Canon Digital Photography Forums  

Go Back   Canon Digital Photography Forums > 'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Register Rules FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #1
JoshuaRoss
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 107
Default Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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!
JoshuaRoss is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #2
elader
Goldmember
 
elader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2,374
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
__________________
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

elader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #3
cfvisuals
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 866
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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/versatility 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.
__________________
flickr
5∞ portfolio
cfvisuals is offline   Reply With Quote
This ad block will go away when you log in as member
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #4
ClassicJ
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 155
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
__________________
Canon 5D MarkIII | 135L | 70-200L IS II
Canon G16
ClassicJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #5
ENto. Abyss
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: socali
Posts: 96
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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..
__________________
Canon 5D Mark II & Canon 5d Mark III
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

Last edited by ENto. Abyss : 30th of May 2012 (Wed) at 19:35.
ENto. Abyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #6
JoshuaRoss
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 107
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
JoshuaRoss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th of May 2012 (Wed)   #7
URLphotographer
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 143
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
URLphotographer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of May 2012 (Thu)   #8
cfvisuals
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 866
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshuaRoss View Post
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.
__________________
flickr
5∞ portfolio
cfvisuals is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of May 2012 (Thu)   #9
hieu1004
Goldmember
 
hieu1004's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,577
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

35L, IMO, but I am biased.
__________________
-Hieu

Gear | Blog | flickr
hieu1004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st of May 2012 (Thu)   #10
sol95
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 661
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
__________________
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
sol95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of June 2012 (Tue)   #11
lvph2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,693
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
__________________
- 5d MkII - 28mm f/1.8 - 50mm f/1.8 II - 85mm f/1.8 - Tele-Lentar 135mm f/3.5
- Canon S95 -
lvph2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of June 2012 (Tue)   #12
Mashimaro
Member
 
Mashimaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 793
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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.
__________________
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
Mashimaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of June 2012 (Tue)   #13
Tommydigi
Goldmember
 
Tommydigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,848
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicJ View Post
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.
__________________
Website | Flickr | Blog

Canon 5D2/60D/G15 24LII 50L 100L 135L 400L 40 STM 17-40 70-300L

Last edited by Tommydigi : 12th of June 2012 (Tue) at 13:02.
Tommydigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of June 2012 (Tue)   #14
tommyboyazn
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 65
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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


tommyboyazn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th of June 2012 (Tue)   #15
delhi
Goldmember
 
delhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 3rd Rock from the Sun
Posts: 2,483
Default Re: Canon 24-70 f2.8 vs Canon 35mm 1.4

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

Personally I just dig the 35L images.
delhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rokinon/Samyang 35mm or Canon 35mm!? MarkLinsangan Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 35 19th of April 2012 (Thu) 11:49
Canon 35mm vs Tokina 35mm Macro for portrait etc rraman Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 14 19th of March 2012 (Mon) 13:13
Is the Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 lens better than the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 MK II? lsquare Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 2 19th of April 2010 (Mon) 02:30
Canon LIDE 80 - try to scan greater than 35mm using it's 35mm attachment optimizer RAW, Post Processing and Printing 2 20th of December 2005 (Tue) 15:19


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
This forum is not affiliated with Canon in any way and is run as a free user helpsite by Pekka Saarinen, Helsinki Finland. You will need to register in order to be able to post messages. Cookies are required for registering and posting. HTML in messages is not allowed, plain website addresses are automatically made active by the board.