September 01, 2014, 04:01:44 AM

Author Topic: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3  (Read 6021 times)

IIIHobbs

  • Guest
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2012, 02:23:12 PM »
I do have the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
It is very useful to get rid of these converging verticals if you are into architecture (including shooting archaelogical places). Up to now I have not used the tilt feature.
In addition it is very sharp with practically no vignetting.
So if someone has no need of very open apertures and does not care of AF the TS-E is much better value for money

Appreciate the recommendation for the TS Lens, I recognize that they are very good at what they do. As for the comment about "better  value" I do not get it.

  • The 24 f1.4 is $1600, the 24TS f3.5 is $2000.
  • The 24TS f3.5 is very sharp with practically no vignetting, the 24 f1.4 shot at 3.5 is amazingly sharp with practically no vignetting.

I have the 24 f1.4 in hand at the moment and will be testing this weekend. Initial feel and few shots I took right out of the box at 11P last night were, very impressive to say the least.

After the unboxing last night I am still confident that the 24 f1.4 is going to end up replacing my 16-35 f2.8II; so much so that I already took the photos for the eBay listing of the 16-35 f2.8II. We shall soon see.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2012, 02:23:12 PM »

Daniel Flather

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 851
    • View Profile
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2012, 01:57:04 AM »
The 24 and it's shallow depth of field and wide perspective render a unique image, I recemond it.
| 5D3 | 8-15L | 24L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 100 macro | 200/2L | EOS M | 22 STM |

risc32

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 462
    • View Profile
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2012, 09:06:11 PM »
Why can't the TS lenses be a good value? The other day someone mentioned the 85L as a good value. Sure, you're looking into the 24mm1.4 so i'll suggest you get a lens with no AF, tilt-shift movements, and some 40 or so % higher price. yeah your welcome! Either there are lots of loons lurking this site, or they are actually just Canon employees.  BTW- I do understand that TS lenses have their place and to some they might be a good value. I don't need anyone trying to take me behind the woodshed.

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2563
    • View Profile
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #18 on: July 01, 2012, 01:14:01 AM »
Because the TS lens is more than the 24L and the 24L is sharp at f/1.4.  Why would I need a TS lens for indoor family shots and indoor family video?  That's why it's not a good value, for the OP.  For landscape and architecture, you better believe it's a good value.  Some part of value has to be based upon need.  The 24-70L II can be a good value, but I already own the 16-35L II, 24L, 35L, 50L, 50 1.4, 50 1.8.  I'm sure it's a great lens, but has no value to me.  Anyways, I recommend, highly, the 24 f/1.4L II to the OP.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

IIIHobbs

  • Guest
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2012, 07:38:11 AM »
The results from the weekend were very positive, I also love the look and feel of the 24 f1.4, this is the right replacement for my 16-35 f2.8.

Having already replaced my 70-200 zoom with a prime, I am still getting use to sneaker-zoom, but the photographic results continue to be much better than expected; I am very happy with the primes.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 07:41:07 AM by IIIHobbs »

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1816
    • View Profile
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2012, 08:17:16 AM »
I do have the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
It is very useful to get rid of these converging verticals if you are into architecture (including shooting archaelogical places). Up to now I have not used the tilt feature.
In addition it is very sharp with practically no vignetting.
So if someone has no need of very open apertures and does not care of AF the TS-E is much better value for money

Appreciate the recommendation for the TS Lens, I recognize that they are very good at what they do. As for the comment about "better  value" I do not get it.

  • The 24 f1.4 is $1600, the 24TS f3.5 is $2000.
  • The 24TS f3.5 is very sharp with practically no vignetting, the 24 f1.4 shot at 3.5 is amazingly sharp with practically no vignetting.

I have the 24 f1.4 in hand at the moment and will be testing this weekend. Initial feel and few shots I took right out of the box at 11P last night were, very impressive to say the least.

After the unboxing last night I am still confident that the 24 f1.4 is going to end up replacing my 16-35 f2.8II; so much so that I already took the photos for the eBay listing of the 16-35 f2.8II. We shall soon see.
it all depends on whether you need the 24mm at 1.4 to 2 often (and in that cases it will not be extra sharp and without vignetting...) vs. the 24mm with the capability to correct converging verticals (this is my mostly used application), stiching, and tilting.

If your needs fall in the first case very well you have made the best choice. If your needs fall in the second case now or in the future you will have to pay 2000 in addition to the 1600 you paid now...

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1816
    • View Profile
Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2012, 08:20:33 AM »
I do have the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
It is very useful to get rid of these converging verticals if you are into architecture (including shooting archaelogical places). Up to now I have not used the tilt feature.
In addition it is very sharp with practically no vignetting.
So if someone has no need of very open apertures and does not care of AF the TS-E is much better value for money

Appreciate the recommendation for the TS Lens, I recognize that they are very good at what they do. As for the comment about "better  value" I do not get it.

  • The 24 f1.4 is $1600, the 24TS f3.5 is $2000.
  • The 24TS f3.5 is very sharp with practically no vignetting, the 24 f1.4 shot at 3.5 is amazingly sharp with practically no vignetting.

I have the 24 f1.4 in hand at the moment and will be testing this weekend. Initial feel and few shots I took right out of the box at 11P last night were, very impressive to say the least.

After the unboxing last night I am still confident that the 24 f1.4 is going to end up replacing my 16-35 f2.8II; so much so that I already took the photos for the eBay listing of the 16-35 f2.8II. We shall soon see.
it all depends on whether you need the 24mm at 1.4 to 2 often (and in that cases it will not be extra sharp and without vignetting...) vs. the 24mm with the capability to correct converging verticals (this is my mostly used application), stiching, and tilting.

If your needs fall in the first case very well you have made the best choice. If your needs fall in the second case now or in the future you will have to pay 2000 in addition to the 1600 you paid now...

That being said Iwould be interested in 24mm 1.4L II if it had less vignetting wide open (for astrophotography). I do not like the idea to have to correct that much vignetting in PP. Maybe the next (III) version...   ;)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Swap 16-35 f2.8 II for 24 f1.4 II on 5D3
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2012, 08:20:33 AM »