Will 24-70 II outresolve a 35L on 5D Mark III?

I use a 35L with 5D Mark III. I only got 35L because of its low light capabilities and DOF work. It's on my camera 90% of the time. And another reason I got it was because I was sick of waiting for 24-70 II. I am now wondering if 24-70 will have better IQ and with 5D Mark III's low light capabilities, I'm questioning whether I really need a prime.

It most likely will. But if you need low light capability and thin dof a f2.8 zoom will never ever become a f1.4

Personally my 35L is going up for sale. I don't shoot in low light that often, and I'm over razor thin dof.

I am fairly confident that the zoom is sharper than the prime @f2.8.

No one has published any controlled tests yet as far as I know. It sounds like it might out resolve many primes...

With 5D3's high ISO capabilities and 24-70 II being arguably the sharpest mid-range zoom ever made, yep, ditch that 35L

kin2son wrote in post #14987257
It most likely will. But if you need low light capability and thin dof a f2.8 zoom will never ever become a f1.4

Personally my 35L is going up for sale. I don't shoot in low light that often, and I'm over razor thin dof.

I am fairly confident that the zoom is sharper than the prime @f2.8.

True about F1.4 vs F2.8, its 2 huge stops, big difference between ISO 1600 vs 6400.

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14987237
I use a 35L with 5D Mark III. I only got 35L because of its low light capabilities and DOF work. It's on my camera 90% of the time. And another reason I got it was because I was sick of waiting for 24-70 II. I am now wondering if 24-70 will have better IQ and with 5D Mark III's low light capabilities, I'm questioning whether I really need a prime.

Resolution is one thing and light gathering ability is quite another. As long as you know how to handle f/1.4 and are ok to use it, the zoom will always necessitate pushing the ISO value two stops to get the same exposure value. And if you want to selective focus to be really effective, you will need that f/1.4 when shooting at those focal lengths.

iLvision wrote in post #14987274
With 5D3's high ISO capabilities and 24-70 II being arguably the sharpest mid-range zoom ever made, yep, ditch that 35L

Sorry, how does being sharp help in low light (i.e high ISO/grainy pictures)?

The reason I bought 35L is f1.4.. 24-70 II is f2.8. That's a huge different

http://www.lensrentals​.com …-f2-8-ii-resolution-tests

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14987322
Sorry, how does being sharp help in low light (i.e high ISO/grainy pictures)?

2.8 at 6400 or higher ISO should be enough. If not, use a flash

iLvision wrote in post #14987340
2.8 at 6400 or higher ISO should be enough. If not, use a flash

ISO 1600 can be printed, ISO 6400 pictures usually will stay in your PC.

And If I wanted to use flash, I'd use the 24-105

TheLensGuy wrote in post #14987343
ISO 1600 can be printed, ISO 6400 pictures usually will stay in your PC.

And If I wanted to use flash, I'd use the 24-105

Ah then use... Noise Reduction no seriously, I think 5D3's ISO 6400 is printable... maybe not 5D2 but I've seen some images at 6400 taken with 5D3.

I'm lazy these days.. So if I had the 5D3, I wouldn't even bother getting a 35L. I like the zoom

I don't get why people compare the 24-70 II with the 35L... Makes no sense in a way. Very different uses.

Comparing the 24-70 and 24-105? Sure.

But the 35L is a fast, wide angle prime. Capable of shooting in near darkness. No matter which way you cut it, the 35L will ALWAYS have 2-stop benefit over the 24-70 in low light. Even with modern cameras amazing ISO, the 35L still will allow 2 stops ISO less (meaning more DR, less noise, etc...) and the ability to match that ISO the 24-70 II is at with 2 stops of additional shutter speed. Meaning at ISO 25,600 at a SS of 1/50 with the 24-70 II, you can either shoot that same SS at ISO 6400 or at the same ISO, have a SS at 1/200. You won't notice all that extra resolution at ISO 12,800 anyways!


Sure the 24-70 II will most likely out-resolve the 35L and many other primes it appears... But the zoom will never give f/1.4 low-light ability and the bright viewfinder when its VERY dark.


If you don't push the limits of night shooting, the 24-70 II will be the better choice most likely. If you do, the prime is an invaluable tool and the zoom will not have anywhere near the same capability.

the 24-70 can do 24-35-50-70, but cant do 1.4... They really shouldnt be compared directly, although if your budget is tight, the 24-70 should have first dibbs, and the 35 should compliment the zoom. IMO, a single zoom > a single prime.

I suppose the best thing to do is to wait until the digital picture uploads their iso 12203 test results.