which one you prefer for portraits 24L II or 35L

Hi
that my qusetion
24L f/1.4 II or 35L f/1.4 for portraits on FF bodies
Thanks

moltengold wrote in post #16617719
Hi
that my qusetion
24L f/1.4 II or 35L f/1.4 for portraits on FF bodies
Thanks

i wouldn't consider either one a 'portrait' lens.

but between the 2, 35L.

Same here. 35mm for me.

Both are very wide. But the 35mm would be reasonable if used with a crop camera.

Thanks all

i will use three lenses
24-105L f/4 for general use
100L f/2.8 macro and portraits
70-200L f/2.8 IS II for portraits
and stop thinking again

I love to have both and I shoot portraits even using a fisheye but...a 85L or 135L is a better portrait lens

Sigma 35 or Sigma 50.

Mark K wrote in post #16617782
I love to have both and I shoot portraits even using a fisheye but...a 85L or 135L is a better portrait lens

i sold the 135L to my friend

DarthVader wrote in post #16617784
Sigma 35 or Sigma 50.

yes i like the sigma 50mm

It's just a matter of how much background you want in the photo. The 24L II is unique in that it's the widest lens that can do f/1.4. The combination of a wide angle of view with a blurry background creates a look that no other lens can. It's great for environmental portraits where the subject it's in the center of the frame and a bit far from the lens (i.e. half body shot) so that there's no rectilinear or linear perspective distortion.

Thanks Chris for the info

moltengold wrote in post #16617838
Thanks Chris for the info

I'm sure that you can look through the sample archive thread for each lens, but here's an example of the 24L in action (wide open):

I love the 24. I would never say it is a portrait lens, but I sure use it and love it for shots like the above. What Chris said that makes it so awesome is it is the widest lens that does 1.4, so you can reveal your setting like only a wide angle can, but at the same time isolate the subject. So you can feel the setting(like a nice resteraunt with formal atmosphere) but it is not distracting from the couple in any way. I really like that about the lens, this same shot from further back with a 85 would look like most all portraits, people with an obliterated background. I like how at 1.4 the 24 kinda melts the background in a way that you know what it is but it is not distracting.

Now all that said, i have it for many other reasons, the cool environmental portraits is just a plus, not a reason to get the 24 IMO.

24L and 35L are great environmental portrait lens. 35mm's distortion is manageable. 24L, though a great lens is just too wide for most occasions but in my honest opinion, it creates a magical perspective than any 35mm 1.4 lenses.

I'm a prime lover and I use primes constantly wide open for Wedding Photography and portraiture, but I'm starting to find the 24LII is not that useful. The problem is, if you photograph far away from the subject so as to avoid perspective distortion, you end up losing the value of the f/1.4 as DOF becomes so deep anyway that you may as well just use the 24-70II f/2.8

I typically use this lens for environmental portraits and group photos only (where I want a LOT of the background in the photo). The lens is also very good for fashion and Bridal photography when you want to deliberately distort the legs so that it extends the legs (e.g. in photo 2 her legs are extended making her look taller):