24mm 1.4 vs 35mm 1.4

<p>Hi!<br>

So I need some on advice between the 24mm 1.4 and the 35mm 1.4. I have a Canon 70d (1.6 crop) and a 50mm 1.8. I love my nifty fifty, however, I always find myself stepping back. I'd like to get a wider lens that still has portrait capabilities (and maybe be used as a walk around as well). I know the 35mm is THE wide angle portrait for full frame but what about for crop? Will it be too long to even be considered wide? Any help would be MUCH appreciated! Thanks!</p>

<p>If you can, I suggest you go to a camera shop and try them both. Personally, I think 24 is an acquired taste, with inherently more potential for distortion in many situations than 35. I've had both and found that 28 pretty well fills the gap for me.</p>

<p>I agree with Stephen. Go to a camera shop and try them out. When I was shooting with a 7D (crop sensor camera) and using my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 (which I loved), I had to step way back away from folks to get a nice portrait style shot also. I loved the quality of the images I get from that lens, but on a crop sensor camera, I was always to close to folks and had to back up. So at the time, like you, I was thinking a lens around a 30-35mm would be perfect. At that time Sigma was closing out the 30mm f/1.4 and the lens was selling for a bargain price. I picked one up, I personally found I didn't like that particular lens and ended up trading it in toward a used Canon 17-40mm f/4 L within a month. I just didn't like the old Sigma 30mm lens, it wasn't giving me what I thought would be the same quality but wider version of my Sigma 50mm, in my opinion. It could have just been that model of lens. The 35mm you are considering may be great, but I recommend you take your camera in to a shop that will let you try some test shots with both lenses. Try them at various f stops and make sure you are getting something you will be happy with before you spend the money. Maybe you can avoid any buyer regret and disappointment. It never hurts to look at the images from both lenses on the computer at home, see which you like best, stew on it and go back to buy the lens you want or maybe not one at all.</p>

<p>And personally, I think on a full frame camera somewhere around 85mm is perfect for portraits. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L at around 85mm is great or the 85mm prime on a full frame camera. </p>

<p>Good luck on what ever you choose.</p>

<p>Why not consider the excellent Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8?</p>

24mm is the equivalent of a 35mm on FF. Many or most consider this the perfect street photography lens as it is presents

a wide normal perspective. I think a 24mm on crop would be better pairing with a 50mm than a 35. However I would

generally pick a 50 mm (35 on crop) if I was shooting with just one lens.

<p>As Robin says, the 24mm on your 70D would be close to the 35mm which us a really useful focal length.</p>

<p>I should add, my experience was at full frame, not cropped.</p>

<p>I have Canon FF (5D Mark II) and crop sensor format (EOS M3). On FF the 24mm 1.4 L lens is terrific, with sharpness and flatness of field at full aperture way ahead of any 24mm I have ever owned. The L lens is, however, huge and very heavy, so I bought a 24mm 2.8 EF-S lens to use with the M3). I also have a 35mm EF lens, which makes a handy semi-wide lens on the 5D and a standard lens on the M3. 50 mm is a good FL on FF, I find I almost never use it on crop format.<br>

Both L lenses (24 and 35) are big and conspicuous and shout "Professional!" or "Amateur with lots of money!" Is this necessarily what you want?</p>

Sarah, besides the great advise already offered, I would suggest that you try the focal length on real portrait

circumstances. While renting would be a good option for this, an easier way to test is using a zoom. Even a cheap zoom

will give you enough information regarding the benefits of one focal length angainst another focal length, specially if you

set you zoom to a focal length and don't change it during a test session. You must remember that this test is only for focal

length, as other characteristics of the image, such as depth of field, bokeh quality, etc, won't be matched when using a

zoom lens.

<p>I've had both lenses, and both are very good (but rendered redundant for me when I got a 24-70/2.8 L II).</p>

<p>As the others have said, go with the focal length that you'll use the most. I personally prefer 35mm to 24mm, but that's just me.</p>

<p>Did you get a Kit Lens (18 to 55) with your 70D? If so GAF tape it at 24mm and use it solidly for two~four weeks - then do the same at 35mm. Make your choice form your own experience.</p>

<p>Based upon my experience when I am using two Prime Lenses at Functions, the most flexibility and effectiveness is gained by a pair of 35mm and 85mm (on 5D Series) - that roughly equates to 24mm and 50mm on APS-C Format, so if I were buying a mate for your 50mm, for the task you outline I would opt for a 24mm Prime.</p>

<p>For Street Photography, when using a Prime Lens, I use a 35mm on a 5D Series the most often - again that roughly equates to 24mm on APS-C. That was one reason I bought a Fuji X100s and Im use it for a lot of Street Portraiture (23mm F/2 lens on APS-C Format Camera).</p>

<p>Notwithstanding all the above, I think as a general comment, considering the High ISO Capacity of the recent Canon Cameras <strong>a very fast Standard Zoom is a sensible investment</strong>: you might have a passion and a particular reason for Prime Lenses?</p>

<p>But, as a general comment, if you compare what you can achieve/produce with your 70D and an EF-S 17 to 55/2.8 IS to using ONLY a 24/1.4 and a 50/1.8 on your camera, then I think that there is NOT that much more that you can achieve using ONLY a 24/1.4 and a 50/1.8. . .</p>

<p>I think that the main list comprises:<br>

> <strong>Saving two stops</strong> of <strong>ISO</strong> (Noise) or <strong>Shutter Speed</strong> (Subject Motion Blur) when shooting in very Low Level Available Light (this might be quite important depending upon how often do you shoot n that situation?)</p>

<p>> <strong>Creating a Shallower DoF</strong> (it is good for you to quantify that - for example, when shooting a Tight Head Shot, there will probably be a perceivable difference. But for an Half Shot the approx. DoF at F/1.4 is 6" and at F/2.8 is 12" - maybe that is significant to you, but for most Half Shots it wouldn't be for me, in fact for an Half Shot I would usually want about 12" DoF - i.e. 12" being the approximate 'thickness' of the 'average' person. At a Full Length Shot, F/1.4 renders about 1'4" DoF and F/2.8 renders about 2'7" which is in most cases is much less significant</p>

<p>On the other hand, arguably you CAN achieve LOT more with an F/2.8 Zoom Lens with a compass 17mm to 55mm and you also have Image Stabilization. AND that particular the Zoom lens costs less that the 24/1.4MkII.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Canon make a 24mm f/2.8 pancake lens. It is much cheaper than the 24/1.4 or the 35/1.4. Unless you're sure you need the wider apertures why not try it out?</p>

<p>I suggest that you try both focal lengths (it doesn't have to be those particular lenses) to photograph faces before you go further for the reason Stephen noted: distortion. One effect of focal length--actually, of the distance a focal length requires you to stand from the subject--is a change in perspective. There is a reason why something in the range of 85 mm is considered the default portrait lens on a FF by many people--they find the very slight flattening one gets at that distance flattering. That is close to 50 mm on your camera. The closer you get--the shorter the focal length you use--the more the perspective will make the face look bulbous, e.g., an exaggerated nose. 35mm will not give you any such distortion on a crop; it is for all practical purposes a normal lens. 24mm will create a bit of this effect.</p>

I agree with Ed Avis 24 f1.4 and 35 f1.4 are great lenses, too big and expensive for use as a general

purpose single focal length lens.

 

The 24 f2.8 pancake is a much better selection. My choice, hands down would be the very excellent EF 28

f2.8 IS lens (with a crop camera). The IS is very useful, excellent quality lens and about one-third the cost

of the two f1.4 lenses.