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 24 Oct 2013 (Thursday) 07:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24 1.4 and 35 1.4 L

 
KarlGB77
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
556 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Delaware
     
Oct 24, 2013 16:40 |  #16

I had a feeling this would be a good topic for conversation.
Maybe the 24 gets the nod because its version II
The technology being better and all.
Sounds like the 35 is better suited for general situations.

But that IQ....


Canon 5D Mark III, 5D Mark II, T2i (2), 24-105 f4LIS, 17-40 f4L, 70-200f4L IS, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 100 2.8, 85 1.8, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 15-85 f4-5.6 IS, 60 2.8, 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS, 430 EX II, 580 EX II, Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod w/ 498RC2, Calumet 8121 Tripod, Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 234 RC2 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
notastockpikr
Senior Member
410 posts
Likes: 52
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Canada
     
Oct 24, 2013 16:58 |  #17

I have the 35L and it's a great lens and my copy is very sharp. I then purchased the 24L II and the 35L got left behind too many times. I also have the venerable 24-70 II which really sealed the 35L's fate. I haven't used the lens for a year and it's up for sale.

I always thought the 35L was never wide enough and in other situations too wide. The 24-70 II is a great subsitute for the 35L. The 24L II just seems to be sharper to me and gives some amazing perspective. Depending on what you photograph both are great lenses. For me, I like the 24L II better.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Oct 24, 2013 17:15 |  #18

^ Funny you say that, because I think the 24-70 II makes the 24L II a bit more useless than the 35L which has a better perspective at the same speed. I know focal length is a personal thing, but the 24-70 II is a monster at 24mm with better IQ than the prime. So why would I use the 24L II for landscapes if the 24-70 II does it better?

Same thing can be said for the 35L, but for me, the 35mm focal length is just more useful for a wider range of things than 24mm... So if I already have the 24-70 II, the 35L is more useful as a compliment than the 24L II.

I thought I would love the 24L II more than the 35L, but I was really surprised how much I really did not care for it. I found the 35L images more contrasty and pleasing to the eye out of camera than the 24L II. The only thing the 24L has over the 35L IMO, is weather sealing. I did not find the IQ better, even for being quite a bit newer in age.

But it really is subjective.... Not saying my opinion is right or anyone else is wrong, no way. Just sharing thoughts!


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
notastockpikr
Senior Member
410 posts
Likes: 52
Joined Aug 2011
Location: Canada
     
Oct 24, 2013 17:50 |  #19

Invertalon wrote in post #16396466 (external link)
^ Funny you say that, because I think the 24-70 II makes the 24L II a bit more useless than the 35L which has a better perspective at the same speed. I know focal length is a personal thing, but the 24-70 II is a monster at 24mm with better IQ than the prime. So why would I use the 24L II for landscapes if the 24-70 II does it better?

Same thing can be said for the 35L, but for me, the 35mm focal length is just more useful for a wider range of things than 24mm... So if I already have the 24-70 II, the 35L is more useful as a compliment than the 24L II.

I thought I would love the 24L II more than the 35L, but I was really surprised how much I really did not care for it. I found the 35L images more contrasty and pleasing to the eye out of camera than the 24L II. The only thing the 24L has over the 35L IMO, is weather sealing. I did not find the IQ better, even for being quite a bit newer in age.

But it really is subjective.... Not saying my opinion is right or anyone else is wrong, no way. Just sharing thoughts!

I guess each to his own. I use the 24 II more for dusk and night photography. I've used the 24L II for landscapes but didn't care for the results. My landscape lens is the Zeiss 21/2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KarlGB77
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
556 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Delaware
     
Oct 24, 2013 18:56 |  #20

The 24-70 L II is better than the 24 L II ?
That's some strong words there.
Not that I would doubt it as I saw countless....I Mean Countless folks say their 135L go bye bye when the Big Dog came out.

I do think we should Officially call the 70-200 2.8L II the big dog because it's one lens that matches one of the best primes out there. The 135L.
It's also close to the 85L and so on.

It really is the big dog.

What was really surprising to me was the release of the new 24-70 II and the tests that showed the IQ of the 24-105 was as good or better than the original 24-70 2.8

The original 24-70 is great and all, but it does appear that the NEW 24-70 L II is an amazing lens.


Canon 5D Mark III, 5D Mark II, T2i (2), 24-105 f4LIS, 17-40 f4L, 70-200f4L IS, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 100 2.8, 85 1.8, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 15-85 f4-5.6 IS, 60 2.8, 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS, 430 EX II, 580 EX II, Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod w/ 498RC2, Calumet 8121 Tripod, Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 234 RC2 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Oct 24, 2013 19:33 as a reply to  @ KarlGB77's post |  #21

Yes, I compared both side-by-side at f/8, tripod mounted and the 24-70 II was sharper with better corned/edges. It also is a much more versatile lens, therefor it is the better one between the two... (Canon MTF charts also show this being accurate when looking at the f/8 lines... The zoom as it higher resolution all the way to the edge of the frame).

I also think the 135L has the edge in IQ as well between it and the 70-200 II... I *love* the 135L, but again, the zoom has the versatility which I need more.

But yeah, between the 24L II and 24-70 II... The 24-70 II has better IQ. Pretty easily seen as well.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Oct 24, 2013 19:34 as a reply to  @ KarlGB77's post |  #22

Yes, I compared both side-by-side at f/8, tripod mounted and the 24-70 II was sharper with better corned/edges. It also is a much more versatile lens, therefor it is the better one between the two... (Canon MTF charts also show this being accurate when looking at the f/8 lines... The zoom as it higher resolution all the way to the edge of the frame).

I also think the 135L has the edge in IQ as well between it and the 70-200 II... I *love* the 135L, but again, the zoom has the versatility which I need more.

But yeah, between the 24L II and 24-70 II... The 24-70 II has better IQ. But if you need 24mm at f/1.4, the zoom won't allow that, either.

For landscape though, the 24-70 II is the better lens.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,611 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 502
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Oct 24, 2013 20:10 |  #23

The 70-200 may match the 135 but the 135 is less than half the price and weight and it is F2. Personally I prefer the 135.

I think the 24-70 is different because weight or price is not much of an issue. Really its the 2 stops.

I feel the 24LII and 135 are 2 of canons best ( affordable ) L primes but I eventually will give a 24-70 a try.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KarlGB77
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
556 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Delaware
     
Oct 24, 2013 20:28 as a reply to  @ Tommydigi's post |  #24

I hear ya on all counts.
I wouldn't mind owning a 135 and I think I'm Sure I'd like to own the 24 II.

I just want an L prime in the wider category.

Great stuff folks.

Thank you very much.


Canon 5D Mark III, 5D Mark II, T2i (2), 24-105 f4LIS, 17-40 f4L, 70-200f4L IS, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 100 2.8, 85 1.8, 50 1.4, 50 1.8, 15-85 f4-5.6 IS, 60 2.8, 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS, 430 EX II, 580 EX II, Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod w/ 498RC2, Calumet 8121 Tripod, Manfrotto 679B Monopod w/ 234 RC2 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stone ­ 13
Goldmember
Avatar
1,690 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Huntersville, NC
     
Oct 24, 2013 20:51 |  #25

for my style, the 24L would be too wide for general use. I can walk around all day and take a variety of shots with the 35L and f1.4 give me good subject isolation while still giving context to the scene I'm shooting. My 24-70 II does an excellent job if I want to go wider than 35mm and f2.8 is fast enough for me in the 24mm range as I generally want more dof not less....


Ken
Fujifilm X100T | 5D III gripped |35L | 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 85 1.8 | 430 EX II | Yongnuo YN-568EX | Billingham 445 | Think Tank UD 60 |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,611 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 502
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Oct 24, 2013 22:08 |  #26

Speaking of the 135, They have one of those double dip sales right now at B&H and its only 889.


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jefzor
Senior Member
788 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 24
Joined Jul 2013
     
Oct 25, 2013 00:27 |  #27

Go by focal length. I'm sure they're both good in the IQ department.


www.jefpauwels.be (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Oct 25, 2013 00:35 |  #28
bannedPermanent ban

jefzor wrote in post #16397304 (external link)
Go by focal length. I'm sure they're both good in the IQ department.

+1

Personally I find 24mm a lil awkward...

It isn't wide enough for landscape, yet too wide for walkaround/portrait...

I prefer 35mm, it's more versatile and strikes a perfect balance.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jerbear00
Goldmember
1,113 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Southern California
     
Oct 25, 2013 01:51 |  #29

90c4 wrote in post #16395146 (external link)
They're both excellent so your choice should be based on which focal length better suits your needs.

Yup. Both are excellent. Which FL do you need/prefer?


5d3 & Lens CoLLector
Gear List/Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
_Steven89
Member
107 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Apr 2012
Location: East Side
     
Oct 25, 2013 08:58 |  #30

at the MFD.. i like the 24mm alot more




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

4,358 views & 0 likes for this thread
24 1.4 and 35 1.4 L
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 kcole1
1870 guests, 318 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.