24mm FD 1.4L

[john_t_fusselman]

Am considering buying this lens and would appreciate any user comments

about function, clarity, detail, depth of field issues and general usefulness as "the" wide angle lens i use other than the FD35-105, 3.5...(all my lenses are 72mm) camera is F1.. expect outdoor use in high alpine & desert mountains in winter and summer. is this a strong, solid, reliable useful lens?

thanks, John, Modesto, California

[terry_carraway]

John,

 

<p>

 

Sorry, while I envy your getting this lens, I have never used it.

 

<p>

 

But considering the performance of the other L series lenses, it will

be awesome.

 

<p>

 

WRT depth of field, it will be the same as any 14 mm lens, meaning, it

will have LOTS. As to general usefulness, I would probably get the

20-35 f3.5 L zoom first, or some primes and see if you want wider.

 

<p>

 

The 20-35 zoom is also a 72mm filter size.

[øyvinddahle]

I have this lens, it is worn, big, heavy, takes to much place in my

bag. I would do better with a 24/2.0 because of this. But I have not

tried to put any high speed film and used it in any low-light

situations, like the pub we go to after every cameraclub meeting.

 

<p>

 

The pictures taken with this lens are sharp, crisp, every positive

word - but the lens does not make me a better photographer.

 

<p>

 

It is probably easier to focus with than the 2.0, but for the sake of

viewfinder brightness, it is sufficient with 2.8.

 

<p>

 

The worn lens is still working, but you might mature one day and

start shooting other things than nature :-) - get the smallest lens

you can cope with - my 50-135/3.5 is my slowest lens. My flashes only

cover 24mm (300TL and 577G) so I do not go to any further wide angles

(except perhaps the used 14/3.5 Sigma for $400.