May 22, 2013, 03:42:20 AM

Poll

Which lens to add to my kit for the China & Japan trip

24mm f/1.4L II
35mm f/1.4L
50mm f/1.2L (replaces 50mm f/1.4)
16-35mm f/2.8L II

Author Topic: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II  (Read 7036 times)

Reid_design

  • PowerShot G15
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« on: April 15, 2012, 10:02:15 PM »
I'm currently thinking of divesting my 50mm f/1.4 for a higher quality lens. The 28-300mm covers a lot of lenses, and is great for travel but i need something with a lower f/ value for low light and nice bokah.

I do take a lot of portraiture, and the 50mm is great for that. I'm also considering the 85mm f/1.2 L II USM, and the 50mm f/1.2L...

I'm going on a three week trip in china and japan and am thinking of upgrading before then...

Whats your take?
5D Mk III, 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

canon rumors FORUM

16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« on: April 15, 2012, 10:02:15 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 8630
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2012, 11:15:21 PM »
I got lots of use from my 35L in China - it's a great nighttime walkaround lens.  I find 24mm often a bit too wide for people shooting (except groups).  The 85L is excellent for portrait sessions but less so for candids - AF is quite slow, IMO.  My most recent trip, my 'travel kit' was a gripped 5DII, 28-300L, 35L, and 135L - that was a great and versatile combo, packed well in a Lowepro Flipside 300.
EOS 1D X, EOS 7D, and lots of lenses
_____________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

mr.ranger

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 57
  • live life to the fullest
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2012, 03:03:01 AM »
i wouldn't go for the 50L although yes it does have better weather sealing and quieter auto focus but over all the 50mm 1.4 has better sharpness. have you thought about the 24-104L?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-50mm-f-1.2-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Canon 60D+Battery Grip, EF-S 60mm USM Macro, EF-S 18-135mm IS, EF 70- 300mm USM IS L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/heras_photography/

keithinmelbourne

  • PowerShot G15
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
    • keithbroadphotography.com
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2012, 04:57:00 AM »
The 50L is a great all-rounder, but so too is the 35L. If I was in your position and could only buy one lens for travel I would probably go for the 35L. It's wide enough to work in tight areas and provides very nice bokeh. I took one to Vietnam and found it to be very versatile, particularly for street portraits. I would steer clear of the 85L, as it really isn't a street lens (the 85 f1.8, however, is very good for this purpose).
"Everyday is a good day" - Yunmen

1Ds3, 17-40L, 17 TSE, 24LII, 24 TSE, 24-105L, 35L, 50L, 85 1.8, 85LII, 100 2.8, 135L, 70-200 f4L, OMD EM-5, 12 f2, 25 f1.4, 45 f1.8

neuroanatomist

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 8630
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2012, 10:47:57 AM »
Street shooting with the 35L in Nanjing and Gunagzhou:


EOS 5D Mark II, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, 1/20 s, f/5, ISO 3200


EOS 5D Mark II, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, 1/50 s, f/2, ISO 200


EOS 5D Mark II, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, 2.5 s, f/5.6, ISO 100
EOS 1D X, EOS 7D, and lots of lenses
_____________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Matthew19

  • PowerShot G15
  • **
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2012, 03:57:29 AM »
35mm is such a cool focal length. I own the 35L as well as the 50L and 50 1.4. The 50L has a nicer bokeh than the 1.4 and feels better. Its a bit sharper below f2.8 than the 1.4 lens but after that the 1.4 is better. I have a love hate with the 16-35mm II. It has some serious distortion between 16-24mm, mine looks soft in the corners below f/4 as well. But that 16mm can produce some cool landscapes. If you want lowlight though, I'd go 24mm 1.4

Random Orbits

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 661
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2012, 08:15:47 AM »
35mm is such a cool focal length. I own the 35L as well as the 50L and 50 1.4. The 50L has a nicer bokeh than the 1.4 and feels better. Its a bit sharper below f2.8 than the 1.4 lens but after that the 1.4 is better. I have a love hate with the 16-35mm II. It has some serious distortion between 16-24mm, mine looks soft in the corners below f/4 as well. But that 16mm can produce some cool landscapes. If you want lowlight though, I'd go 24mm 1.4

+1.  Love the 35L on a crop body and love the 50L on a FF.  My 35L does better with closer subjects because it has a shorter MFD.

It seems to me that you are actually asking two questions:
1.  Which is a better wide angle option:  16-35L or 24L?  I'd suggest the 16-35L to complement your 28-300L better for your trip.  The 24L is a great lens, but there are so many options at 24mm (wide angle zoom, mid range zoom, prime, tilt shift, etc) that the focal length is easy to cover.
2.  Which is a better portrait lens:  50L or 85L?  If your 50 f/1.4 works well for you wide open, keep the 50 f/1.4 and add the 85L.  It'll give you more flexibility.  If the reason you're considering selling your 50 f/1.4 is because it doesn't perform as well as you'd like wide open, then it'd make sense to replace it with the 50L if it is your preferred portrait focal length.

If you are able to afford only 1 lens at this time, I'd opt for the 16-35L assuming that you're satisfied with the 50 f/1.4  If you're not satisfied with the 50 f/1.4, then I'd get the 50L or 85L first.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2012, 08:15:47 AM »

prestonpalmer

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
    • Wedding Photography
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2012, 04:50:42 PM »
I have both the 16-35mm f/2.8 II and the 24mm f/1.4L II.  I use the 16-35 ten to one over the 24 1.4  It obviously depends on what you are doing.  For me the 16-35 is on my camera more than most my other lenses combined!  Its a fantastic lens.  the 24 is always in my bag, but I defiantly lean to the 16-35
~Preston Palmer
MN Wedding Photographer
http://www.brovadoweddings.com

photophreek

  • Guest
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2012, 05:51:24 PM »
Preston:

I looked at your site and I have to say your are a gifted photographer to have such vision and be able to transfer that vision into photographs. 

Well done!! 

You must be busy.

Sorry for hijacking the thread.   :-\

cpsico

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 187
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2012, 06:10:04 PM »
Is the classic versatility versus sharpest IQ, i love my 16-35II if it helps. It is crazy wide on a full frame and excellent between 20-30

prestonpalmer

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
    • Wedding Photography
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2012, 06:32:46 PM »
Preston:

I looked at your site and I have to say your are a gifted photographer to have such vision and be able to transfer that vision into photographs. 

Well done!! 

You must be busy.

Sorry for hijacking the thread.   :-\

Thank you.  And yes. VERY busy.  We are in Hawaii till the end of May :)
~Preston Palmer
MN Wedding Photographer
http://www.brovadoweddings.com

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1239
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #11 on: April 17, 2012, 07:11:56 PM »
My vote wo uld be for a 35 as well.  I agree with neuro that the 24 is too wide for portrait and i would not use it as a trip lens.  I mostly use it for group or family event photo plus video shooting.  That said, the 50 mm or 35 are better suited for walkaround prime, or the zoom you mentionned.  Good luck.
1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, 24 1.4G, 35 1.4G, 50 1.4G, 85 1.4G, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 VR II

Caps18

  • EOS M
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #12 on: April 17, 2012, 10:10:37 PM »
The 16-35mm is on my camera the most, but it is because it is easy.

I 'might' have gone with the 17 TS-E, 24mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.2 and the 85mm f/1.8 if I had it all to do over again.  And if I had to have the same budget, I would swap the 24 f/1.4 for the 17mm TS-E with 1.4x.  The only problem with the TS-E is the lack of auto focus and high f/4+.

Anyways, the 24mm would be too limiting for my tastes after using the 16-35.  I'm sure it is a great lens, but I am too used to being able to zoom out, or zoom in (I do with it was a 16-50 though).
5D mark 2, 16-35mm f/2.8, 17mm TS-E f/4, 85mm f/1.8, 300mm f/4 + 1.4x, 580 EX Flash

birdman

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #13 on: April 18, 2012, 10:10:13 AM »
35L all the way.

If you need wider 16-35 or 17-40. At 40mm, the 17-40 is pretty decent stopped down.
5d2; 17-40L; 35L; 50/1.8 Mk. 1; 70-300 IS; 100mm/2.8

Reid_design

  • PowerShot G15
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2012, 11:11:15 AM »
Its interesting to me that there are NO votes for the 24mm.... very interesting..

I think I'm going to go with the 16-35mm though, and hold onto my 50mm f/1.4 for this trip. I also think i will pick up the new flash and perhaps the battery grip as well..


Thanks guys!
5D Mk III, 16-35mm f/2.8 L II USM, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2012, 11:11:15 AM »