October 23, 2014, 05:48:54 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 10829 times)

Reid_design

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #15 on: April 20, 2012, 11:14:12 AM »
An interesting comment made by one of my friends, should I perhaps wait until i'm in Japan to buy some of the gear? Will it be any cheaper over there?

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 #15 on: April 20, 2012, 11:14:12 AM »

KreutzerPhotography

  • Guest
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2012, 09:46:31 PM »
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!

I am heading to costa rica over the summer and will NOT be bringing my grip. I will bring several batteries and 2 lenses. I am hiling/camping for almost a week so the smaller the better. I ALWAYS have a grip when shooting around town but think it makes the camera to combersome for a trip. Especially if photography is the main purpose of the trip. I would leave the grip at home and grab another lens.

I am bringing my 50d
16-35mm
70-200mm and some weather proofing (ie. plastic bags)

The grip is your choise but I would leave it at home. More cons than pros in my opinion...

Reid_design

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #17 on: April 22, 2012, 01:31:15 PM »
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!

I am heading to costa rica over the summer and will NOT be bringing my grip. I will bring several batteries and 2 lenses. I am hiling/camping for almost a week so the smaller the better. I ALWAYS have a grip when shooting around town but think it makes the camera to combersome for a trip. Especially if photography is the main purpose of the trip. I would leave the grip at home and grab another lens.

I am bringing my 50d
16-35mm
70-200mm and some weather proofing (ie. plastic bags)

The grip is your choise but I would leave it at home. More cons than pros in my opinion...

I think you've raised a very interesting point and its definitely going to come into play for me. I've always shot without a grip but i just thought it would be a nice addition since i shoot a lot of portraiture.

Why do you bring plastic bags for waterproofing? the 16-35mm L and the 70-200mm L are both water resistant no?

Thanks !!
Peter
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

helpful

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
  • Ecclesiastes 3:11
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #18 on: April 22, 2012, 06:15:19 PM »
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!

That's interesting to me, too. I honestly did not vote yet in this poll although I read it. And I would have recommended the 16-35mm II for you over the 24mm f/1.4L II.

However, the odd thing for me is that I own both lenses, and I almost always leave the 16-35mm at home in favor of the 24mm f/1.4L II. It's the perfect lens for my needs in dark conditions at events or turning around and getting crowd shots at games. For those needs the 24mm focal length is just right because it gets enough in the frame without being so wide-angle that the subjects are too small. A common practice with the 16-35mm lens is to use it at the widest end for cases such as mine, and I tend to do that, too. (For grab shots there usually isn't time to think and zoom, especially when catching a fleeting expression on the front row of the crowd, so the widest angle gives the best chance for catching it all.) But after a year or so I realized that 24mm was really the ideal focal length for grab shots that I wanted, and I get two extra stops of aperture as well, and a definite increase in sharpness at any equivalent aperture.

That's my two cents. I can't honestly define why I don't use the 16-35mm more in my own photography, and I would still recommend it as more versatile, although somehow for me the 24mm has become my "right-hand man" and go-to wide-angle lens. And so much so that if I were going to China and Japan right now, I would feel much more comfortable taking the 24mm f/1.4L II and leaving behind the 16-35mm II, and I would feel very ill at ease without the 24mm f/1.4L II no matter what other lenses I had in its place.

Does anyone else find the 24mm f/1.4L II so useful and versatile in their everyday photography?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2012, 06:20:39 PM by helpful »
5DIII, 5DII, 7D x5, 6D, T2i, T3, 1D X, 10-22mm, 16-35mm II, 18-55mm II, 18-135mm IS x2, 70-200mm f/2.8L II, 24mm f/1.4L II, 50mm f/1.4, 50mm 1/1.8 II x2, 85mm f/1.8 x2, 100mm f/2 x2, 135mm f/2L x2, 200mm f/2.8L II x2, 1.4X III, 2.0X II, 60mm f/2.8 Macro, etc. only had room to list a few Canon items

squarebox

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #19 on: April 22, 2012, 07:51:27 PM »
An interesting comment made by one of my friends, should I perhaps wait until i'm in Japan to buy some of the gear? Will it be any cheaper over there?

If you are coming from Europe, it might be slightly cheaper here in Japan.  If you are coming from the U.S./Canada it will be SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper there.  Let's put it this way, when I bought my 35L last Dec., I saved about $600 by buying it at B&H and having it shipped over. 

If you are buying new stuff though, the gap isn't as large.  The 600ex-rt i picked up for $600 USD, the 5D3 is $3900, and the 24-80mk2 is $2350. 

Thing about Japan is that there is very little consumer protectionism here tied with Oligopolies that prices are stupid high here for Made in Japan goods.  It is much much cheaper to buy any Japanese goods over in the states for cheaper.  Now, I think the perception of Japan being cheaper than the U.S. was back when the exchange rate was 130-150 yen to the dollar up until 5 years ago.
5Dmk3 - 16-35L - 24-105L - 70-200L F2.8 mk2 - 35L - 50mm 1.4 - 100L - 600xt-rt

KreutzerPhotography

  • Guest
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2012, 05:59:00 PM »
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!

I am heading to costa rica over the summer and will NOT be bringing my grip. I will bring several batteries and 2 lenses. I am hiling/camping for almost a week so the smaller the better. I ALWAYS have a grip when shooting around town but think it makes the camera to combersome for a trip. Especially if photography is the main purpose of the trip. I would leave the grip at home and grab another lens.

I am bringing my 50d
16-35mm
70-200mm and some weather proofing (ie. plastic bags)

The grip is your choise but I would leave it at home. More cons than pros in my opinion...

I think you've raised a very interesting point and its definitely going to come into play for me. I've always shot without a grip but i just thought it would be a nice addition since i shoot a lot of portraiture.

Why do you bring plastic bags for waterproofing? the 16-35mm L and the 70-200mm L are both water resistant no?

Thanks !!
Peter

Im goin to Costa Rica in the rainy season with a 50d body. which is only SEMI waterresistant. and I just dont want to chance it... but yes the lenses are bothe water resistant...

Reid_design

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2012, 05:26:02 PM »
I just wanted to say thank you to all who participated in this forum... I decided to go with the majority and get the 16-35mm f/2.8L II .... and what a beauty. Can't wait for this trip. I also bought a gorillapod to take with me. Its going to be an amazing trip and ill for sure post some pics here for you all upon return.

Also, the potential for the 35mm to be updated as well as the 85 due to recent rumours helped me along with my decision since the 16-35 is such a new lens!

Bon shooting!
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 #21 on: April 24, 2012, 05:26:02 PM »

rambarra

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2012, 05:53:52 PM »
you made a misshtake. the zeiss 21 was the lens you needed. so sad
r


« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 05:59:37 PM by rambarra »

Caps18

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2012, 06:01:23 PM »
The Zeiss 21mm is still f/2.8...  I would like something f/2 and below if I am going with a prime (besides the 17mm TS-E).

21mm is a good focal length, but there are some places where even 16mm isn't wide enough.
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

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 16-35mm f/2.8 II vs 24mm f/1.4L II
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2012, 06:01:23 PM »