when would you use 24mm f/1.4G?

<p>Hi Guys,<br>

The 24mm f/1.4G was my wife's favorite lens when she has a D5100. I on the other hand use the 24-70 most of the time. We own them for about 2 years. After my wife switched over to full frame D600 she did not touch the 24mm again, she went to the 35mm f/1.4G and now she is in love with the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for her wedding shoots. The 24-70 is my go to lens for weddings as well.<br>

I just realized I did not bring my 24mm out much at all, other than sometimes when I want to take some real estate quick snap shots and just need a light lens to bring along.<br>

My question to photographers: when do you use your 24mm f/1.4G, over the 24-70? I know you can shoot wide open at f/1.4 in a dark room, but this lens is not sharp wide open, especially if you dont shoot closeups. The lens is so rarely used in my bag, but it's a nice lens I feel like I want to keep it if I do need it some day. Perhaps I am not very good at 24mm, but please, enlighten me with how you will use it to create beautiful images? share your thoughts about when and why you would use it over the 24-70? In weddings, 24mm can have its share of distortions on the people at certain angles..<br>

Thanks for all comments</p>

<p><em>when do you use your 24mm f/1.4G, over the 24-70?</em></p>

<p>I use it over the 24-70 when I am shooting in extremely low light and want to obtain more ambient light into the pictures, and/or when I want a dreamy feel with beautiful out of focus rendition (which is unusual for a wide angle). I use the 24 over the 35 prime when I want to get a more dynamic feel to my indoor or nighttime people photographs, and perhaps more environment than when using the 35mm. The drawback is the tricky focusing of the 24/1.4.</p>

<p><em> this lens is not sharp wide open, especially if you dont shoot closeups</em></p>

<p>I find it to be sharp at long distances at f/1.4 (though corners have issues, nevertheless I like the "feel" of the outcome) but for that I use live view AF to do the focusing as phase-detect AF is not adequate for the task. If I use regular (mirror down) AF then results are scattered all over the place (when shooting at night in low artificial light over long distances at f/1.4) and it's very difficult to get the system to focus on the desired target consistently. In daylight most of the focusing difficulties are greatly alleviated and regular AF works ok (though I find AF fine tune mandatory on this type of lens; mine is currently set to -19 on my D800). I normally use CDAF only in special circumstances such as when shooting over long distances in large nighttime outdoor events. It does the trick and the results from the 24/1.4 are often magical on the D800 when the focus is set correctly. Obviously there is some subjectivity to any lens evaluation.</p>

<p>I use my 24mm f/1.4G at almost any chance I get. I use the lens as a standard lens most of the time. The 35mm is a better lens for general pictures, but I didn't want my 24mm to be sitting around collecting dust, especially since it cost so much. A 24-70 zoom is a fantastic range and would probably cover most situations, but it's a large lens that's much, much heavier than a single prime lens. So, most of the time a lighter weight prime lens is best to carry around than a heavy, fast zoom lens. </p>

<p>24mm is a perspective that you need to get used to as for many it represents a little too wide. I am on a different system but got rid of my 24mm prime as I just did not like what I saw, preferring a 28mm and at times, a 19mm.</p>

<p>A 24mm on a D5100 gives the same perspective as 35mm on FF. I had a Konica Hexar AF (35/2) as my only camera for several years. The only time I felt the need for something else was when our girls played handball indoor. The 35mm perspective gives me a picture very much like what I visualize when I reach for the camera to capture something. I understand very well the choice of perspective/lens your wife has made.</p>

<p>i dont have a 24/1.4 G but i want one. in general, i use primes for low-light conditions where i need to shoot at sub-2.8 apertures and/or when i want blurred backgrounds. also, the 24-70 is a very intimidating lens. so when i want to take candid shots, i reach for the 50mm prime. another thing about the 24-70 is,it has a lot of distortion @24mm. so that would be a reason to use the 24mm prime, i.e. less distortion.</p>

<p>Most of my wide shots at fast aperture (35/1.4) are to very close subjects or details, with a perfectly blurred background.<br>

Almost never a distant subject or dim scenarios at such apertures. Results use to be disappointing to my taste.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>...I know you can shoot wide open at f/1.4 in a dark room, but this lens is not sharp wide open, especially if you dont shoot closeups...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ah... yet again the "lens is not sharp wide open" stuff.</p>

<p>That is the point at which your lens is probably weakest, yes. That is true of all lenses. It's also true that you have the least amount of depth of field wide open and chances are not everything you want to be in focus is not in the focus plane, or the plane of acceptable focus.</p>

<p>Additionally, all too often, people shooting wide open are shooting in dim light and very often shooting at shutter speeds that are too low (often by necessity).</p>

<p>I bet your lens is just fine wide open.</p>

<p>I have a Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 and a Sigma 30mm f1.4. For me, the speed of use the 17-55mm trumps everything. I only use my 30mm when I need the f1.4, usually for extremely low light situations where my subject is moving. The 30mm is not quite wide enough for me though. I don't have any interest in the Nikon 24mm, but am going to take a very close look at the Sigma when it's released. Sigma's new line of f1.4 lenses are outstanding! I might end up selling the 30mm and buying one, again for extreme low light shooting moving subjects.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>I'm using the 17-55 and a Sigma 24 f/1.8 and I'm very happy with that combination. I like to keep the 17-55 on the D2x and the 24 on the D700. I realize the Sigma is not a Nikon f/1.4 but it is very sharp and is 75% cheaper than the Nikon 24. As a non Professional I can't justify the cost.</p>

<p>I'd use it a lot in poorly lit interiors, and with today's ISOs, for shooting black cats in unlit closets. ;) <br>

My lens of this sort is an old 20mm f/4, but while I love it, it's a little wide for people shots just as a general rule.</p>

<p>The 24-70 has excellent sharpness and mid-tone contrast. But the bokeh is awful -- /awful/! The 24mm end of the 14-24 is a bit better. But for bokeh, I'd even go to a 24/2.8AI. </p>

<p>If my funds allowed me a 24 f/1.4, I bet it would be on my camera a lot.... I like wide angle views with shallow depth of field a lot. Plus, the advantage in weight of primes - it bet if I'd had the lens, I'd use it quite enough (my most used lens now is an old 35 f/1.4 AiS, and I wouldn't mind a lot wider - 24mm would fit the bill). As it is, I "make do" with a 24 f/2.8 and 20 f/3.5 - mainly the latter as it has a more pleasant rendering, in my view. But, what I shoot can hardly be called events....</p>

<p>But for event shooting? I wouldn't even bother to bring the prime. A 24-70 f/2.8 makes a lot more sense, as does 35mm as a prime.</p>

<p>My shooting style is different. A 24mm/f1.4 is of little use to me. I have the 28mm/f1.8 AF-S that I use once in a while. Recently I got to test the Sigma 35mm/f1.4 and I find that to be excellent. To me, the 35mm is even more useful than the 28mm indoors, on FX.</p>

<p>To me, 24mm happens to be a great focal length for landscape, and I use the 24mm PC-E, typically stopped down to f8 or so. I don't need 1.4 for that.</p>

<p>We all have a good quality zoom that gets us 24mm, and we can get generous depth of field by f8 for near/far compositions.</p>

<p>The benefit of the 24/1.4 is the ability to isolate a near subject with shallow depth of field at f1.4 or 2.0. This is where the lens really shine. Of course, it also gets you higher shutter speeds for dimly lit interiors.</p>

<p>But, at the end of the day, it's really all about f.14 depth of field.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>We all have a good quality zoom that gets us 24mm, ....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Have we? All?</p>

<p>I love my 17-55mm DX lens on my D200. However, I just bough a Nikon D4....I am vacillating between buying the 24mm f/1.4G and the 24-70mm zoom! My son owns the 24mm f/1.4G, so I have used it....and love the results.</p>