I bought this as my first lens with my 5d mk ii
Back last year in septrmber
I shot an entire wedding as a second shooter, a street style fashion shoot, and other odds and.ends.
At first I was torn between a 24-70 and the 35 all im going to say is get the 35
Shooting in 1.4 is pure magic, I have more keepers.than avetage shots of a 2.8
I used to be a d700 shooter with a 24-70
Although convenient, photography for me is about getting shots that look magical not just getting the shot
My nikon buddies alll want to shoot prime now
So if your deciding between a zoom and a prime, go for the prime, I have 0 regrets. Its wide enough for tight spaces and long enough for.portraits. Oh did I mention, the bokeh is glorious
I am in this exact situation, stuck between 24-70 L or 35L. I've been debating it for a long time and probably still will be in a few months but it's good to know you're this happy with the 35
I owned 24-70L before buying 85L and later 35L. Then I sold the 24-70L after forcing myself to get used to the primes. 2 years later, I am starting to think of getting the 24-70L again.
I totally agree. The 35L is just one lens that is just completely amazing. Like honest I've never experienced anything like it. You can do EVERYTHING with it. And my 35L was dropped in a muddy river, still works. Had to clean the elements but other than that its perfect.
Yes, indeed, a 35L mounted on a 5DmkII is pure magic. I sold my 24-70 lpng ago, and never looked back. The 35L is my most used lens, by far. Here's a snapshot from today, from the hip, at f1.4
I owned 24-70L before buying 85L and later 35L. Then I sold the 24-70L after forcing myself to get used to the primes. 2 years later, I am starting to think of getting the 24-70L again.
+1 The 35 is very useful and the 85...well it is pure magic, but when shooting an event I would rather have the 24-70 with a flash.
I have both lenses. I bought the 24-70L first, and then bought the 35L last year. I've been doing a lot of shots with primes the last 1.5 years, and it's made my photography a lot better.
Shooting at f/1.4 is simply incredible, that 35L is probably my best lens, with the 135L right beside it. My copy is just sick sharp with incredible detail - I love it!
Agree with the OP. My 35L is my best lens because it makes pictures that shine and are special. They are not just OK or Good..sometimes they are magic.
If you like what you get with the 35L because of the "magic", do yourself a favor and go search for used "Pipe" (aka 80-200L). It is the only zoom that i consider to be "magic gathering" like the 35L. Truly outstanding.
Not to be a contrarian, the 35L was a lens I just never had much use for and thus sold it. Good lens - sure, maybe even great, but it didn't meet my shooting style so it merely took up space on the shelf.
Hrow wrote:
Not to be a contrarian, the 35L was a lens I just never had much use for and thus sold it. Good lens - sure, maybe even great, but it didn't meet my shooting style so it merely took up space on the shelf.
I'm surprised looking at your images. It looks like you will do magic with 35L.
I just sold my 24-70 and bought a 35L and I love it. It has been about a month and I haven't taken it off my camera. Now I just have a 35 1.4 L 50 1.4, and a 70-200 2.8 IS mark I and for me my kit feels just about complete for how I shoot.
One more vote for the 35L. Whenever I've shot it - which unfortunately hasn't been as often as I would have liked - the results, especially at 1.4, have been spectacular.
As I said, I never cottoned on to it much. It's like a date where you can't point what's wrong with the girl yet you don't hit it off. Which is why mine is on sale right now...
I've got both lenses too, yes it's an amazing lens, thats the first lens I pick out of the bag! Can't wait for the MK II, hopefully better coatings and better weather sealing.
okafoja wrote:
I'm surprised looking at your images. It looks like you will do magic with 35L.
Thank you for the kind words. I bought the 35L for a specific shoot and it did a nice job but even there, I used it far less than I thought I would. I did a scan of several thousand of my images and found that only about 4% were between 30 and 40 mm and that of that 4% only about 10 really benefitted or would have benefitted from a fast lens. For what I was doing, it just didn't make much sense and represented funds that could be better utilized.
My shooting interests have recently taken a hard left off of Sanity Road so it once again may become a desirable addition to the arsenal at some point in the future.
datousteve wrote:
Hrow: totally OT but what were your three most used FL from your analysis?
In terms of pure numbers, the sequence went like this...
280 - 300mm
85mm
200mm
105mm
70mm
24mm
I was very surprised how often I was at the end of the zoom range. Good argument for primes if I wasn't lazy and they had IS, which I consider essential.
The dominance of the long end is because of sports and butterfly shooting. I have a 300 f4 but I frequently find myself using the 70-200 MkII with a 1.4X (280mm) these days. With tubes it is great fun.
The 85mm is from lots of flower shooting with an 85L - don't think it has every been stopped down past f3.5.
Starting to shoot more wide-angle so I expect my ultra-wide numbers have or will over take the 24.
