which is sharper 35L or 24L II?

I'm debating between the both as well. My concern is CA and wide open performance. I will pretty much be always shooting at 1.4, maybe 1.8 as I will be using it in low light for video work. Any thoughts on that?

if either lens locks focus in - it doesn't matter. if one is slightly sharper then the other - you can alwasy just bump up sharpening in PP.

don't get caught up in sharpness - its not everything in the world. these two lenses have very different FL, with the 24 introducing a significant amount of distortion.

that should be much more important then any slight sharpness comparison.

The only problem with lack of sharpness would be CA that shows up wide open in high-contrast lighting. It really isn't an issue of which is sharper, it's what FL do you want to shoot. If I could only have one and I had a crop and FF (which I do) I would go with the 24LII, but it's obviously a personal preference.

I have both the 35L and 24L not the II and both have very similar IQ so I say get the F/L that better works with your vision.

Wouldn't a few steps forward or backward makes these lenses pretty much the same? You would more likely be able to step toward rather than away from your subject, so I would go with the the 24L II. I know there would be some distortion, but you could crop or fix it with PP.

^ Although framing would be the same by "foot zooming," perspective would change dramatically between the two lenses.

-tyler

TeeBoi wrote in post #12506282
^ Although framing would be the same by "foot zooming," perspective would change dramatically between the two lenses.

-tyler

Just learn to see differently. Theres more than one way to frame a shot. Foot zooming is a myth.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #12506289
Just learn to see differently. Theres more than one way to frame a shot. Foot zooming is a myth.

My response was made in an attempt to emphasize your point. "Foot zooming" is a myth. My point is, you can't "foot zoom" to achieve the same perspective with two different focal lengths. So taking a step forward or a step backward with two different focal lengths can result in the same framing, but different perspectives.

-tyler

TeeBoi wrote in post #12506282
^ Although framing would be the same by "foot zooming," perspective would change dramatically between the two lenses.

-tyler

I see.

TeeBoi, I remember you from the vwvortex forums. You still got your mark 4 jetta? I used to have the mark 3 jetta. I'm in Hawaii too.

I have used both and own the 24. Both are fine lenses that are a lot of fun to shoot with. I choose 24 but it had 0 to do with sharpness.

neurospeed wrote in post #12506681
I see.

TeeBoi, I remember you from the vwvortex forums. You still got your mark 4 jetta? I used to have the mark 3 jetta. I'm in Hawaii too.

A lot has changed from the times I posted on vwvortex. I sold my Jetta, purchased a '11 4Runner, and started a family. I also learned a lot more about photography since my picture posts on vwvortex.

Sorry, but I don't really remember your sn from vwvortex. Did I ever meet you on any of the car cruises?

-tyler

TeeBoi wrote in post #12507221
A lot has changed from the times I posted on vwvortex. I sold my Jetta, purchased a '11 4Runner, and started a family. I also learned a lot more about photography since my picture posts on vwvortex.

Sorry, but I don't really remember your sn from vwvortex. Did I ever meet you on any of the car cruises?

-tyler

I think I met you at one of the cruises, but it has been a while. My SN was "two.0". A lot has changed with me as well. No VW, family, and a genesis sedan.