24 f2.8 IS or 28 f2.8 IS ???

[Bohns]

Hello,

I would appreciate some user’s advices to choose a light go-to length for discretion, street photos, architecture, landscape.

I am FF (5D mark III), and already own 17-40, 24-105, 40 STM and 50f1.4. But I look for something wider than the 40, and more discrete than the L zooms.
I don’t consider the 35 f2 IS as being too close to the 40. I indeed hesitate between the 24 f2.8 IS and the 28 f2.8 IS. The pros of the one are the cons of the other.

My intention is indeed to have a very light kit with the wide prime, the 40 STM, and the 50 f1.4 for interior and low light.

Any insight ?

Thanks by advance.

 

[Zv]

Hello,

I would appreciate some user’s advices to choose a light go-to length for discretion, street photos, architecture, landscape.

I am FF (5D mark III), and already own 17-40, 24-105, 40 STM and 50f1.4. But I look for something wider than the 40, and more discrete than the L zooms.
I don’t consider the 35 f2 IS as being too close to the 40. I indeed hesitate between the 24 f2.8 IS and the 28 f2.8 IS. The pros of the one are the cons of the other.

My intention is indeed to have a very light kit with the wide prime, the 40 STM, and the 50 f1.4 for interior and low light.

Any insight ?

Thanks by advance.

For buildings wider is always better. That's my pref though, you might find 28mm is more suited to your style. Tbh there's not much between these two lenses. If I had to choose I'd get the 24mm and crop the image to suit.

I'm actually thinking of getting the 24IS myself for similar reasons.

 

[caMARYnon]

I had almost the same dilemma but finally: I got the 35 f2 IS for street, I sold the 40 (the colours are not excellent IMO, "only" 2.8 and no IS), I put first on my buying list the 24 IS and I am waiting for a new 50 in Canon's line.

 

[MintChocs]

I went through this process of being unsure which one to get. I bought the 28mm one because for me I thought it be better for group shots. I also use the lens and do a walk about for general street on a FF. Now that I've started using it I am glad I got this one as I feel the 24mm would have been too wide( I did have second thoughts even after I placed my order, it was not an easy decision as I paid full price). It's funny how those 4mm can make so much difference! Lol the only way to be sure is to buy one, use it and if you don't like it then sell it and get the other one.

 

[Bohns]

I had almost the same dilemma but finally: I got the 35 f2 IS for street, I sold the 40 (the colours are not excellent IMO, "only" 2.8 and no IS), I put first on my buying list the 24 IS and I am waiting for a new 50 in Canon's line.

I will NEVER sell my 40 STM ! It is probably the best quality/price ratio of Canon's EF lenses.

I fear the 24 to be too much distorted and too wide for people and portrait. But on the other hand, I don't know if the 28 will not be too narrow for some architecture and landscapes. Somewhat tricky… I don't want to buy both, and sometimes I wonder whether Canon's marketing did not choose those focals intentionally…

 

[Bohns]

I went through this process of being unsure which one to get. I bought the 28mm one because for me I thought it be better for group shots. I also use the lens and do a walk about for general street on a FF. Now that I've started using it I am glad I got this one as I feel the 24mm would have been too wide( I did have second thoughts even after I placed my order, it was not an easy decision as I paid full price). It's funny how those 4mm can make so much difference! Lol the only way to be sure is to buy one, use it and if you don't like it then sell it and get the other one.

Your current use seems to be very similar to the one I intend. And your experience basically confirms my primary intuition. I will probably move forward in buying the 28.
Thanks.

Any other experience or advise from anybody else ?

 

[Ruined]

While this seems a tough decision, it is fairly simple:

Question is, do you want the significantly increased, but also unique distortion of 24mm at the edges of the pic?

28mm is about the widest you can go without very obvious distortion (some might even say 35mm). Since you are doing group shots, I think 28mm is the correct decision because the 24mm would have introduced severe distortion on the edges.

24mm is fantastic for landscapes, not so great for people at edges of frame. I think you made the right choice, I would not go any wider than 28mm for group shots and even then you must be careful.

 

[CanonLITA]

It's funny how those 4mm can make so much difference!

Speaking of mm, those mere 4mm push you about 17% further into "tele" (or better, away from "wide"). In fact 28mm is midway between 24mm and 35mm (it's still closer to 24mm, but a 29mm lens would in turn be closer to 35mm, and would be further away from the middle than the 28mm is - 28.47mm would be the middle lens).

This assumes the "mm" that identify the lens are the real focal length of those lens, which is not.

 

[pdirestajr]

These lenses are VERY similar. You have zooms that cover this range...you tell us which focal length you prefer!

 

[Random Orbits]

If you're considering a three lens kit, then the 24/35/50 is a bit more natural than a (24 or 28)/40/50.

For architecture, a 16/17 lens is useful indoors and a 24 is useful for larger rooms and buildings, which favors your 17-40. If you're going for architecture, I'd suggest bringing your 17-40 over getting another lens even though it is a bit larger than what you're considering. The 17-40 will also be more flexible for landscapes.

For street, I prefer a 35 if I'm only going to use one lens. If you opt for the 35 f/2 IS, then you might be able to leave your 50 at home a lot of the time because f/2 would also work well in low light situations. You might want to consider swapping the 40 for the 35 f/2 IS, and seeing if that one lens will satisfy your needs for street photography. If you need wider, then you can consider the 24 f/2.8 IS and if you need longer, then bring along your 50 f/1.4.

FWIW, I recently picked up the 28 f/2.8 IS. It's nice: the colors are good and it's sharp enough. The IS is less useful than I thought it would be. I need to drop the shutter speed a lot before I can see IS making much of a difference (i.e. 1/15 or slower, at 1/30 I'm getting similar IS on/off results). I chose the 28 because I have plenty of options at 24/35/50 and I got it during a sale for 350.

 

[Bohns]

These lenses are VERY similar. You have zooms that cover this range...you tell us which focal length you prefer!

I very rarely use the 17 to 20 range. I like the 20-24 range when I can add some "materials" in the foreground or for architecture, knowing that I will need PT to manage distorsion (I use DXO Viewpoint). In street, and for some architecture, I like the 28-40 range.

The 35 f2 IS is tempting, i should admit it. But I really like the 40 STM because of its discretion, and its IQ is really good. The more I think about it, the more I look at the 28.

 

[Ruined]

For my primes in this range, I used to have a 28mm IS and a 40mm pancake, but instead I now use a 24mm IS and a 35mm IS.

Reason being, the 24 IS is a nice lightweight landscape lens that is good when you dont want something too expensive on the camera but still need a nice panoramic looking shot. The 28mm does not quite satisfy for this look.

The 35 IS is optically superior to the 40mm and has faster aperture+IS so I chose the 35mm, but it was a bit too close to 28mm. Plus, with 35mm you have a lower chance of distortion than the 28mm.

So in the end, I choose 24mm IS for landscape and 35mm IS for street/group. I feel the 24mm is better than the 28mm for that landscape look, while the 35mm is more safe to use than the 28mm with people due to lower chance of distortion.

However, if you really want to push your group shots as wide as possible, you can use the 28mm with caution. The 24mm is just too wide for people IMO unless the group is dead center of the frame with ample room along all around them.


Anyway, I'd go with one of those combos - 28 IS + 40mm or 24 IS + 35 IS. The former offers more compact size with less bulk, but the latter gives you more flexibility in the look of your shots along with better optics on the "normal" end.

 

[Mr_Canuck]

I'd say leave the 40 at home when you've got the 50 with you. They are so close, and at that distance zoom with your feet. Keeps you down to two lenses. The 40 simply has physical size going for it, which is redundant if you're carrying both.

If you're tending towards landscapes and still subjects, I'd tend towards the 24. If you are more interested in capturing people, I'd for sure go with the 28 to optimize distortion issues. I think you'll capture people more effectively. If it's a bit of both, I'd still go for the 28. That's quite wide even for indoor group shots, and a bit more moderate for everything else.

 

[mwh1964]

I got the 35 f2 IS. It is a really useful lens for walking around. And f2 compared to f2.8. I do also have the 40 and 50. The 40 is really discrete and a very good lens for the money. I use it for running around in the streets. The 50 gets you closer to people from a distance and has f1.4 even though a bit soft at that aperture. With the setup you already got You should be able to cover the streets in a useful manner. If you looked for something totally different go with the 24.