Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 21 May 2018 (Monday) 18:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70 or 35 1.4?

 
jlstan
Senior Member
Avatar
489 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Feb 2012
     
May 21, 2018 18:59 |  #1

Having trouble deciding. I currently shoot with a 50mm 70-200 and 100mm and am wanting to go a little wider. This would be for wedding/event shooting. The 35mm has my attention mostly because of the extra stops. Give me some options for me to mull over.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jlstan
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
489 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Feb 2012
     
May 21, 2018 19:38 |  #2

90% leaning towards the 35mm....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,004 posts
Likes: 988
Joined Dec 2006
     
May 21, 2018 21:13 |  #3

The versatility of the 24-70 Can't be beat. Primes are great until you are space restricted and can't move to compose as needed.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ah-keong
Senior Member
Avatar
793 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 719
Joined Apr 2016
Post edited 5 months ago by Ah-keong.
     
May 21, 2018 21:35 |  #4

I believe you need both....  :p
the 24-70mm for back-up to fall back on if your 50mm and 35mm fails....


Canon 7D Mark II | BG-E16 | Canon EF-S 10-18mm | Sigma DC 18-35mm ART | Canon EF 70-200mm f/2,8L IS II | Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 2/100mm ZE | Zeiss Distagon T* 2/35mm ZE
Canon Speedlite 430EX III-RT | 600EX-RT
Olympus E-PL3 | M.Zuiko ED 7-14mm PRO
Manfrotto BeFree Travel Tripod |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jlstan
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
489 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Feb 2012
     
May 22, 2018 06:20 as a reply to  @ gonzogolf's post |  #5

Totally agree but 1.4 also weighs heavy in my thoughts for those really dark receptions. I feel I already have the longer side of the 24-70 covered by my 50 and 70-200 that's what is making this so hard for me to decide.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,004 posts
Likes: 988
Joined Dec 2006
     
May 22, 2018 07:21 |  #6

jlstan wrote in post #18630252 (external link)
Totally agree but 1.4 also weighs heavy in my thoughts for those really dark receptions. I feel I already have the longer side of the 24-70 covered by my 50 and 70-200 that's what is making this so hard for me to decide.

Those really dark receptions are what flash is for. 1.4 isn't a savior when the the resulting depth of field is too shallow and the light quality is as poor as the light quantity. Sure there will be a few shots where the 1.4 would be great, but not enough to make it your wide coverage lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
5,885 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3008
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
May 22, 2018 08:08 |  #7

24-70 2.8 all the way. Don’t be scared to pump up your ISO and/or use flash.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - 18-55 - 23/35/50 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jlstan
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
489 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 101
Joined Feb 2012
     
May 22, 2018 12:15 |  #8

Thanks for all the great feedback totally understand the DOF limitations at 1.4 and yes flash with also be used when needed. Im starting to tip the other way towards the 24-70 . I also use a ND filter outdoors the one I use is has 77mm threads. Does anyone know if I will see any issues using a step down ring shooting at the wide side of the 24-70 with vignetting?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2723
Joined Oct 2015
     
May 22, 2018 14:53 |  #9

I looked all over Canon's web-site. I couldn't find any rule that says you can't own both. Go ahead. Indulge.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ltdave
Goldmember
2,712 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 606
Joined Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
     
May 22, 2018 18:42 as a reply to  @ jlstan's post |  #10

when i shot film, i owned only primes. zoom lenses at that time, really were not something most people carried due to slow speed or questionable IQ. did people buy them? yep. i sold more Nikkor AI 80-200 f4.5 lenses than i ever thought i would in the years i worked in a photo lab/camera store but it was an f4.5. and we sold it at a very low markup at $500+...

today's zoom lenses, while heavier than the old film lenses, are so much faster and more capable in my humble opinion...

i would love to shoot primes but a) theyre either really fast f1.4 which is nice, or as slow as the zoom with nothing in between and b) giant and heavy for being a prime. my FD 24, 35, 50 (f2, f2 and f1.4) are all nice short lenses, right about the same size as well. the EF 35 f1.4 is double the length...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,930 posts
Likes: 337
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
May 27, 2018 14:01 |  #11

I wouldn't be without a 24-70 for weddings. Modern cameras high ISO is amazing, you don't need F1.4 lenses for that reason any more. Razor thin DOF is more difficult to work with during rapidly changing parts of the day, it's fine when you have a bit more control.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
s1a1om
Senior Member
Avatar
501 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 434
Joined Jul 2013
Location: Hartford, CT, USA
     
May 27, 2018 16:17 |  #12

How about the 16-35 f/2.8?


Constructive criticism is always appreciated.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,004 posts
Likes: 988
Joined Dec 2006
     
May 27, 2018 16:46 |  #13

s1a1om wrote in post #18633932 (external link)
How about the 16-35 f/2.8?

While an ultra wide can be useful, the tendency toward unflattering perspective distortion makes it a lot less useful except for group shots.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dbs_jd
Senior Member
574 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 28
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Guatemala
     
May 27, 2018 18:55 |  #14

What about the 24-35mm f/2? It's quite heavy though.


Gripped bad boi Canon XT, Canon 50mm f/1.8 II, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro, Canon 135mm f/2 L, Canon 35mm f/2 IS, CZ f/1.8 FE, , Samyang 24mm f/3.5 Tilt Shift, CZ 24mm f/2 SSM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
evolyllaphotography
Member
Avatar
59 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 25
Joined Dec 2016
Location: Toronto
     
Jun 07, 2018 11:27 |  #15

35mm all the way. I just love shooting with a prime. The light weight is a bonus.


Toronto Documentary Wedding Photographer | Evolylla Photography (external link)
follow me on Instagram (external link); follow me on Facebook (external link); Canon shooter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,094 views & 7 likes for this thread
24-70 or 35 1.4?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is weddingvideography
747 guests, 346 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.