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 Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 02 Apr 2015 (Thursday) 03:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Wedding 24mm which lens??

 
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,897 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 2362
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Apr 07, 2015 20:45 |  #16

The best 24mm lens is a 35 and a few steps back.

- Confucius

At least I think it was him who said that.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sourcehill
Senior Member
Avatar
481 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 80
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Boston
     
Apr 08, 2015 09:36 as a reply to  @ Left Handed Brisket's post |  #17

Unless you don't have a few extra steps =)


I like gear and I have too much.
Check out my current work on Instagram @immichaelcarmen
redwoodandrye.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,897 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 2362
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
Post edited over 4 years ago by Left Handed Brisket.
     
Apr 08, 2015 11:02 |  #18

sourcehill wrote in post #17509145 (external link)
Unless you don't have a few extra steps =)

of course.

i had just read this review (external link) when i saw this thread.

The new Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art lens does, indeed, out resolve the offerings from the major manufacturers, at least in the center of the image. At the edges, though, the advantage disappears. More importantly with any 24mm f/1.4 lens, try as you will, unless you really stop the lens way down you aren't going to get a flat field of focus. And if you are going to stop the lens way down, why invest all the extra money for a wider aperture lens.
That doesn't make these bad lenses. There are clearly some types of photography that this focal length is invaluable for, and in that case you just learn to work around the shortcomings. In many cases, though, the old rule that the best 24mm f/1.4 is a 35mm f/1.4 and a few steps backwards is often true.

i for my purposes the Tokina 16-28 2.8 fills any 20-30mm needs. I will probably look into a wider than 20mm prime at some point, or maybe even the 17mm TS-E (if i strike it rich). for me, 24 is just an odd people lens, it's definitely full body, not close up, so details and extreme sharpness generally won't matter.

I love my sigma 35, it is always on a camera. YMMV.

:D


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcap1972
Member
Avatar
151 posts
Likes: 52
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Toronto
     
Apr 12, 2015 10:23 |  #19

I shoot 90% of my weddings with canon 24 1.4 II on one camera and 85 1.2 II on second camera. It all depends on your style of shooting. I would go with Canon primes. I had tried using Sigma few times but they always back or front focus for me in low light situations.


Avangard Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mckay ­ photography
Senior Member
Avatar
676 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
     
Apr 16, 2015 17:10 |  #20

If the sigma 24mm art is as good as the 50mm art then i think for the price it would be way better value than the canon 24mm.....and only being $300-400 more than the sigma 1.8 I'd get the 1.4 for sure.

BUT as others have mentioned I'm not convinced of the need for a 24mm prime.... you'll get a super sharp image from say a canon 24-70mm (version II) zoom plus have the extra versatility of the range. Or for even more width I use a 16-35mm and love the extreme wideness even though the sharpness isnt great. I have a sigma 12-24mm but 12mm is too weirdly wide and again sharpness isnt great through the whole range.

That all said, if you shoot mainly primes (like mcap1972) and love the look of shooting wide open then zoom range isnt going to be a deal breaker for you.

so maybe is boils down to whether you are looking for: width, sharpness, or a wide open look?


Gear: 5D mkiii x 2, 35 1.4 L, 16-35 L, 24-70 mkiiL, 70-200 L, Sigma Art 50 1.4
Wedding Photography Sydney (external link)
| Wedding Photography blog (external link) | Wedding photography Bowral (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vanmidd
Member
215 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Sep 2013
     
May 04, 2015 02:40 |  #21

24mm sigma art. I have the canon 24 1.4 II and don't rate it. My other sigma art lenses are awesome.

Don't get any wide zooms, they're totally unnecessary and just limit you in low light (cramped dance-floor for example)


Van Middleton Photography - Byron Bay Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,987 posts
Likes: 361
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
May 04, 2015 03:32 |  #22

vanmidd wrote in post #17542606 (external link)
Don't get any wide zooms, they're totally unnecessary and just limit you in low light (cramped dance-floor for example)

Different photographers work differently. I find a wide zoom essential, for example I use them in cramped churches and for cool wide angle shots.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
memoriesoftomorrow
Goldmember
3,846 posts
Likes: 289
Joined Nov 2010
Post edited over 3 years ago by memoriesoftomorrow.
     
May 04, 2015 04:20 |  #23

vanmidd wrote in post #17542606 (external link)
24mm sigma art. I have the canon 24 1.4 II and don't rate it. My other sigma art lenses are awesome.

Don't get any wide zooms, they're totally unnecessary and just limit you in low light (cramped dance-floor for example)

16-35 is one of my favourite lenses.

As for a 35 over a 24... personally I just don't like the 35 perspective. Much prefer 24 focal length.


Peter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Will ­ Chao
Member
Avatar
98 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Mar 2014
     
May 07, 2015 00:14 |  #24

I used to own a 24L II but I sold it due to focus inaccuracies

Never bothered with a 24 prime since as I don't need it, but if I were to buy it again it'd be the sigma art

at least with the art you can calibrate it easily


Wedding Photography Melbourne (external link)
Gear: 5D3 and some L lenses ~ Favourite lens: 85mm F1.2 ~ Favourite bag: Thinktank Airport Security 2.0
Melbourne Wedding Photographer (external link) / High school dropout

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vanmidd
Member
215 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Sep 2013
     
May 09, 2015 20:51 |  #25

Different photographers work differently. I find a wide zoom essential, for example I use them in cramped churches and for cool wide angle shots.

16-35 is one of my favourite lenses. As for a 35 over a 24... personally I just don't like the 35 perspective. Much prefer 24.

Yep, we're all different, and all have different styles. I use the 24mm occasionally, but I find the distortion can be unflattering. Having said that, I see great work done with it.


Van Middleton Photography - Byron Bay Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,872 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2603
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by Wilt. (4 edits in all)
     
May 09, 2015 21:27 |  #26

vanmidd wrote:
but I find the distortion can be unflattering. Having said that, I see great work done with it.

^
I just wanted to comment that, having covered many weddings in medium format film after shooting weddings on 135 format, I have long ago adopted the personal approach of seldom shooting people with a FL which is wider AOV than about 77 degrees diagonal. So I would never use wider than 45mm FL on 645 format, nor wider than 28mm on 135 format when shooting PEOPLE as the main subject(s) in a shot. Wider (40mm on 645, 24mm on 135 format) was OK for scene establishing shots that happened to include people a reasonable distance from camera. But when the shooting space was limited so that subjects were relatively close, the danger of induced perspective distortion would exaggerate bellies and butts in an unflattering way!


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mckay ­ photography
Senior Member
Avatar
676 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
     
Oct 26, 2015 00:01 |  #27

Reviving this thread a bit.....has anyone tried the new 16-35mm lenses? I'm pretty keen to replace my 16-35mm, looking at the f4 version or even the Tokina 16-28mm


Gear: 5D mkiii x 2, 35 1.4 L, 16-35 L, 24-70 mkiiL, 70-200 L, Sigma Art 50 1.4
Wedding Photography Sydney (external link)
| Wedding Photography blog (external link) | Wedding photography Bowral (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colin ­ Glover
Goldmember
1,374 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 129
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southport nr Liverpool United Kingdom
     
Nov 02, 2015 09:43 |  #28

FWIW, I've been using a classic Pentax 50mm and 135mm with a manual adapter (no focus confirm chip) on my 600D. Now you'll find 24mm primes on Ebay pretty cheap. The classic Pentax lenses were all the proper fluorite glass, and used properly (live view and 5 or 10 X magnification) are superb. IQ on the 600D is outstanding. I've yet to try it on my 70D but suspect it will be even better. And price wise, they are inexpensive for the IQ you get. I finally got round to editing some gig shots from 2 months ago last night, and viewing at 100% in LR 5, I got shots as sharp if not sharper than I get from my IS lens on my 70D.And it's wide. F2 not 1.4, but amazing details and resolution.


Canon EOS 70D, Canon EOS 600D, EF-S 18-55 ii, EF 55-200 USM ii, EF-S 75-300 iii, Tamron 28-80, Sigma 70-210. Pentax 50mm, Pentax 135mm, EF-S 55-250, Raynox Macro adapter, Neewer filters (CPL, UV, FLD & ND4), Fuji HS20 EXR (30X zoom ) & cable release, Yongnuo 560 iii & Luxon 9800A manual flashguns for the Fuji, Hama Star 63 tripod, Hongdek RC-6 remote control, Velbon DF 40 www.point-n-shoot.co.uk website.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Silver-Halide
Senior Member
819 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 241
Joined Jan 2015
Post edited over 4 years ago by Silver-Halide.
     
Nov 03, 2015 01:26 |  #29

For some reason the 24mm focal length is the weird uncle in my image family that nobody ever talks about :rolleyes:

I have a 16-35mm F/4L IS which I use all the time for landscapes, but seldomly at weddings.
If I could only take ONE of my lenses to a wedding, it would be my 24-70 F/4L IS.

That said, I hardly ever use either of those lenses around 24mm. For people I don't like to go wider than 35-28mm because of distortion if I can avoid it and when I'm thinking ultra wide its usually 16-20mm. If I woke up tomorrow and my 24-70 suddenly became a 28-70, I probably wouldn't cry too much over it.


Echoes in Eternity LLC | Tucson and Southern Arizona Wedding Photographer (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,932 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2785
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Nov 03, 2015 14:32 |  #30

The new Sigma 20MM 1.4 for full frames is in my sites. Looks awesome. Still using my 17-35. Love it


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

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

18,010 views & 7 likes for this thread
Wedding 24mm which lens??
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
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 Bob Wille
995 guests, 234 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.