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 26 May 2014 (Monday) 20:14
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is it worth dropping f/1.4 and getting f/2.8

 
Kwirk
Member
237 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2010
     
May 27, 2014 07:28 |  #16

2008 join date and this is your first post! Dang. :)

I'm actually in a similar situation myself. I could basically replace 2 or 3 of my lenses if I bought a 16-35 II. That would be my 24 f1/4, 17-40, and to some extent my 15mm fisheye. The ISO on my 6D is good enough to where I can just crank it up a bit more when I need it, plus I will have the versatility of a zoom. I mostly shoot concerts and I'm usually shooting at f/2 (on the 24, my 50, and my 100) to get the most out of everything but one more stop wouldn't hurt too bad.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,723 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
May 27, 2014 10:09 |  #17

It all depends on your style of shooting. I'm a zoom guy and hardly ever used the primes that I have owned. (Except long ones.)
Image quality of the newest zooms can be excellent. YMMV


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
May 27, 2014 10:41 |  #18

FEChariot wrote in post #16932847 (external link)
Why not add a 24-105 to the non L trinity you have there? It will give you a do all lens for when you don't want to change lenses, give you back up lenses for when you are 2nd shooting, and still gives you the faster than 2.0 option when you need it. Plus it would cost significantly less even considering the loss of back income from selling the primes.

I agree with this. It would be less than the 24-70 2.8 and far more versatile of a kit.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 221
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
     
May 27, 2014 16:27 |  #19

I think you have a great set of prime lenses. They give you more abilities for shooting in varying conditions.
The 24-70L II is a great lens for it's convenience but it won't have the same look as your primes.
As others have stated. Nothing beat a zoom for varying FL, but nothing beats low-light like a prime.
It just depends on how you are using your current lenses.
Best of luck on your decision.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dpark
Senior Member
376 posts
Joined Dec 2008
     
May 27, 2014 22:55 |  #20

mannyrios wrote in post #16932285 (external link)
For the most part, I'm not using the 3 primes often.

The question is really whether you should leave your money tied up in these lenses, and not whether you should get the 24-70 II. If you don't use them, and don't want to leave your money tied up, then sell them off.

As for whether you should get the 24-70 II, from your Flickr account it looks like you already have the 24-105, so live with just that for a while and see how often you miss f/2.8 or need a sharper lens. If you need those things, then the 24-70 II might make sense (but personally I'd also sell the 24-105 if buying a 24-70 II).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 23
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
May 28, 2014 06:30 |  #21

I have switched back and forth between fast primes and "slower" zooms. Today, I do not have a lens faster than f/2.8

The other day, I was using my 24-70 II in a low-light situation at ISO 12,800 and 25,600... However, the results were fantastic (for me). I could have used a faster lens for lower ISO, but the 5D does so well at higher ISO the need is less and less. A few months ago at a night parade I used the 35L and 24-70 II side by side, and the results from the 24-70 II were slightly better for me due to DOF. Sure, higher ISO, but the end result unless peeping at 100% the 24-70 II images were a bit better.

The 35L is one of my favorite lenses and I am just waiting for the new version to roll out when/if... Nothing wrong with the current one, but it does have some flaws I would like to see get corrected in the new version.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TijmenDal
Goldmember
Avatar
1,214 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
     
May 28, 2014 06:48 |  #22

Unless you do a lot of portrait work: do it! And then get an 50mm f/1.8 for low light.


//Tijmen
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/tijmendalexternal link

Gear
______________
flickrexternal link
_____________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
clarnibass
Senior Member
797 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2011
     
May 28, 2014 07:28 |  #23

I think it's one of those things that you can only decide for yourself. No one can really say if you would be better with the zoom.
I use more or less the same three lenses you do (different lenses but exactly the same focal lengths). I decided there's no way I'd use a 24-70mm f/2.8 instead for a few reasons.

1) Most of my photos are at apertures around f/2 (usually f/1.8-f/2.2). An f/2.8 is "slow" and this alone is a good enough reason for me to use the primes. Also 85mm instead of 70mm is another advantage.

2) The three primes only weigh sligthly more than a 24-70mm, but far more important to me, the weight is in the bag. I much prefer a light lens on the camera than a heavy one and the difference is big.

3) Although the three lenses together are significantly bigger than a 24-70mm, that takes space in the bag that I would usually take anyway. Since I prefer a back pack I would take it with a zoom too (maybe a smaller one but still).

Of course there are advantages to the zoom but they are just so much less signfiicant to me. Decide based on what is more important to you :)


www.nitailevi.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gkallison
Mostly Lurking
19 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2014
Location: Limassol, Cyprus
     
May 31, 2014 17:42 |  #24

I have the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II and sold my 24L soon after getting it because it's so good at the wider end. However, it won't replace your 85mm as your portrait lens. I think you'd miss the thin depth of field and the 85mm perspective. I use the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II wide open as much as possible because it's such a quality lens from 24mm to 60mm. At 70mm it's not so sharp wide open at f/2.8 because it misses focus now and again. Perhaps it's just my copy tho. For events, i don't think you'll miss the 28 and 50 lenses. When it comes to portraits and a tighter frame, the 24-70mm isn't quite long enough.


Cyprus Wedding Photographer
www.gkallison.com (external link)
www.gkallison.ru (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kobeson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,075 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jun 01, 2014 05:43 |  #25

I recently sold my 35L and Canon 24-70 f4 IS, and it bought me a 24-70 f2.8 mk II.

1. f2.8 is wide enough for me in the 24-70 range
2. f4 is too slow
3. the mk II is just an amazing lens

I tried to manage with the 35 1.4 and a slower zoom. I figured the 35 would be handy for the times the f4 was too slow. I became frustrated and wanted to merge the 2 lenses, so that's what I did.

I will never sell my 85 though, I don't see that the 24-70 can replace it. It can definitely replace some primes within it's range though, I'm my opinion.


1Dx | 5D III | 1D IV | 8-15 | 16-35L II | 24-70L II | 70-200L II | 400L II | 1.4x III | Σ85 | 100L | 3 x 600EX-RT | ST-E3-RT
website  (external link)facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
duncanapple
Member
43 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jun 01, 2014 14:08 |  #26

YMMV but for me it would be difficult to give up all the extra stops of aperture. Though I do like simple... Thats why i stick to basically two primes (35L and 135L).


Canon 5DmkII, Canon 35mm 1.4L, Canon 70-200 2.8L IS mk II, Canon 580exII, Alum Macbook + Aperture 3 + Adobe CS3

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Staszek
Goldmember
Avatar
3,606 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Jun 01, 2014 14:20 |  #27

kobeson wrote in post #16943665 (external link)
I recently sold my 35L and Canon 24-70 f4 IS, and it bought me a 24-70 f2.8 mk II.

1. f2.8 is wide enough for me in the 24-70 range
2. f4 is too slow
3. the mk II is just an amazing lens

I tried to manage with the 35 1.4 and a slower zoom. I figured the 35 would be handy for the times the f4 was too slow. I became frustrated and wanted to merge the 2 lenses, so that's what I did.

I will never sell my 85 though, I don't see that the 24-70 can replace it. It can definitely replace some primes within it's range though, I'm my opinion.

I had the 24-70 II (and 16-35 II) but found f/2.8 to be marginal at best for most of my weddings in ambient light. I ended up selling it to fund all trio of short primes (24L II, 35L, and 50L) and a 24-105. The 24-105 was pretty handy because of the image stabilizer, but I found that I preferred working with primes over the zooms. I sold the 24-105 and couldn't be happier with the prime lens set up.

Yes, it's more work to move and swap lenses, but I feel my creativity and thought process has progressed because of the prime lens limitations.


SOSKIphoto (external link) | Blog (external link) | Facebook (external link)| Instagram (external link)
Shooting with big noisy cameras and a bag of primes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
daleg
Senior Member
695 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 139
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Maryland, USA
     
Jun 02, 2014 10:59 |  #28

kobeson wrote in post #16943665 (external link)
I recently sold my 35L and Canon 24-70 f4 IS, and it bought me a 24-70 f2.8 mk II.

1. f2.8 is wide enough for me in the 24-70 range
2. f4 is too slow
3. the mk II is just an amazing lens

I tried to manage with the 35 1.4 and a slower zoom. I figured the 35 would be handy for the times the f4 was too slow. I became frustrated and wanted to merge the 2 lenses, so that's what I did.

I will never sell my 85 though, I don't see that the 24-70 can replace it. It can definitely replace some primes within it's range though, I'm my opinion.

have you carried the 24-70/2.8 on your 5D MkIII for extended periods? to be honest, that's why I limit my zooms to mostly f/4's (the AF on my 17-55 just splendidly died - mid-gig - ugh) on a crop body & use non-L primes on the FF. I find my crop body can effectively push ISO which minimizes my need for the faster, heavier zooms. If I were doing industrial or enviro portraiture work, (a) it would not be staged at an event, and (b) I'd shoot with the full-frame with faster primes for separation, and off-camera lighting for fill, composition, and highlights.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tntadroit
Junior Member
21 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2013
     
Jun 02, 2014 13:57 |  #29

On a FF, it's definitely worth getting rid of all the other primes. The 50mm at anything below f2.8 was terrible for me. I still have it but I don't use it anywhere near as much as the 24-70. The 85mm was good for me but the convenience factor beats out the 85mm. I use the 35mm L on a cropper because that's a good lens for B+W because of f1.4.

BTW, why do people keep on saying profit when selling? I don't think many people here profit from selling their lens unless they bought it used at a lower price. But then again, you have to factor in driving or shipping etc.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,601 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6563
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 02, 2014 14:13 |  #30

daleg wrote in post #16946426 (external link)
have you carried the 24-70/2.8 on your 5D MkIII for extended periods? to be honest, that's why I limit my zooms to mostly f/4's (the AF on my 17-55 just splendidly died - mid-gig - ugh) on a crop body & use non-L primes on the FF. I find my crop body can effectively push ISO which minimizes my need for the faster, heavier zooms. If I were doing industrial or enviro portraiture work, (a) it would not be staged at an event, and (b) I'd shoot with the full-frame with faster primes for separation, and off-camera lighting for fill, composition, and highlights.

I've been to seaworld all sunny day with a 24-70 + 135. totally manageable depending on who you are and how you carry. I'de be crying in pain if I had to do it with a shoulder bag, but waist bag all day is very manageable.

I really like having a 24-70F2.8. Even with the worst lighting conditions, I can manage an ok shot. Sure, it's not jaw dropping as 1.2/1.4 glass, but it's plenty serviceable.

I'm really happy to own both :D


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

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

5,946 views & 0 likes for this thread
Is it worth dropping f/1.4 and getting f/2.8
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 lupecia
873 guests, 261 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.