I just recently purchased a Canon 5D Mark ii and I was wondering which one of these two lenses would be the ideal "wide-angle" walk around lens. I am looking for a wide-angle option because I have all my other bases covered already. The other lenses that I have are the Canon 50mm f/1.2L, Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, and Canon 200mm f/2.8L II.
I primarily shoot portraits and events so I was wondering which would best suit my needs for both street shooting and events. I rented both lenses over the last week and I still can't make up my mind on which one would be the "ideal" wide angle lens. I use my 50mm 1.2 as my walk-around "standard" lens and sometimes I feel that I just can't go wide enough. Any and all help, comments, and suggestions are appreciated Thanks in advance!
Personally I think the 24mm is the much more flexible of the two. 14mm is INCREDIBLY wide. Unless you know you really need to go that wide then it's a lens that is rarely needed. Nobody can tell you for certain which is the right focal length though, it's too subjective based on preference, stye, and subject. If you really can't choose, the 24mm is f1.4 rather than f2.8... that's a big difference
Feb 03, 2012 at 10:59 PM
Jonathan Huynh Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
14mm is too wide for me, 24mm is about right for most wide shots and the f/1.4 would certainly be nice. So if it were me the choice would be the 24mm. But I don't know what would work best for you.
The 14mm, while a wonderful lens, is anything but a "walk around" lens. This one takes some getting used to and may be one of the more difficult lenses to master. The field of view is so wide it's easy to distort objects and also to include much more than may be wanted in the image. The 24mm is a far easier lens to use. If you're leaning toward the 14mm I highly recommend renting one for a few days first to see how it is in actual use.
Now if only they made a 14-24L zoom for Canon, then my needs would be set I fancy that zoom lens for nikon users.
I took the 14mm out for another spin today and have come to the conclusion that it's a very specialized lens for what I do. I had to get extremely close to my subject just to frame properly and sometimes I still got a part of the background that I didn't want. However, I still got some great images with the 14mm that the 24mm couldn't do for me.
I tested the 24mm out last weekend and it was definitely easier to use. Didn't have to get as close to my subject to frame properly and f/1.4 was definitely an added bonus. Before the 24 1.4 I tried the 35 1.4 to compare and they are both very good in different ways. Has anyone had any experience comparing the 24mm f/1.4 to the 35mm f/1.4
I'd recommend that instead of either of the lenses you mentioned - you should get the 14mm Samyang + PTLens and a 24 1.4 version 1 for the same amount of money.
I have the 14mm Samyang, you don't really need AF for this focal length, especially if you have live view. The mustache distortion can be fixed using PTLens, I have not bought the software as yet - there were only a couple of shots that I've taken so far which show obvious distortion.
The 24 1.4 version 1 is better at vignetting that the new version 2. You should be able to get it for around 950 used easy. Sharpness at 1.4 is fine. AF could be a little better but its not a deal breaker.
Since you need a wide angle to compliment your current kit, I would say 24L II is a better choice than the 35L. I have the set (24, 35, 50, 85, 135) and I will tend to shoot 24-50-135 or 35-85. I wouldn't typically lens change from 50 to 35 if I could just take a step back. I tend to shoot scenes in as vignettes with a master shot, then singles, OTS etc. I would also agree with you that 14 is really too wide for most stuff. +1 on the reccommendation to pick up the samyang 14 in addition to your 24L II.
Well, the 14mm is definitely NOT a walk-around lens in the most popular sense of the term. Its a lens that its at its best when used on a tripod, level, to shoot architecture, interior spaces and landscapes (that have very interesting Foreground subjects).
The 24mm 1.4 is awesome as a walk around lens in a city at night. But I almost always use the 50mm (or 35mm) for that to better isolate subjects. What the 24 1.4 also does is give you that "medium format look" when used during the day at 1.4 because of the slight background blur achieved without having to have the subject extremely close to the lens. Its not a stellar lens optically so If you dont intend to use it at f1.4-2 it isnt worth it.
For other than people, read inanimates, I have "walked around" with a 17mm TSE and 1.4xTC (to make the 17 a 24). You can hand hold but it takes a lot of attention to procedure. but acheavycand slow rig.
Frankly, the best walk around must be the 24-70. Its not light but very versatile with fine IQ. If you don't need F2.8 then try the 24-105.
To give you an idea, with a 14mm lens you could (back in the days) shoot the entire height of the WTC, from the very bottom where it meets the ground up to the sky, from the edge of the sidewalk. Not something for everyday use.
The 24/1.4 has been my favorite lens for the past 14 years, in both versions. I can walk around with it on my camera du jour all day long.
Thanks in advance! 
I fancy that zoom lens for nikon users.