Trip to NYC: 24 1.4 MII or 17-40L?

We're heading to NYC next week and I'm torn between a 24 1.4 L or 17-40L. I did some search and a good number of people recommends a 17-40L on FF camera (5D).

As much as possible, I would like to keep just one maybe two FL on my bag. I really want to travel light since I know me and my wife will be doing a lot of shopping so I will be carrying a good amount of stuff. I could rent both but to be honest, I'd rather stick with just one lens throughout the entire trip while we're walking around Manhattan, Brooklyn and other parts of NY.

I don't know if 24 is wide enough for NYC, I plan on taking pictures of the Brooklyn bridge, cityscapes above the Rockefeller Bldg and some street shooting. I will be bringing an 85 1.8 for the longer end just in case but I can't decide if the extra FL of 17-40 will be much more better than the speed of a 24 1.4.


I'd appreciate any input.

Thanks!

When i was in NYC, i used my 10-22mm a lot. So, between the two, I'd say 17-40 works better.

I would say bring both.
17-40 during daytime then 24 1.4 at night.

been preparing myself as well for my NYC trip next July, will be bring my 17-40 during the day, 35 f2 or 50 1.4 at night/museum.
not sure if I'm bring my 24-105 or maybe buy a 85 f1.8 or 135 f2 for zoom.

I plan to go next spring and want to go prepared too. Around 72nd and Broadway, there are some beautiful buildings that I want to capture during the day for which I guess a 16-35 or 17-40 would be fine. But wonder if I want to capture some of the finer details such as the gorgoyles, would I need to carry my 70-200L II.

taemo wrote in post #13372405
I would say bring both.
17-40 during daytime then 24 1.4 at night.

Yupp.

taemo wrote in post #13372405
I would say bring both.
17-40 during daytime then 24 1.4 at night.

What taemo said.

If I had to choose, I'd probably choose the 17-40. You can't always foot zoom when you're photographing buildings.

I go to NYC often to shoot photos. Your zoom will serve you well. You will be kicking yourself if you go wide fixed.

I have both. The 17-40 would certainly be more versatile but it really depends on what and how you like to shoot it.

The last time I was in NYC I carried my 7D with a 17-55 f/2.8 and a 40D with the 10-22 and the 7D with the 17-55 got the most use by far. I really concentrated on street photography. I would also bring along a flash.
My point being that range of focal lengths were most useful to me on a crop sensor.

Just got back from a trip to NYC. I would recommend the 17-40L with at least a mini-tripod. You'll definitely want to capture the close-up lights both in time square and lights afar from atop the "Rock" if you want to capture the Empire State Building.

If you are renting, why not make a compromise on focal length and speed? Go for the 16-35 f/2.8

Wide as you can. Love the 10-22 between buildings during the day.

I'm surprised nobody brought this up, but it really depends on if you're shooting architecture or not. Most people seem to like the "characters" of the city better than the landscape. For that you really need a 70-200 or longer as the last think you want to do is get in someone's face with a camera -- specially there.

I would recommend a 17-40L, a "light but strong enough" mini tripod, and a "85 or 100 or 135mm" for portraits and details.

Titi