LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 30 May 2012 (Wednesday) 18:34   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
JoshuaRoss
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2012
107 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I finally wrapped my mind around spending a thousand plus dollars on a single lens and now I'm trying to figure out my options. I have a Canon 5D Mark 1 and currently use and 85mm 1.8. I want something wider because I like to do landscapes and street photography.

My budget is a little over a 1,000 and I will probably buy used. I need an every day lens and I narrowed it down to these too. I have never used them before so your exeriences with both of them could be something you could comment. In terms of sharpness and usuability, which will fit me best? And where would be a good place to buy used? Thanks!

Post #1, May 30, 2012 18:34:02




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
elader
Goldmember
elader's Avatar
Joined Nov 2005
2,374 posts
Maryland
[MORE/SHARE]

cant imagine living life with only the 35 and 85 - I mean they are beautiful lenses, but sometimes you just want a walk about.

I'd buy a minty 24-105 used from someone ditching it from a 5DmkIII kit and a 50mm f/1,4 -should cost you about as the 24-70 used. The 24-70 is pretty heavy for a walk around lens.

Post #2, May 30, 2012 18:45:19


Eric
FJR1300 rider
5D mkIII and 1D MkIII

16-35L | 24-105L | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 85 f/1.8 / 50 f.1,4

LOG IN TO REPLY
cfvisuals
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2011
866 posts
San Diego
[MORE/SHARE]

can't imagine living with a mediocre zoom (24-70mm) which is "standard good" at doing everything but excels at nothing.
That's just my 2 cents. If I were to have only one lens, I would rather want something that would surprise me in performance.

I am quite sure 24-70L is very useful for event photographers who make a living out of it. It covers a wide range, it's reliable and durable. It's handy but heavy.
For me, photography isn't what keeps me alive, i can afford to have no zooms. I rather have a complete set of good primes before I spend money on buying a zoom for convenience.

It's always a trade-off, it's either convenience/versatilit​y or image quality. 35L offers better image quality but the trade off is its versatility.

I've been living with 2 primes, Zeiss 35mm and 85mm 1.4. 35mm is just good enough for everyday walk around, it's wide enough for landscape and not too wide for distortion. I get to capture more of a happening with a wide angle than a long focal length. I use 85mm for portrait mainly because 35mm doesn't produce enough bokeh. Each of these focal lengths excels at their purpose.

Post #3, May 30, 2012 18:54:58


flickrexternal link
5∞ portfolioexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
ClassicJ
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2011
155 posts
Bay Area, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

I had both and ended up parting with 24-70L. The 24-70 is versatile but nothing that a few steps forward or backward with a 35L cant fix. 35L on my 5diii is very sharp.

Post #4, May 30, 2012 19:01:22


Canon 5D MarkIII | 135L | 70-200L IS II
Canon G16

LOG IN TO REPLY
ENto. ­ Abyss
Member
Joined Sep 2011
96 posts
socali
[MORE/SHARE]

I have both these lenses.. It serve me very well.. Still digging my 35l prime...I was planning to add my next lens which would be the 135L or the 200mm 2.8 L.. Hehe and my recent bad boy would be the great white whale.. Thanks to my girlfriend who surprise me with this gift.. But once again I still have my 35mm L on most of the time... Just something about the prime you. Ant resist ..
But as of my 24-70mm I hardly being used by it does cover my walk around.. Little from wide to zoom...


Not to mention the great white whale is a lot more heavier then the brick *sigh.. Just a heavy weight champion..

Post #5, May 30, 2012 19:30:38


Canon 5D Mark II & Canon 5d Mark III
[COLOR="Black"]Lens : EF 35mm f/1.4L USM - EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM - EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II
FD 50mm f/1.4 S.S.C

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
JoshuaRoss
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2012
107 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Thanks for the advice guys. I agree, zooms are really for convenience, but taking the extra time to frame your shot with primes makes a huge difference. Them again I don't think it would be a bad idea to have both lenses.

Post #6, May 30, 2012 23:41:49 as a reply to ENto. Abyss's post 4 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
URLphotographer
Senior Member
Joined Apr 2012
143 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

The short end of the 24-70 will be beneficial, but it is heavy. The 70mm end is a bit short for me. Never had the 35 L. I agree with previous post about 24-105 plus another prime.

Post #7, May 30, 2012 23:48:50 as a reply to JoshuaRoss's post 7 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
cfvisuals
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2011
866 posts
San Diego
[MORE/SHARE]

JoshuaRoss wrote in post #14509569external link
Then again I don't think it would be a bad idea to have both lenses.

It's the best idea to have all the lenses in the world.

Post #8, May 31, 2012 00:26:14


flickrexternal link
5∞ portfolioexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
hieu1004
Goldmember
hieu1004's Avatar
Joined Jul 2010
3,577 posts
Seattle
[MORE/SHARE]

35L, IMO, but I am biased. :)

Post #9, May 31, 2012 01:29:44


-Hieu
Gear | Blogexternal link | flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sol95
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2008
661 posts
Sydney, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

I know it's a totally different lens suggestion to the ones you're considering, but I think the 17-40L + 50/1.4 would work well for you.

Honestly, the 24-70L can be a bit hit-or-miss. some people have wonderful copies that are sharp across the zoom range, but there's enough people complaining about disappointing results with the lens to not be worth the lottery, imo.

And for the price of the 24-70L, you can pick up a 17-40L, which would be great as a general walk-around and landscape lens, and a 50/1.4 lens for low light. And the bonus is that it's not very heavy, meaning you can probably carry the 50/1.4 with you all the time, which you can use for low-light and also a fixed length walk-around lens.

I had the 24-70L (and also the 24-105L), and sold them as I use my 50L most of the time as a walk-around lens.

Post #10, May 31, 2012 01:59:58


Bodies: 5D mk III
Lenses: 50 f/1.2L | 85 f/1.2L II | 100 f/2.8L IS Macro | 17-40 f/4.0L | 24-70 f/2.8L II | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
Accessories: 430EX II | TC-80N3 M43: Olympus E-PM1 | Olympus m.Zuiko 14-42 II R | Panasonic 14 f/2.5 | Panasonic 20 f/1.8 | Olympus m.Zuiko 45 f/1.8

LOG IN TO REPLY
lvph2
Goldmember
Joined Jul 2005
1,693 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm in the same boat, but currently own a 24-70mm. I find myself never using it at it's widest. and almost never at it's longest. Thinking about going with a couple primes to take it's place. I get nice results with cars with the 24-70mm, but I'm not getting a wow from anything else I've been shooting. Especially portraits.

Post #11, Jun 12, 2012 11:08:53


- 5d MkII - 28mm f/1.8 - 50mm f/1.8 II - 85mm f/1.8 - Tele-Lentar 135mm f/3.5
- Canon S95 -

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Mashimaro
Senior Member
Mashimaro's Avatar
Joined Jun 2009
795 posts
Vancouver
[MORE/SHARE]

i thought about ditching my 24-70 for the 35L as well before but as others have said, it's nice for its convenience of being a zoom lens.

24 is pretty wide for most usage on FF and the 70mm is decent for some reach.

my lens is not super sharp at 2.8 but is great at 3.2 onwards.

you get used to the weight of it pretty fast unless you hiking it for more than an hour on your shoulder.

i think it boils down to having a fast prime (great IQ and speed) vs. a fast-for-a-zoom lens (convenience).

i'm thinking the new 24-70II will make it a tougher choice if it's anything like the 70-200II for IQ/sharpness...other than the price of course.

Post #12, Jun 12, 2012 12:41:46


Canon 5D Mk III | Canon 24-70 F2.8L II | Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II | Canon 85 F1.2L II| Leica M240 | Sony A7R

LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Goldmember
Tommydigi's Avatar
Joined May 2010
4,881 posts
Chicago
[MORE/SHARE]

ClassicJ wrote in post #14508396external link
I had both and ended up parting with 24-70L. The 24-70 is versatile but nothing that a few steps forward or backward with a 35L cant fix. 35L on my 5diii is very sharp.

I never really understand this advice, this is just not always possible. 35 is 35 it will not be 70 or 24 by moving. Anyway, I have used both lenses and both are excellent but I would not want 35 as my widest lens So I would vote in favor of a used 24-105 that you can probably get for between $700 or $800 now and a 35 2.0 or some other affordable wider prime since it seems budget is an issue.

Many differences between he 24-70/105 is really splitting hairs and right now the 24-70 is at a premium while the 24-105 can always be picked up rather cheaply. I do feel the 24-70 is a bit better but after having both I got tired of using it because it was heavy and cumbersome.

-Edit as mentioned above when I had the 24-70 my experience was the same, it was really sharp at 3.2.

Post #13, Jun 12, 2012 12:56:10


Websiteexternal link | Flickrexternal link | Blogexternal link
Canon 5D2/60D/G15 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 17-40L • 70-300L

LOG IN TO REPLY
tommyboyazn
Member
Joined Dec 2008
65 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I only have a crop camera and the 17-55. Sold the 17-55 for the 35L and never looked back. It is only 2 steps forward for "55" and a few more steps back for "17".

Ultimately, it came down to: I can work to make a 35L be at 24 or 70, but I can never work to make a 24-70 be a 35.

Post #14, Jun 12, 2012 13:22:41 as a reply to Tommydigi's post 26 minutes earlier.


Canon 50D | 35L | 85 1.8 |580EX


LOG IN TO REPLY
delhi
Goldmember
delhi's Avatar
Joined Feb 2005
2,483 posts
3rd Rock from the Sun
[MORE/SHARE]

You can always play it safe and get a 35L + a Tammy 28-75 f2.8. :cool: Apparently the Tamron is on par with the Canon 24-70L optically but lacks the robust build.

Personally I just dig the 35L images.

Post #15, Jun 12, 2012 13:39:52 as a reply to tommyboyazn's post 17 minutes earlier.


Vancouver Portrait Photographerexternal link
No toys. Just tools.external link :lol:

5d3/1dx AF Guidebook | What AF Points to use for my 5d3/1dx?!external link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
6,109 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00093 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
1105 guests, 829 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is ozcar17308

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.