psul_aul Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Besides the difference in speed, which lens do you guys like better: The FD 24mmf2, or the FD 24mm f2.8? Was thinking of getting a wide prime lens ... There seem to be a lot more ofthe f2.8 variety availble than the f2. Just curious as to what the opinions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris_h Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Oh I'd like to know this too. I have a chance to buy one fairly cheap, but worry the 2.8 isn't as good as the 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wei Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 I have the 24mm f2.8 and find it to be very sharp and contrasty - wide-open it's a little soft at the corners, but it's not too noticeable. I would venture to guess that the f/2 is pretty good, but by nature of its wider aperture, isn't as good a performer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awahlster Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 A friend of mine did some extensive testing of the three different 24mm Canon FD lenses the f2.8 F2.0 and F1.4L and found that clearly the f2.0 d was the best of the three. That said the f2.8 is a very very good lens for the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steven_moseley1 Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 Hi, I always wonder why people automatically assume the faster and more expensive lenses must be better? Simpler and slower lenses are far easier for lens makers to produce. The cheaper ones are often the better performers, this is a simple optical fact. cheers Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris_h Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 It's not so much the more money and faster equals "better" I'm curious because I do a lot of indoor bands shots at a bar and I need a faster lens. I was just wondering if it's worth it to get the 2 rather than the 2.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
14mm 2.8l Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 I owned/collected all 3 FDn 24mm and 24mm SSC breechmount at one point. The first ones I parted with were the 2.8's and soon after the 1.4L found a new home. Inspired by Mark's friend Vlad, I reevaluated my need to collect all 4. For me too 24 f2, is the keeper due to price, small size, & image quality. Lindy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 You shoot with what you have. I've used a 24mm f2.8 extensively on my F-1s for years and have been perfectly happy with the results. There are times I would have liked to have had the extra stop. If I run across a nice f2 one day, I will probably lift it as I am quite partial to the 24mm focal length in SLR land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h._p. Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 When I used FD (an F1 and an FT-B) I found the 24/2.8 to be a very reliable performer. It's adequate wide open and pretty darn good at f8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincenzo_maielli Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Hi, Psul aul. The FD 24 mm f/ 2 is a very excellent lens, but i own the f/ 2,8 version and i find it very good indeed and less expensive. Ciao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now