I old suspect users of the 24L II will love it on 7D. I have the 24L II, 35L, and 24-70L II, and the TS-E 24L II and find the 24L II doesn't get on my camera. 24-70L II for general use and in events with and without a flash. 35L for low light down to F/1.4, TSE for architecture mostly with a tripod.   Steve

I did like it on the 7D, I had actually forgot how much until I looked back at the images I shot with it.  In fact, I might have liked the tighter framing a crop sensor buys me. On full frame, I'm partial to 35mm lenses, and this makes sense in this context. As CRguy mentioned in his intro, it's a great lens on all camera formats. Obviously you take full advantage of it on a FF camera, but I was able to get some great results on crop too.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #30 on: March 23, 2013, 10:45:26 AM »

RS2021

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 720
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #31 on: March 23, 2013, 11:15:45 AM »
On full frame, I'm partial to 35mm lenses, and this makes sense in this context.

Yup, 35mm is a lot more versatile on Full Frame...as the 24mm becomes a ~38mm FOV on the crop sensor it finds more use on the crop.

But on a FF, 24mm is a tad more of a specialized lens...it works best for outdoor portraits and groups etc IMHO...for indoors low light I prefer the 35mm as it provides better control of the framing...when the 24mm is used for typical  indoor shots, you get unwanted items on the borders of the frame... furniture, window sills, ceilings.

Yes, you can always crop, then why not just use a straight 35mm or a 50mm instead? :)

As CRguy mentioned in his intro, it's a great lens on all camera formats. Obviously you take full advantage of it on a FF camera, but I was able to get some great results on crop too.

Now JVL, you are just trying to get in a few nice things to say to be PC in the review.  ;D

I dont' dislike the 24mm actually, I just think it is really a niche lens for "most" users. If it is landscape, I will rather use a TSE or even the UWA zoom.
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” - Henri Cartier-Bresson

hammar

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 51
    • View Profile
    • Erik Hammar
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #32 on: March 23, 2013, 12:57:29 PM »
I use my 24/1.4 II as my primary lens on my 5D3, and before that on my 5D2.

I use the 40/2.8 when I want something more narrow and the 70-200 f/4L IS for tele. Next purchase will definitively be 135/2.
blog.erikhammar.se
5D3, 24/1.4 II, 24-70/2.8 II, 40/2.8

ahsanford

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 513
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2013, 01:22:24 AM »

Good discussion all. I appreciate your comments!

Regarding usage of this lens, I find it odd that the 24L seems relegated to environmental portraiture, full body portraits, etc.  Would one not use this for landscape work?  I appreciate that the tilt-shift is preferred for some things (architecture comes to mind) but is the 24L II an underperformer when you stop it down for landscape work?  Is there another lens that is preferred to this (on FF) for landscape work?  Surely not the 16-35...  (-10 if you say the Nikon 14-24.)

I would never think to ask this for another ultra-wide aperture lens, like the 50L or 85L.  I honestly see those lenses as some form of troublesome prima donnas;  they seem to be used principally for what they can do that other lenses cant -- shooting between F/1.2 and perhaps F/2.

But a 24mm prime strikes me as (a) sharper than zooms (the impressive new 24-70 II notwithstanding) and (b) an ideal FOV for landscape work.

So talk me down -- if you're at a great natural vista, why wouldn't you use this lens?

I ask because I am considering a move away from zooms and selling my 24-70 F/2.8L Mk I for this 24 prime and likely the 50 F/2 IS that should come out this year.  Understand that I would use the 24 prime for the reasons discussed on this thread, but if it's not excellent for landscape work, I might switch to the 35L and the new 50 instead. 

Thoughts?

- A

Stickman

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2013, 01:48:08 AM »
I love my 24LII. I prefer it over the 35L.

That single picture said more to me than the actual review, thank you. 

TrumpetPower!

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 951
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2013, 10:26:40 AM »
So talk me down -- if you're at a great natural vista, why wouldn't you use this lens?

If it's what you've got in your bag, sure, of course, use it. And it'll just just fine.

But if you're looking to get a 24mm lens to shoot landscapes, the TS-E 24 outperforms the 24 f/1.4 by such a significant margin at that sort of thing that you'd be silly to get the 24 f/1.4.

And, similarly, if you're looking to do environmental portraiture...well, yes, the TS-E 24 can do that as well as the 24 f/1.4 can do landscapes, but the 24 f/1.4 is so much better than the TS-E 24 at environmental portraiture that you'd again be silly to get the TS-E 24 for environmental portraiture.

I'd even go so far as to suggest that, if you do a lot of both, you should have both lenses....

It's like choosing between a minivan and a pickup truck. Can you haul a bunch of stuff in a minivan? Sure, but would you really want to? And can you ferry a bunch of people in a pickup truck? Again, yes, but why?

Horses for courses and all that....

Cheers,

b&

Canon-F1

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 715
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2013, 03:01:32 PM »
personally, for landscapes, i would love slower but tack sharp and well corrected wideangle lenses.

why should i pay for f1.4 when i use it only at f5.6 and higher anyway.

a 14mm f4 as widest would be fine for me.
6D, 5D MK2, 7D, 550D... a lot of Glass.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2013, 03:01:32 PM »

bdunbar79

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2430
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #37 on: March 24, 2013, 03:33:35 PM »

Good discussion all. I appreciate your comments!

Regarding usage of this lens, I find it odd that the 24L seems relegated to environmental portraiture, full body portraits, etc.  Would one not use this for landscape work?  I appreciate that the tilt-shift is preferred for some things (architecture comes to mind) but is the 24L II an underperformer when you stop it down for landscape work?  Is there another lens that is preferred to this (on FF) for landscape work?  Surely not the 16-35...  (-10 if you say the Nikon 14-24.)

I would never think to ask this for another ultra-wide aperture lens, like the 50L or 85L.  I honestly see those lenses as some form of troublesome prima donnas;  they seem to be used principally for what they can do that other lenses cant -- shooting between F/1.2 and perhaps F/2.

But a 24mm prime strikes me as (a) sharper than zooms (the impressive new 24-70 II notwithstanding) and (b) an ideal FOV for landscape work.

So talk me down -- if you're at a great natural vista, why wouldn't you use this lens?

I ask because I am considering a move away from zooms and selling my 24-70 F/2.8L Mk I for this 24 prime and likely the 50 F/2 IS that should come out this year.  Understand that I would use the 24 prime for the reasons discussed on this thread, but if it's not excellent for landscape work, I might switch to the 35L and the new 50 instead. 

Thoughts?

- A

The 24L is not sharper than the new 24-70L II lens.  The zoom is sharper.  Only advantage is the prime can go wider, nothing else.

Standard

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #38 on: March 24, 2013, 04:23:13 PM »
Quote
The 24L is not sharper than the new 24-70L II lens.  The zoom is sharper.  Only advantage is the prime can go wider, nothing else.

Really? What are you basing this off? Your own experience or other reviews and tests you have read? Just curious.

bdunbar79

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2430
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #39 on: March 24, 2013, 04:27:41 PM »
Quote
The 24L is not sharper than the new 24-70L II lens.  The zoom is sharper.  Only advantage is the prime can go wider, nothing else.

Really? What are you basing this off? Your own experience or other reviews and tests you have read? Just curious.

Yes I own both.  It's not so dramatic with the 24L as it is with the 35L and 50L.  Sharpness only, the new zoom whips the 35L and 50L stopped down by enough that I sold both of them, but kept the 24L.  I still like the 24L for unique shooting wider than f/2.8 on a wide lens.  Love it.

Even though I hate charts, they do support my observations as well.

pefi

  • Guest
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #40 on: March 25, 2013, 07:36:16 PM »
Hey there,

are there any new on the Sigma version of the 1.4/24? Their 1.4/35 really convinced me.

-Peter

vlad

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #41 on: March 26, 2013, 02:55:58 PM »
Love my 24.  I actually tend to use the 16-35 II for shots like this due to flexibility, but when 24 is right, it's so right.


bdunbar79

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2430
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #42 on: March 26, 2013, 08:49:30 PM »
personally, for landscapes, i would love slower but tack sharp and well corrected wideangle lenses.

why should i pay for f1.4 when i use it only at f5.6 and higher anyway.

a 14mm f4 as widest would be fine for me.

True.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #42 on: March 26, 2013, 08:49:30 PM »

messus

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #43 on: March 30, 2013, 01:53:38 AM »
Justin "You are wrong about how good this lens is" - The 24 1.4 II is in desperate need for an upgrade!! This is not a lens you buy to stop down, this is a lens you buy to be able to use wide open in low lit conditions.

The vignetting I guess is something you to a certain degree must accept. But the level of Chromatic Aberration (purple fringe) this lens produces wide open is absolutely unacceptable.

The worst negative of this lens however is not the CA, but the coma distortion.

I work a lot in night/low light photography, and stars in the edges of this lens get distorted to the level that they look like "bananas". If you shoot wide open in contrasting light sources, eg. night photos of a city, the coma distortion in the edges is so bad that it is ridiculous!

A slight positive is that the 24mm 1.4 from Nikon is not any better. But that still does not mean that this lens from Canon is optically a good lens.

The Samyang 24mm 1.4 which I also own 2 samples of, may not be as sharp in the center as the Canon/Nikon 24, but it is virtually free of CA and coma distortion in the edges, and the Samyang even has more glass/lens elements!! Hence I more often tend to use my Samyang 24 than my Canon 24.

The Canon 24mm 1.4 II, as well as all other of Canons L wide angle primes (14mm 2.8 II/35mm 1.4/50mm 1.4/1.8/1.2) are in desperate need of upgrades! I wish Canon would start to prioritize the wide angle department, and not only focus on tele-lenses.

TWI by Dustin Abbott

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1473
    • View Profile
    • dustinabbott.net
Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2013, 10:25:58 AM »
personally, for landscapes, i would love slower but tack sharp and well corrected wideangle lenses.

why should i pay for f1.4 when i use it only at f5.6 and higher anyway.

a 14mm f4 as widest would be fine for me.


True.


If you don't mind manual focus, the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 is capable of stunning results at a bargain price.  This guy is using it VERY effectively!

http://500px.com/photo/29615393
6D x 2 | EOS-M w/22mm f/2 + 18-55 STM + EF Adapter| Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC | 35mm f/2 IS | 40mm f/2.8 | 100L | 135L | 70-300L -----OLD SCHOOL----- SMC Takumar 28mm f/3.5, Super Takumar 35mm f/3.5, SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8, Helios 44-2 and 44-4, Super Takumar 150mm f/4

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - EF 24 f/1.4L II
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2013, 10:25:58 AM »