Which lenses capable of 24mm?

Ok, as you can see from my gear list I have way too many lenses capable of 24mm focal length and I'm finally ready to thin the herd. So I have

EF 24mm f/1.4L II, TS-E 24mm f/3.5 II, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 16-35mm f/2.8L II, and 24-105mm f/4L .

I'm keeping the TS-E and 24-70mm f/2.8L II, selling the 24-105 no matter what. Is it worth keeping the other two? I've thought about selling the 16-35L II and 24L II to get either a Zeiss 21mm or TS-E 17mm since I never seem to use the zoom ( bought for its flexibility) or the 24L II

For some reason 24mm is not my favorite except when I augment it with the Tilt and Shift.

Any recommendations?

I've had the 24L II, the TS-E and the 24-105 at the same time but eventually ended up selling my 24L. The TS-E is in fact superior in means of IQ, you should indeed keep that one. I am currently also thinking to sell my 24-105

Although the 24L is a nice lens...I would personally sell it if I were you. Too much overlap.

swldstn wrote in post #16099726
For some reason 24mm is not my favorite except when I augment it with the Tilt and Shift.

Any recommendations?

Sounds like you only enjoy 24 for specific shots, best done with the TSE. Sell everything that doesn't do that one thing as well - or has another roll at another focal length. If you're not certain, put the candidate lenses in a box for a month and see if you miss them.

The 24L II has been in the box for quite a while now. The 16-35L II is in my zoom kit with the 24-70L II and 70-200L IS II and never gets on the camera.

If you do not use them then selling is a good plan.

Agreed. I would not mind having a 16-35L II ... but if you like the TS-E 24mm and enjoy the ultra wide angle, selling the 24L II and the 16-35L II for a TS-E 17 seems like a good idea. I love my TS-E 17 f/4L - use it a LOT for varying types of shots.

swldstn wrote in post #16100339
The 16-35L II is in my zoom kit with the 24-70L II and 70-200L IS II and never gets on the camera.

There's an almost pathological need for focal length coverage (photographers tend to be perfectionists and perfectionists don't want to miss anything. But I've found a lot of freedom in getting away from the impulse. You don't need to keep a lens that you aren't using.

I'd get rid of the 24-105 since I feel it's redundant with the stellar f2.8 zoom. And, although the 24L is special because of its wide FOV and speed, it's certainly not worth keeping around when you have these other lenses if you don't use it.

I'd keep the 24-70II just for its flexibility and great IQ. The 24 TS-e is a great lens and it sounds like it's the one you go to when you need a specific shot at 24mm so that one definitely stays.

Finally, even though the 16-35 covers 24mm, it's not stuck there and 16mm is useful on occasion. If you don't use it then the money is better spent elsewhere, but I'm hesitant to jump right out and say to get rid of it because it can do 16mm - dealers choice on this one!

I had the 24L II for a long time, but sold it a few months after I got the 24-70L II. I was thinking there'd by times I'd miss the prime, but that has not happened at all. Sure, the zoom doesn't do f/1.4-2.7, but imo, IQ-wise, it equals the prime.

So sell the 24L II - you won't miss it.

As for the 16-35L II, if you like the ultra-wides, why not just keep it? And if you're ok with a slower lens, why not sell it for a 17-40L and whatever else you want to get?

ElectronGuru wrote in post #16100536
... You don't need to keep a lens that you aren't using.

+1

i have similar issue.
i have the 24-70L, 24LII, 24-105L
wedding wise, i use mainly the 24LII with 24-70L as the backup.
The 24-105 is my travelling lens.

rogergcq wrote in post #16100852
If you do not use them then selling is a good plan.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

Today I viewed two threads. And in both I found you replying to something, and calling someone (with the little yellow man) a FOOL...
That is not really how it should be (but thats only my opinion)

So the first step is sell the 24L II. I agree the 16-35II has the ultra wide capability so I will sell it a little later to ensure I'm really not using it.

swldstn wrote in post #16102395
So the first step is sell the 24L II. I agree the 16-35II has the ultra wide capability so I will sell it a little later to ensure I'm really not using it.

I rarely use ultrawide, but when I do, I have one of the cheapest ones on the market.

I dont shoot ultra wide much and telephoto much, so I skimp on those focal lengths. It works out great for me, since I dont feel like my budget is stretched, and still have those options in a pinch.

swldstn wrote in post #16102395
So the first step is sell the 24L II. I agree the 16-35II has the ultra wide capability so I will sell it a little later to ensure I'm really not using it.

Probably a wise choice. And, you could probably swap the 16-35 for a 17-40 if you wanted to keep a smaller chunk of cash tied up in a lens you rarely need.

And, as I mentioned above I'd also ditch the 24-105...I didn't miss that lens for an instant after buying the 24-70II.