24L or 35L on a 7d

which one would you choose based on IQ and usefulness if you could only buy 1 of these lens for the 7d?

The usefulness would depend on which focal length you prefer.

Are you looking at the 24L II or the original model? If I could only have one, I would probably go with the 35L since it would be similar to 50mm on a full frame camera.

It would be 24L II.

If I had the $$ (which I don't ) I'd get the 24L as it seems as a better FL for me. But I think I'm going to get the 28 1.8 to be just in the middle of the two

I'm not sure about YOUR purpose, but for my usage, the 35L is the next one on my list far and above the next lens on my list.

newbiephotographer wrote in post #8675435
It would be 24L II.

Hmm, tough choice then. The 24L II is definitely the nicer lens IMO. It's built better, weather sealed, has Canon's new coatings to reduce flare, etc. They're pretty similar in terms of IQ--the 24L II might do a little better in harsh sunlight because of the coatings and it's built with digital SLRs in mind.

So I guess my advice still stands--buy based on your focal length needs, it's really the most important thing.

I love my 35L on all three sensors but I would probally go with the 24L II on the 7D because it will offer a 38mm field-of-view.

The 5D/35L still travels with me at night because it is light and wide enough.

Seems like an odd question. No mention of use? Subject?

gasrocks wrote in post #8675658
Seems like an odd question. No mention of use? Subject?

walkaround lens that can take portraits and sceneries as well, daytime and nighttime photography, indoor and outdoor. mainly, I want to know what people would use and would find versatile to them, and if it's possible to replace zoom lens with either of these for traveling.

Don't think either would/could "replace" your zooms for traveling. You'll simply need to compromise on the FL and FoV you get.

Why not just use your 17-50 right now and set it to 24 and shoot exclusively like that for an entire day. And the next day set it to 35 and see which FL you think will work best for you?

I did that with my 17-55 and that's how I ended up choosing the 24. Because difference between 35 and 55 was very small and in many indoor situations, 35 was not wide enough unless I only wanted head-n-shoulder shots.

But your situation may vary and you may have a very large house where you can back up and include more people if/when needed.

newbiephotographer wrote in post #8675707
walkaround lens that can take portraits and sceneries as well, daytime and nighttime photography, indoor and outdoor. mainly, I want to know what people would use and would find versatile to them, and if it's possible to replace zoom lens with either of these for traveling.

For crop 24L.

I think your zooms will be far more versatile for travelling.

For my shooting, I would get the 35L because the FL suits me better.

Frankly I wouldn't get either one for use on a 1.6X crop camera.

I'd get 28/1.8 and two or three other lenses instead. Upgrade from 50/1.8 to 50/1.4 (Canon's or Sigma's), for example. And/or maybe add an 85/1.8.

On the other hand, with a full frame camera I'd really like to have the 35/1.4. Just personal preference.

jwcdds wrote in post #8675737
Don't think either would/could "replace" your zooms for traveling. You'll simply need to compromise on the FL and FoV you get.

Why not just use your 17-50 right now and set it to 24 and shoot exclusively like that for an entire day. And the next day set it to 35 and see which FL you think will work best for you?

I did that with my 17-55 and that's how I ended up choosing the 24. Because difference between 35 and 55 was very small and in many indoor situations, 35 was not wide enough unless I only wanted head-n-shoulder shots.

But your situation may vary and you may have a very large house where you can back up and include more people if/when needed.

What he said...I've got a 7D on pre-order, and plan on sticking with my current lens line-up

The damn thing isn't even out yet. This thread won't make any sense.