35L or 24-70 for a model shoot?

The shoot will be held at a hotel, so a fast lens is needed, because im expecting some areas where lighting is not going to be good enough for a 2.8. I already have my head and shoulder specialist (135L) so I just need another one at a shorter focal length to cover head to toe as well as the background indoors.

Should I go with a 24-70 2.8 or the 35 1.4?

Im willing to compromise versatility so as long as the 35 is lighter and also produces sharper images than the 24-70.

What camera will these lenses be used on? On a FF the 35L will get the job done, however you may get some distortion if thats the look your going for. You should be okay with the 24-70L if you're willing to increase the ISO.

Its hard to advise not knowing the body. Keep in mind that the 35, especially on a full frame is going to have some wide angle distortion. Not particularly flattering to the human form from most angles so what you gain in speed may be helpful.

Sorry, i have a 5D2.

rodal126 wrote in post #10283793
What camera will these lenses be used on? On a FF the 35L will get the job done, however you may get some distortion if thats the look your going for. You should be okay with the 24-70L if you're willing to increase the ISO.

gonzogolf wrote in post #10283818
Its hard to advise not knowing the body. Keep in mind that the 35, especially on a full frame is going to have some wide angle distortion. Not particularly flattering to the human form from most angles so what you gain in speed may be helpful.

Hmm, so distortion is going to be an issue. Wow, I never thought of that. Yikes, I think im better off with a 24-70 then?

eye2i wrote in post #10283851
Hmm, so distortion is going to be an issue. Wow, I never thought of that. Yikes, I think im better off with a 24-70 then?

Things closer to the camera are exaggerated. It's not as bad as with a true wide angle lens, but noticeable.

OP already said he needs the 35L/24-70L for head to toes as he has the 135L for close-ups, so in this case, distortion resulting from the 35L is a moot point IMO. Take your 35L.

Since you will be indoors you might not have the room you might need with a prime. Shooting wide open is also not a requirement. Personally I woud bring them all and decide what will work the best for you. If you can only bring one, I would bring the 24-70.

You're going to want to use a flash, and shooting at f/1.4 is probably not going to give you enough DoF anyway for these shots... So I'd go for the 24-70mm. It'll give you more flexibility in framing and stopped down, especially w/flash - will be just as sharp as the 35L.

Of course, if you don't have a flash or just don't want to use one... The extra speed of the 35L is the only way to go. I'd shoot it at a more modest f/1.8-2.0 for both DoF and sharpness. You're still a stop ahead of the zoom this way ( f/2 vs f/2.8 ).

Tough choice, they're both awesome.

eye2i wrote in post #10283517
The shoot will be held at a hotel, so a fast lens is needed, because im expecting some areas where lighting is not going to be good enough for a 2.8. I already have my head and shoulder specialist (135L) so I just need another one at a shorter focal length to cover head to toe as well as the background indoors.

Should I go with a 24-70 2.8 or the 35 1.4?

Im willing to compromise versatility so as long as the 35 is lighter and also produces sharper images than the 24-70.

Answer is simple, 35.

+1 Bohdank