35L or 24L II

which one would you prefer on FF?

Depends on your focal length needs.

Good all-around, 1.4 prime: 35L
Good wide-angle, 1.4 prime: 24L

Prefer the 24L II on FF.

35 on FF

Know what about on a 1.3 crop?

tylerpaulphoto wrote in post #12598631
Know what about on a 1.3 crop?

24L. Smaller the better. You may get it amplified by 1.6x on the crop.

xanavi wrote in post #12598836
24L. Smaller the better. You may get it amplified by 1.6x on the crop.

Well I shoot a 1D MKIII which is a 1.3x crop factor. My 16-35 essentially lives on my body only to be traded out for the 50mm. Im considering getting either the 24 or the 35. but none of my buddies have either. I really dont want to have to spend $200+ to rent both and compare.

tylerpaulphoto wrote in post #12599360
Well I shoot a 1D MKIII which is a 1.3x crop factor. My 16-35 essentially lives on my body only to be traded out for the 50mm. Im considering getting either the 24 or the 35. but none of my buddies have either. I really dont want to have to spend $200+ to rent both and compare.

They're similar enough to make the decision purely based on FL, in my opinion. Just use your 16-35 (or look through shots you already have from it) to find out what suits you better. You really can't go wrong with either lens. Both are solid performers.

FWIW - I think the 24 pairs really well with 1.6 and 1.3 crops. One of my favorite lenses for either of those bodies. That's the way I'd go, personally.

From somebody that has both, 24L II.

I also like the 24L for the reason it is a pretty new lens from Canon where the 35L is getting a little old. Its a great lens don't get me wrong but its also one of the most rumored lens that is going to be replaced in the next year or so. Who knows though. I picked up the 24L II and it pretty much has not left my 7D since I bought it. I just love the lens. Good Luck

I prefer the 24 because IMHO, it's a more more "dramatic" focal length.

Kento wrote in post #12599521
From somebody that has both, 24L II.

leaning this way.
oh such a tough choice.
there's no wrong answer here, overall both great pieces.

but I've made so many changes in the past few years I want to get this one just right!

I do shoot people more than anything and have the 85 / 135.
WANT the 35L for street and indoor.
However, my brain wants the 24L b/c it's so new (not that the 35 doesn't perform great).
FF shooter
Love shooting cars, landscape, but portraits pay the bills.
I am heading to italy this year though.
Having the 16-35, I feel I should get a 35L to complete the trinity.

I would only buy the 35L used, since it's due for an update soon, patent released.
I can get a used one locally for $1175 out the door.
vs. I can get a new 24L for $1470 out the door.

minimal focusing distance:
24L ii 9.84"
35L 12"

weight is too close to make a difference

filter size, now we're talking!
72 for the 35L
77 for the 24L

24L ii water/dust resistant

nicksan wrote in post #12600883
I prefer the 24 because IMHO, it's a more more "dramatic" focal length.

+1....

I'm going through this same debate myself for a trip to Italy in October

I've been looking at this (shot on a 1Ds Mark III though)
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0