# 24mm options...



## adhocphotographer (Jun 24, 2013)

Hi all,

I had recently been considering getting the TS-E 24 II as a landscape/architecture lens, however, after great advice from you guys (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15485.0) I have re-evaluated my needs.

I shoot at 24mm a lot, for landscape, buildings and street (in that order of preference too).
I'm looking for an increase in IQ and speed over my 24-105
IS is not needed particularly, but would not be snubbed at, AF is required though
Size and weight are a consideration but not a major one... I carry my camera with me always so lighter is always nicer.

My current thoughts are:
24mm f/1.4L II
24mm f/2.8 IS 
24-70mm f/2.8L II

I'm leaning more towards a prime as i am quite happy with my 24-105 as a "one lens does all travel lens". I do not have any urgent need to go wider at the moment and am happily waiting for a 14-24.

Any more great words of advice/wisdom?

Thanks,

John


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 24, 2013)

I guess this isn't a very interesting question... : I will take no replies as no strong opinion on choice and that they are all good (which they are)!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 24, 2013)

Since you list buildings, I'd go with the 24/1.4L II, budget permitting. It has the least amount of barrel distortion of the three lenses you list, and although it's a bit soft away form the center wide open at f/1.4, stopped down to f/2.8 or narrower it's as sharp or sharper than the other lenses you list. The only area where the 24/1.4L II is worse is vignetting, (over three stops wide open), but that's also much less of an issue when stopped down.


----------



## c3hammer (Jun 24, 2013)

I have both the 24mm f/2.8 IS and the 24mm f/1.4 L II. I bought the IS version to try on a stabilizer for video work and have found it to be an outstanding lens. I'd highly recommend you go rent or test one at the local shop.

The 24 f/2.8 IS has an image quality that doesn't show in the numbers. It's warmer, has a higher acutance, but is slightly darker. On the crop cam it appears to be sharper than my 24 L II which I think the crops from a 60D on TDP would concur with.

I think it's definitely worth a look, if weight and size, much less cost are any issue at all.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## K-amps (Jun 24, 2013)

Unless you make money off Architectural shots, I would consider selling the 24-105 and getting the 24-70ii. It replaces the zoom of the 24-105, is razor sharp at 24mm, better vignetting than the 24F1.4wide open, it might have some distortion but that is fixable in PP.

Also... you will not need to carry 2 lenses around.

But... if you need a specialized lens .... then the TSE and the 1.4 would fit the bill for roughly the same cash.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 24, 2013)

in consideration... the 24-70 and 24 1.4 are about 150$ apart in price here... would that sway your opinion one way or the other?


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 26, 2013)

I'm now torn between the 24 f/1.4 II and the 24-70 II. 

From what i gather (online) there is little or no difference in IQ at f/2.8 or higher.... so it really breaks down to a choice between a speed vs versatility (assuming equal-ish IQ, excluding barrel distortion which is higher in the zoom; vignetting appears to be about the same in both at equal aperture)... 

Is that statement true or am I forgetting a particular perk of one over the other?

How often will i need faster than 2.8 in a wide-angle vs how much i would like better IQ over a range! dang... I feel like Homer Simpson choosing between glaze and sprinkles!

Unfortunately, renting is not an option...


----------



## Zv (Jun 26, 2013)

You know I never even thought about it that way - why pay almost the same for the 24LII when you could get the 24-70II for a little more. It's got me thinking. If it were me and IS wasn't important I'd get the 24-70II and possibly sell the 24-105L, though it's a versatile lens and may come in handy for your video needs. 

Have you considered the new 24mm TSE? For buildings and architecture it might prove more useful if you like your verticals to correct etc. might also be fun playing around with the tilt function. Not very handholdable though. 

The 24mm IS may be the smarter, lighter (on the wallet as well), more compact option. With f/2.8 and four stops of IS you could get shots in near dark. Might open up some creativity. Then again you already have 24mm f/4 with 3 stops of IS so it's only a two stop adv. though two stops is not to be sniffed at when the lens is fairly cheap. 

I guess the only time you might want f/1.4 is for night shots of star fields or what not. Even then you'd prob stop it down to f/2 or f/2.8 for improved sharpness. I could be wrong there.


----------



## bholliman (Jun 26, 2013)

For me the 24-70 2.8 II would be the clear choice over the 24 1.4 II. For close to the same price the zoom gives you terrific flexibility and similar IQ at 24mm. The 24-70 II is much sharper than your 24-105 at 24mm with considerably less barrel distortion. A prime would give you wider apertures, but unless you are doing lots of astrophotography, I can't imagine you will be using it much at f/1.4 anyway.


----------



## insanitybeard (Jun 26, 2013)

I think I'll be adding the 24 2.8 IS to my collection next for use on a crop body, my main reasons being the compact size and low weight, the low light handholdability and the ~40mm equivalent focal length, good as a walkaround lens. For more specialised architectural work and landscapes the tilt shift may be a better bet in your case, even though it is manual focus, if that is one of your primary uses.


----------



## hammar (Jun 26, 2013)

I have both, I just got the 24-70ii last week and I love it so far. I'm currently trying to sell the 24/1.4ii, mainly because I need the money but also because I have no use for it anymore. I like to shoot landscapes and apertures below 2.8 is not tremendously useful for that anyway.


----------



## drolo61 (Jun 26, 2013)

I have been in your shoes a couple of weeks ago and CR members pointed me to the 24-70 2.8 II.
I jumped that direction - and shocked how visibly the better IQ is compared to my now 7 y old 24-105.
This zoom is an amazing piece of glass.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 26, 2013)

Zv said:


> Have you considered the new 24mm TSE?



Indeed, that is where i started, but drifted away from it as i do like AF for quick street/environmental shots.



insanitybeard said:


> I think I'll be adding the 24 2.8 IS to my collection next for use on a crop body, my main reasons being the compact size and low weight, the low light handholdability and the ~40mm equivalent focal length, good as a walkaround lens.



This is also a consideration for my wife, she is getting a 100D... hmmm, I had narrowed it down to two and now i'm back to three... on the bright side, at least i have a choice and the money to spend on it too... damn these 1st world problems! : 

Thanks for the input, i think I am more leaning towards the 24-70 (+ new CPL filter, sigh)...


----------



## Zv (Jun 26, 2013)

adhocphotographer said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Have you considered the new 24mm TSE?
> ...



Yeah you can't go wrong with the 24-70II. Sorry to have added to your confusion with the TSE!


----------



## SPL (Jun 26, 2013)

This is a great thread!….I’m somewhat in the same boat. I have a 24L,…purchased this for star and night work (on a FF body) but have not used it much. I considered selling it to pick up the new 24-70II for more versatility and to maintain sharpness and good IQ.


----------



## tron (Jun 26, 2013)

I got the 24mm TS-E II and I never regretted it. It doubles for architectural and landscape photography and it is very sharp.
I do not find the manual focus a problem. But of course, I do not use it for street photography.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 26, 2013)

tron said:


> I got the 24mm TS-E II and I never regretted it. It doubles for architectural and landscape photography and it is very sharp.
> I do not find the manual focus a problem. But of course, I do not use it for street photography.



The TSE was my first thought, but when testing my competence in MF (which was ok) i realised how much i use my camera for candid "capture the moment" when walking through town or trekking... So i decided that AF was important to me.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 26, 2013)

adhocphotographer said:


> I'm now torn between the 24 f/1.4 II and the 24-70 II.
> 
> From what i gather (online) there is little or no difference in IQ at f/2.8 or higher.... so it really breaks down to a choice between a speed vs versatility (assuming equal-ish IQ, excluding barrel distortion which is higher in the zoom; vignetting appears to be about the same in both at equal aperture)...
> 
> ...



If I remember correctly, you are based in India (same as I am). IMHO, shooting in this busy country requires large apertures because blurring out the background is usually more than desirable. If you do want the background, you can always step the lens down. The reverse is not possible unless you have sufficient time for PP.

I was generally advised (here) that the 24-70 II obviates the need of primes - maybe true for some users but for what I shoot and in the conditions I shoot, I really can do with a wider aperture. While I do like the 24-70 II, I do regret the fact in a number of circumstances, that I can't shoot a 35mm shot at f/1.4. 

Choosing between these two lenses is extremely difficult because both are stellar lenses. You need to identify how you like your shots and whether you are willing to change lenses on the go. I went for the zoom because that felt like the best decision to take at the time - Going forward, I will add a few primes though.

PS: Do you intend to buy the lens in India?


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 27, 2013)

J.R. said:


> If I remember correctly, you are based in India (same as I am).



Correct, im in bangalore! 



J.R. said:


> Choosing between these two lenses is extremely difficult because both are stellar lenses. You need to identify how you like your shots and whether you are willing to change lenses on the go.



Indeed, but I think I am more inclined to favour versatility over speed... When i go for a specific shoot, I often find i do a lot of street/candid environmental shots along the way. I rarely shoot lower than 2.8 or feel the need to...



J.R. said:


> Do you intend to buy the lens in India?



I do... i am not planning for going back to the EU (or US) any time soon, and due to the current exchange rates, i can usually get things at the same if not slightly cheaper here... and I get 2 years warranty here (i will be here for another 3 years anyway).


----------



## Ekychoi (Jun 27, 2013)

I have all three lenses - 24-105mm, 24-70mm II, 24mm 1.4 II. The series II are similar but 24mm prime seems to me to be sharper.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Jun 27, 2013)

Ekychoi said:


> I have all three lenses - 24-105mm, 24-70mm II, 24mm 1.4 II. The series II are similar but 24mm prime seems to me to be sharper.



thanks for the info... much appreciated... think i'm going to go for the 24-70 anyway... I will keep the 24-105 for those times i want the range without changing lenses!


----------

