Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 02 Feb 2011 (Wednesday) 06:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24mm f/1.4L and 35mm f/1.4L - What's the difference

 
ni$mo350
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,011 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Portland, OR
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:11 |  #31

<< waiting for someone to post the 1200 ;)


-Chris-Website (external link)|| (external link)Facebook (external link)|| My Flickr (external link)|| Follow me!!! 500px (external link) || (external link) 5D mkii || 35L || 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII || My bank account hates you all :cry:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Helena
Goldmember
Avatar
1,385 posts
Likes: 15
Joined May 2008
Location: Trondheim, Norway
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:12 as a reply to  @ post 11763790 |  #32

Too funny Allen and Chris! :lol:

But seriously, I agree, they are very different lenses. 24mm feels substantially wider than 35mm. I rarely bring both though. These are my most common "kits" with 5D:

1) 35L (favorite)
2) 24 + 50
3) 35 + a longer lens.
4) 24 + 50 + 70-200/4IS (only for traveling with car).


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JonK
Goldmember
Avatar
2,161 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2004
Location: PA USA
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:12 |  #33

Its no 1200 but it's almost there!

Lens spam!

IMAGE NOT FOUND
IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


One way I think of how much wider a 24 is over a 35, or anything vs an anything is in percentage. Sure its only 11mm sounds almost insignificant. But, 24/35, its 31% wider.


I just noticed I took that with a 24L II lol

7NE | 7D | 5DII | 16-35/2.8L II | 24/1.4L II | TS-E 24/3.5L II | 50/1.4 | 85/1.2L II | 100/2.8L IS | 70-200/2.8L IS II | 400/5.6L | PIXMA Pro 9500 Mark II
check my blog:
www.jonkensy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnHemlock
Member
182 posts
Joined Jun 2009
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:13 |  #34

arentol wrote in post #11763520 (external link)
There is a WORLD of difference between bugging someone and buggering them....

Perhaps he is using it correctly?

In any case, they are fairly analagous to my wife.


Powershot A530, 2 AA Batteries, Wrist Strap

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
37,142 posts
Gallery: 176 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 9000
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:15 |  #35

ni$mo350 wrote in post #11763872 (external link)
<< waiting for someone to post the 1200 ;)

Does anyone that posts here have one? I think my point is that worry about the images you make and not worry about how the tool looks that helps you take them because as you see there is something else that someone will always thinks looks more badass. But can you take badass images while looking badass ;):lol::lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kento
Goldmember
Avatar
1,207 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Innsbruck, Austria
     
Feb 02, 2011 13:18 |  #36

How was the 200mm f/1.8 not brought in on this?!?!?

IMAGE: http://www.shuttersniped.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/-36881903597934852.jpg

My Tools
-Jesse
Unknown-Studio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eelnoraa
Goldmember
1,798 posts
Likes: 37
Joined May 2007
     
Feb 02, 2011 15:15 |  #37

hieu1004 wrote in post #11762560 (external link)
^I've shot both side by side. Any color variation is absolutely negligible. There is VERY little difference.

I totally agree. Color & sharpness are the least of your concern between these two lenses. The real difference is the FL, pick the FL that fits you need.


5Di, 5Diii, 28, 50, 85, 16-35II, 24-105, 70-200F2.8 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankk
Senior Member
825 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: NJ, USA
     
Feb 02, 2011 21:18 as a reply to  @ eelnoraa's post |  #38

I love this thread. I spend a lot of time in the 17-35mm space and one day hope to own both of these lenses (replacing my 24mm 2.8 and 35mm 2).

I can't speak to the quality of the lenses since I am clearly not up to that level yet...but I can speak to the focal length.

If you generally agree that difference with 24mm/35mm is 2/3 then to frame a subject that is 10 feet away is a few steps (between 24 and 35). It is about 1/3 or 3.3 feet difference for comparable *subject size* (even though the subjects are the same size, the background will be wider on the 24mm). Now, if the subject is 75 feet away, that same 1/3 difference is now 25 feet (which could mean jumping a river or cliff).

Here's one: on a full frame, shooting horizontal, with a 35mm lens:: the distance from the subject is 'nearly equivalent' to the subject width ... so if I am 10 feet away from a 10 foot wide object, the object will fill the frame. If I am 15 feet a way from a 15 foot object, it too will also fill the frame... hmm, at this point you are saying either duh or really.

Just understand that... On a 24mm lens at 10 feet, a 10 foot a subject will only fill approximate 2/3 of the frame (vs 35mm, which fills the full frame). So, at 24mm, if I am 10 feet away from a 10 foot wide object, it will fill approximately 2/3 the frame. If at 35mm, the subject fills the whole frame. NOTE: the the background will be wider with the 24mm.

Really hope this makes sense and contributes (as opposed to being obvious or confusing).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
windpig
Chopped liver
Avatar
15,530 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1863
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Just South of Ballard
     
Feb 02, 2011 21:57 |  #39

I wish I would have paid the extra $400 for the mkII version when I bought my mkI a couple years ago. The mkI is still a killer lens on crop of FF.


Would you like to buy a vowel?
Go ahead, spin the wheel.
flickr (external link)
I'm accross the canal just south of Ballard, the town Seattle usurped in 1907.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ilumo
Goldmember
1,739 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 36
Joined Oct 2009
     
Feb 02, 2011 21:58 |  #40

frankk wrote in post #11766774 (external link)
I love this thread. I spend a lot of time in the 17-35mm space and one day hope to own both of these lenses (replacing my 24mm 2.8 and 35mm 2).

I can't speak to the quality of the lenses since I am clearly not up to that level yet...but I can speak to the focal length.

If you generally agree that difference with 24mm/35mm is 2/3 then to frame a subject that is 10 feet away is a few steps (between 24 and 35). It is about 1/3 or 3.3 feet difference for comparable *subject size* (even though the subjects are the same size, the background will be wider on the 24mm). Now, if the subject is 75 feet away, that same 1/3 difference is now 25 feet (which could mean jumping a river or cliff).

Here's one: on a full frame, shooting horizontal, with a 35mm lens:: the distance from the subject is 'nearly equivalent' to the subject width ... so if I am 10 feet away from a 10 foot wide object, the object will fill the frame. If I am 15 feet a way from a 15 foot object, it too will also fill the frame... hmm, at this point you are saying either duh or really.

Just understand that... On a 24mm lens at 10 feet, a 10 foot a subject will only fill approximate 2/3 of the frame (vs 35mm, which fills the full frame). So, at 24mm, if I am 10 feet away from a 10 foot wide object, it will fill approximately 2/3 the frame. If at 35mm, the subject fills the whole frame. NOTE: the the background will be wider with the 24mm.

Really hope this makes sense and contributes (as opposed to being obvious or confusing).

I think it's a tad bit confusing... but i get your point ;)


Body: Sony a7R IV
Glass: 50mm f/1.8 | 35mm f/1.4L USM | 16-35 f/4.0 IS USML USM | 24-70 f/2.8L II USM | 24-105 f/4.0L IS USM | 70-200 f/2.8L II IS USM | 85mm f/1.4L IS USM | 100mm f/2.8L IS USM | 24mm f/1.4GM | 70-200mm f/2.8GM | Samyang 85mm f/1.4 | Voigtlander 10mm f/5.6
Accessories: 430 EX II, 600 EX, tripods, umbrellas, and other goodies.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick ­ S
Member
98 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Feb 02, 2011 22:12 |  #41

arentol wrote in post #11763520 (external link)
The second is slang for a specific sexual act, which is analogous (pun intended) to a guy bringing his "special delivery" in through the "exit only" door rather than through the "main entrance".

Thanks, that makes TWO things I've learned from this topic discussion. :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankk
Senior Member
825 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: NJ, USA
     
Feb 02, 2011 23:21 |  #42

ilumo wrote in post #11766983 (external link)
I think it's a tad bit confusing... but i get your point ;)

Thanks.

If I tried to summarize my points I'd make two points:

1) going from 24 to 35mm is a 46% increase in mm...wow...even though 24 and 35 seem close.

2) going from 24mm to 35mm by moving your body may 'frame' an equivalent subject size but it will not produce the same picture. Imagine a picture of a leaf from a 17mm 6 inches away versus a 300mm 6 feet away. The former shows the leaf with an entire wide background while the latter shows a background just a few inches wider/taller than the leaf.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Terran
Member
151 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Orange County, CA
     
Feb 02, 2011 23:39 |  #43

Nicely summed up... seems to me 24 is the way to go with a crop frame.


| 7D | Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 | 17-55 f/2.8 | 24 f/1.4L II | 60 f/2.8 Macro | 70-200 f/2.8L IS II | EF 2X II | 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
brownbugger
Senior Member
Avatar
941 posts
Joined Feb 2008
     
Mar 17, 2011 00:19 |  #44

The 24L is extremely useful shooting in small dimly lit rooms to get the atmosphere where space is a constraint, the 35 is not too wide for the job & Id miss the picture.


Gripped Canon 50D, Canon 400D with BG-E3 Grip, 580 EXII Flash, Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L , Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L / Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 /Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 / Tamron AF18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
windpig
Chopped liver
Avatar
15,530 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1863
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Just South of Ballard
     
Mar 17, 2011 06:45 |  #45

UPS is delivering a 35L to me today, I'll then have them both. I've had the 24L mkI for a couple years.

I'm as stoked to get a lens as I've been in a long time.


Would you like to buy a vowel?
Go ahead, spin the wheel.
flickr (external link)
I'm accross the canal just south of Ballard, the town Seattle usurped in 1907.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,694 views & 0 likes for this thread
24mm f/1.4L and 35mm f/1.4L - What's the difference
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is wmkwok
885 guests, 227 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.