Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
p.1 #1Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness. What's the go-to in that range? The Sony 24 1.4 seems like a winner. Anything else out there I'm missing?
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
Aug 06, 2026 at 07:29 PM
p.1 #2Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness. What's the go-to in that range? The Sony 24 1.4 seems like a winner. Anything else out there I'm missing?
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
Remember that perspective distortion cannot be fixed regardless of how good the lens is. Barrel distortion can be fixed with lens profiles, you don't need to worry about that.
Changing the lens could improve sharpness, the weakness of the 20-70 is indeed corner performance.
In practice "getting the shot" is the most important factor. If you use a 24mm prime there are situations where its not wide enough. The 24/1.4 is great for low light, but you don't necessarily need it for group shots where you are going to use f8-11 anyway.
I would pick the 16-35GMii, and in practice try to use the longest focal length possible.
If there are multiple photographers trying to get the same shot, 12-24 may be better. this way nobody can stand in front of you.
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness. What's the go-to in that range? The Sony 24 1.4 seems like a winner. Anything else out there I'm missing?
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
Remember that perspective distortion cannot be fixed regardless of how good the lens is. Barrel distortion can be fixed with lens profiles, you don't need to worry about that.
Changing the lens could improve sharpness, the weakness of the 20-70 is indeed corner performance.
In practice "getting the shot" is the most important factor. If you use a 24mm prime there are situations where its not wide enough. The 24/1.4 is great for low light, but you don't necessarily need it for group shots where you are going to use f8-11 anyway.
I would pick the 16-35GMii, and in practice try to use the longest focal length possible.
If there are multiple photographers trying to get the same shot, 12-24 may be better. this way nobody can stand in front of you.
Aug 06, 2026 at 07:51 PM
p.1 #3Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
The 24-70/2.8 II, 24-50/2.8 and 28-70/2 are all very sharp and practical for large groups. The 24/1.4 is great, but for large groups you'll stop down to f/4 or smaller apertures where the zooms are plenty sharp anyway.
Aug 06, 2026 at 10:33 PM
p.1 #4Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
NJPhotographer wrote:
The 24-70/2.8 II, 24-50/2.8 and 28-70/2 are all very sharp and practical for large groups. The 24/1.4 is great, but for large groups you'll stop down to f/4 or smaller apertures where the zooms are plenty sharp anyway.
Right, a low F stop doesn't matter here, but if it happened to be 1.4 I wouldn't be upset lol.
The question is then I suppose, do any of those zooms perform better than the 24 1.4, at 2.8 and up? It is also significantly cheaper than the 16-35 ii and the 24-70ii.
24-50 looks like a fun lens, but 24mm the distortion looks a bit rough.
The 24-70/2.8 II, 24-50/2.8 and 28-70/2 are all very sharp and practical for large groups. The 24/1.4 is great, but for large groups you'll stop down to f/4 or smaller apertures where the zooms are plenty sharp anyway.
Right, a low F stop doesn't matter here, but if it happened to be 1.4 I wouldn't be upset lol.
The question is then I suppose, do any of those zooms perform better than the 24 1.4, at 2.8 and up? It is also significantly cheaper than the 16-35 ii and the 24-70ii.
24-50 looks like a fun lens, but 24mm the distortion looks a bit rough.
Aug 06, 2026 at 10:44 PM
p.1 #5Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness.
At what aperture? Past f/5.6 any lens will do. But if you want faster than f/2.8, I agree with your assesment that the 24mm GM cannot be beat, and the 35mm f/1.4 GM is simply sensational. If you're thinking of zooms, the Tamron 16-30 f/2.8 really impressed me optically, I just couldn't live without an aperture ring. Another obvious contender would be the Sony's 16-35mm GM II. I never tried it, but given Sony's present day high standards for GM lenses, I would be confident buying one. And finally, the 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II, which I own, is phenomenal.
And if you're looking for IQ-above-all-else, I would also consider the Voigtlander 28mm f/2 APO unless AF is a must. It is also the smallest lens mentioned here.
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness.
At what aperture? Past f/5.6 any lens will do. But if you want faster than f/2.8, I agree with your assesment that the 24mm GM cannot be beat, and the 35mm f/1.4 GM is simply sensational. If you're thinking of zooms, the Tamron 16-30 f/2.8 really impressed me optically, I just couldn't live without an aperture ring. Another obvious contender would be the Sony's 16-35mm GM II. I never tried it, but given Sony's present day high standards for GM lenses, I would be confident buying one. And finally, the 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II, which I own, is phenomenal.
And if you're looking for IQ-above-all-else, I would also consider the Voigtlander 28mm f/2 APO unless AF is a must. It is also the smallest lens mentioned here.
Aug 06, 2026 at 11:04 PM
p.1 #6Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
From huge to small.
Sigma 28-45mm F1.8 DG DN Art
Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 28mm f/2
Sigma 28-45mm F1.8 DG DN Art
Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 28mm f/2
Aug 07, 2026 at 04:16 AM
p.1 #7Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness. What's the go-to in that range? The Sony 24 1.4 seems like a winner. Anything else out there I'm missing?
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
Rent the GFX100S II with the GF20-35MM F4 lens.
Aug 07, 2026 at 04:25 AM
p.1 #8Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
Wild, I have all the equipment mentioned in the past 2 posts. But I really don't photograph people very often, let alone groups.
But I can vouch that they are excellent.
Aug 07, 2026 at 04:54 AM
|
p.1 #9Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
Right, a low F stop doesn't matter here, but if it happened to be 1.4 I wouldn't be upset lol.
The question is then I suppose, do any of those zooms perform better than the 24 1.4, at 2.8 and up? It is also significantly cheaper than the 16-35 ii and the 24-70ii.
24-50 looks like a fun lens, but 24mm the distortion looks a bit rough.
I doubt that any of the zooms perform better than the 24/1.4 at f/2.8 and smaller. That is unlikely. But they offer the advantage of zooming in when needed. Some large group photos may benefit from zooming in to 28mm or 35mm.
As for the 24-50, I feel that the distortion is a feature to be used as needed. When distortion is corrected, the lens is still very sharp. But for group photos, people near the edges of the frame often look better (normal) with distortion uncorrected. They don't look as stretched. Of course not correcting distortion will leave some straight wall lines curved, so it's a judgment call whether to correct or not correct: make the walls look better vs. make the people look better.
Edited on Aug 07, 2026 at 09:13 AM · View previous versions
NJPhotographer wrote
The 24-70/2.8 II, 24-50/2.8 and 28-70/2 are all very sharp and practical for large groups. The 24/1.4 is great, but for large groups you'll stop down to f/4 or smaller apertures where the zooms are plenty sharp anyway.The question is then I suppose, do any of those zooms perform better than the 24 1.4, at 2.8 and up? It is also significantly cheaper than the 16-35 ii and the 24-70ii.
24-50 looks like a fun lens, but 24mm the distortion looks a bit rough.
I doubt that any of the zooms perform better than the 24/1.4 at f/2.8 and smaller. That is unlikely. But they offer the advantage of zooming in when needed. Some large group photos may benefit from zooming in to 28mm or 35mm.
As for the 24-50, I feel that the distortion is a feature to be used as needed. When distortion is corrected, the lens is still very sharp. But for group photos, people near the edges of the frame often look better (normal) with distortion uncorrected. They don't look as stretched. Of course not correcting distortion will leave some straight wall lines curved, so it's a judgment call whether to correct or not correct: make the walls look better vs. make the people look better.
Edited on Aug 07, 2026 at 09:13 AM · View previous versions
Aug 07, 2026 at 08:08 AM
p.1 #10Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
As I have commented in many posts, f/8 & f/11 equalizes most lenses.
At f/8-11 the lenses I have - the 14-24 sigma, 16-35gmii, 40 2.5, 40 1.2, 24-105, 28-75g2 and 28-200 are all pretty close in IQ all the way to the far corner. The 28-200 might be the worst of the batch when doing brick wall tests, but it is no slouch, especially considering the range the lens affords.
I've never understood a 1.4 wide for anything other than astro, dark churches or niche photography. Total overkill for most subjects and not worth the extra weight, especially in the Sigma line. However, I am looking for a Sigma 14 1.4 DG DN and Sigma 20 1.4 DG DN for astro. I keep waiting for one of decent price and condition to hit the buy sell. Anyone
However, I would only use those sigma beasts for astro.
At f/8-11 the lenses I have - the 14-24 sigma, 16-35gmii, 40 2.5, 40 1.2, 24-105, 28-75g2 and 28-200 are all pretty close in IQ all the way to the far corner. The 28-200 might be the worst of the batch when doing brick wall tests, but it is no slouch, especially considering the range the lens affords.
I've never understood a 1.4 wide for anything other than astro, dark churches or niche photography. Total overkill for most subjects and not worth the extra weight, especially in the Sigma line. However, I am looking for a Sigma 14 1.4 DG DN and Sigma 20 1.4 DG DN for astro. I keep waiting for one of decent price and condition to hit the buy sell. Anyone
However, I would only use those sigma beasts for astro. Aug 07, 2026 at 09:05 AM
p.1 #11Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
NJPhotographer wrote:
I feel that the distortion is a feature to be used as needed. When distortion is corrected, the lens is still very sharp. But for group photos, people near the edges of the frame often look better (normal) with distortion uncorrected. They don't look as stretched.
100%
Strangely, I never see people say this online. Barrel distortion is universally despised, while in reality it can be a good thing!
ps09 wrote:
I've never understood a 1.4 wide for anything other than astro, dark churches or niche photography.
I used to hold the same opinion until the second+ generation of mirrorless. The intelligent AF has gotten so fast and accurate, that now I can freeze motion indoors when photographing moving subjects without being penalized by excessive noise or missed focus due to shallow DOF. The 24mm f/1.4 GM cannot be beat when photographing moving people, even running kids, at 1/250s or faster. Low noise. No motion blur. Sharp eyes+faces.
I feel that the distortion is a feature to be used as needed. When distortion is corrected, the lens is still very sharp. But for group photos, people near the edges of the frame often look better (normal) with distortion uncorrected. They don't look as stretched.
100%
Strangely, I never see people say this online. Barrel distortion is universally despised, while in reality it can be a good thing!
ps09 wrote:
I've never understood a 1.4 wide for anything other than astro, dark churches or niche photography.
I used to hold the same opinion until the second+ generation of mirrorless. The intelligent AF has gotten so fast and accurate, that now I can freeze motion indoors when photographing moving subjects without being penalized by excessive noise or missed focus due to shallow DOF. The 24mm f/1.4 GM cannot be beat when photographing moving people, even running kids, at 1/250s or faster. Low noise. No motion blur. Sharp eyes+faces.
Aug 07, 2026 at 01:06 PM
p.1 #12Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
How close are you to the fast moving people to be able to use 24mm? I shoot indoor track and, depending on the venue, even 50mm is too short. I guess if it's kids running across the living room it might work, but I've never been able to use 24mm for fast moving people in dark places. I guess everyone's usage case is different and that's why lots of options are a great thing, but 24mm for fast moving subjects is a niche use in my opinion.
Aug 07, 2026 at 01:32 PM
p.1 #13Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
ps09 wrote:
How close are you to the fast moving people to be able to use 24mm? I shoot indoor track and, depending on the venue, even 50mm is too short. I guess if it's kids running across the living room it might work
Your kids-in-the-living-room example describes my use cases perfectly. I also like it a bit wider too. On the A7RV, 60mp allows me to treat the 24mm as a 24-50mm f/1.4 zoom via cropping.
How close are you to the fast moving people to be able to use 24mm? I shoot indoor track and, depending on the venue, even 50mm is too short. I guess if it's kids running across the living room it might work
Your kids-in-the-living-room example describes my use cases perfectly. I also like it a bit wider too. On the A7RV, 60mp allows me to treat the 24mm as a 24-50mm f/1.4 zoom via cropping.
Aug 07, 2026 at 03:18 PM
p.1 #14Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
Hockey, and basketball under the net are two immediate examples I could think of for my personal uses. Pets in studio as well.
I appreciate everyone's responses. I asked because I've been strongly debating picking up the Sony 50-150, and a 24 1.4 for the wide end.Both would really help finish out my kit until I could afford an UW 2.8 or the rumored upcoming F2 UW zoom.
I appreciate everyone's responses. I asked because I've been strongly debating picking up the Sony 50-150, and a 24 1.4 for the wide end.Both would really help finish out my kit until I could afford an UW 2.8 or the rumored upcoming F2 UW zoom.
Aug 07, 2026 at 03:29 PM
p.1 #15Sharpest / lowest distortion lens in the 24 - 35mm range?
ruthenium wrote:
I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.Rent the GFX100S II with the GF20-35MM F4 lens.
I just know I would fall in love with it and never financially recover, so I will NOT be doing that lol. But maybe....
BigBabyMoses06 wrote
Need a lens for large groups of people where the edges don't drop drastically in IQ/sharpness. What's the go-to in that range? The Sony 24 1.4 seems like a winner. Anything else out there I'm missing?I've been using the 20-70 but even that gets a little too soft on the edges for me and I'm worried zooms just have too many compromises. Prefer to stay around 24-28mm, in case I have to go wider than 35.
I just know I would fall in love with it and never financially recover, so I will NOT be doing that lol. But maybe....
Aug 07, 2026 at 03:39 PM