# Did I make the wrong decision?



## VitorMachado (Sep 13, 2013)

Just picked up a brand new 24L ii for $1,350. I'm starting to think I shouldn't of went this wide.

First of let me start off with what I shoot. Automotive photography is what I do. The 135L is my sniper and that's almost 85% of my on-location lens. I do occasionally attend events/car shows which is the "prime" reason I got this lens. I am disappointed in the fact that 24mm is almost too wide for me. The distortion isn't much from afar, but the closer you get, the more you want to back up. I just started testing waters in portraiture, and this lens is the absolute last piece of glass I should be using for that type of work.

Also, I can honestly say I haven't seen the value of (retail) $1,500 in this lens. The image quality is great, but for some reason the lens doesn't POP like I'd expect it to.

My question to you guys: Should I sell for the same price I payed, and look into the Sigma 35mm? I'm not interested in the Canon model as of right now. I've seen plenty of comparisons and the Sigma wins my vote. I'd put the left over money into some other piece of glass, or maybe even a 600EX-RT.

Thanks a lot in advance for the feedback.


----------



## Jim Saunders (Sep 13, 2013)

If you don't have one why not rent a 24-70 for a weekend and see what length you like? The Sigma 35 is probably what I'd get rather than the Canon one, but if you find you prefer another length better then there are options.

Jim


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 13, 2013)

If 24mm is very wide-angle, buy a APS-C camera and will be less wide-angle ... ;D Resolved.


----------



## RC (Sep 13, 2013)

Better to be too wide than not wide enough especially when you are in tight areas and can't get back far enough. I'd keep it and crop when necessary instead of going with a 35mm lens. I don't do auto photography but it seems like the 24L is about the perfect lens for that.

Also, I'd still pick up a good flash, that might be all that's lacking for that "pop."


----------



## Etienne (Sep 13, 2013)

VitorMachado said:


> Just picked up a brand new 24L ii for $1,350. I'm starting to think I shouldn't of went this wide.
> 
> First of let me start off with what I shoot. Automotive photography is what I do. The 135L is my sniper and that's almost 85% of my on-location lens. I do occasionally attend events/car shows which is the "prime" reason I got this lens. I am disappointed in the fact that 24mm is almost too wide for me. The distortion isn't much from afar, but the closer you get, the more you want to back up. I just started testing waters in portraiture, and this lens is the absolute last piece of glass I should be using for that type of work.
> 
> ...



Where did you get this lens new for $1350? It's $1749 at B&H now.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 13, 2013)

VitorMachado said:


> My question to you guys: Should I sell for the same price I payed, and look into the Sigma 35mm?



Sorry to say this...but you are the best person can answer your own question. If you feel 24mm is not for you, then try Sigma 35mm before sell it. You would get same resale value - either you sell it now or after 35mm. I found 35mm is quite easy to shoot on FF. I shoot a lot with my RX1.

I just don't see the advantage of keeping the lens that you hate or don't use at all - even if you lose $100 or so, sell it.......


----------



## BozillaNZ (Sep 13, 2013)

Just personal preferences. I find 24 suits my style far better than 35, but that's just me.

Also 24L II's color/contrast/resolution is absolutely fantastic. Just some old saying: If your picture is not good enough, you are not close enough!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 13, 2013)

It indeed comes down to your personal needs and judgment. Return or resell it if its too wide.


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 13, 2013)

24L II > 35mm 1.4's. 

That's just me and if I need narrower, I got my 50mm. 35mm is great if your not sure if you need narrow or wide.


----------



## scottkinfw (Sep 13, 2013)

Judging from your comments, you don't love this lens, and as such, you likely won't use it. Might as well get what you will love and use.


----------



## RGF (Sep 13, 2013)

It will take time to get use to it. Not rush - moving from 135 to 24 is a shock. Give it time, then try a 14 or 15mm and you will see what wide truly is ;D


----------



## AmbientLight (Sep 13, 2013)

RGF said:


> It will take time to get use to it. Not rush - moving from 135 to 24 is a shock. Give it time, then try a 14 or 15mm and you will see what wide truly is ;D



That's pretty good. Personally I shoot at 24mm quite a lot. If you are space restricted and want dramatic exaggeration of the forms of your subjects, you will be better off with a 24mm lens. This should work well with cars. The only trick behind this is the old saying I quote below:


BozillaNZ said:


> If your picture is not good enough, you are not close enough!



Do give it a try and then you can rethink your options. There is no need to be in a hurry to correct what may not even be wrong.


----------

