If it means anything to you, I had both at different points in time. I originally had the 35G, then sold it to buy a 24-70 because I felt like I \"should\" have had the versatility and thought I might need it.
Now, I regret it. I wish I never sold the 35G, and am in the process of switching back to it. There\'s just something special about the way it draws an image, its hard to describe and no review I\'ve seen ever mentioned it, but it just has it. Not just at 1.4 either, it does amazing at f/2 as well.
The versatility of the 24-70 is great and all, but honestly, any image I\'ve taken with it at other than 24mm I\'ve never liked, and ended up not delivering to clients. Anything past 24mm, and I always felt I was better of switching to a prime or the 70-200, because at least those lenses delivered a pop to them. The only reason I keep shots taken at 24mm with it is because its the widest focal length I have, so it gets used by default. This is something I know I will enjoy the 24 1.4G more for, because I\'m just drawn to the 24mm focal length for some reason, and if I\'ve going to keep it stuck to 24mm, then I might as well get the 24G. To me, anything past 35mm but below 70mm is just an awkward focal length anyway...
Jul 29, 2012 at 09:34 PM
Previous versions of KibblesNbitz's message #10842991 « Question: 24-70/2.8 VS 35 f1.4G »
