So here comes the time of the year where I start changing my equipment (I like to test new equipment a LOT) and I have the opportunity to buy a 16-35 mk II for the same price I'll sell my 24L mk I.
Both lenses are AMAZING in every sense, and I own the 24L, but I love the look of a wideangle on my precious 5D. Help a pal make a wise decision because right now I am leaning 70% towards selling 24L and getting 16-35 mk II.
I should mention the following facts:
1. Apertures at 2.8 is more than fine because I can use flash when needed.
2. I love primes which is why I got the 24L and YES I have thought about 35L but now is not the moment, now I want something wider with a sharper crisp look.
3. I love bokeh, but at the wide end, it won't kill me to have reduced bokeh because I've got other telephotos to get that extra touch.
4. Apertures at 1.4 are extremely awesome but it won't kill me to go back to 2.8.
24 just isn't wide enough for those "wide opportunities", in my opinion. But the 16-35 is ideal for tight spaces, dancing/receptions etc. I love the look of fast primes as well, but they work better for me at the longer end of the range, like 50mm and 85mm. The 16-35 and the 50 are my two most used wedding lenses.
I like a nice prime sometimes, but at weddings, only really that for portrait shots. We also shoot a ton of lit stuff at f/9 or f/11, so the zooms look amazing at those f stops. Otherwise, nothing needs to be super sharp (like at receptions and so on).
I considered the 24 II, but to convince my self I needed it I put my 16-35 on the camera and took some snaps at 24mm, looked at the images, and figured I did not need the 24L. Yes, the 1.4 would be nice, but unless you REALLY need it.....get the 16-35 IMHO.
Ok ummm...that's what I was looking forward to hearing
Getting that bad boy today!!!!
P.S. 24L up for grabs. Its almost like new got it brand spankin new May 2008 still with warranty and yes FM I'll be posting it on the buy/sell forum soon with pics
RedWhiteandRed wrote:
Keep them both - lenses are not very expensive and you will invariably regret selling.
Red, I beginning to believe your independently wealthy. Actually it's good advice. Keep em both if possible. I'm purchasing a 16~35 and plan on a 24L within the next 60 days.
I love my 24L, but just picked up the 16-35 for this wedding this week. Absolutely blown away. Now I need to find a way to keep it in my bag as I only bought to later sell after the wedding!
I've been shooting crop bodies and the 10-22 is just about my favorite lens. My 5D arrives monday and a 16-35II is being held for me by a fellow photog, we just need to meet up.
(but then he's selling it to get a 24L...).
I'm a zoom guy, but I love my 50 1.2, I have a 28 1.8 but it's not got much bokeh to it unless i'm 1 foot from my subject, which I guess is pretty typical of WA lenses anyway.
If you consider the 1/focal length rule then the extra stop or two won't do much good anyway. There's not much point in handholding below 1/20 or 1/30 as you end up with subject motion blur.
16-35 for sure! I bought mine last fall, but wish I had pulled the trigger much, much sooner. I use it for every wedding reception and when you want to capture funny moments at the B&G/head table. The f/2.8 aperture is crazy nice to shoot - at this last wedding, I was using ISO1600, f/2.8, and 1/100 shutter for the reception. People are sharp, my subjects are well-focused (thanks, 1DM3) and I couldn't be happier with the results. It's one of those lenses that allows you to get creative, too.
I've never owned the 24L and I'm sure it's a wonderful lens, but I'd PERSONALLY get the 16-35 over a 24L...and I did! Plus, in the off-season or dead time, you can use it for some really, really sweet landscapes.
Actually it's good advice. Keep em both if possible. I'm purchasing a 16~35 and plan on a 24L within the next 60 days.