20 24 28 or 35mm on a 5Dmk ii

Jacal

Jacal

Messages
201
Name
Jack
Edit My Images
Yes
With the festive season coming up shortly I'm hope to acquire a much coveted wide angle lens BUT the more research I do the less I learn and more confused I get, in the 'old days' anything below 35mm was considered really wide with a 20mm an extreme also I need to explain that I'm a lover of prime lens and will eventually end up with just three, a wide angle my 50mm and a undecided telephoto.

The lens is for my 5D ii and primarily for shooting landscapes. The pennies won't run to any exotica which would be overkill with my basic skills.

So if any of you knowledgeable lot could point me the right direction, maybe a few reasons why you bought your wwangle? I would be most grateful.
 
28mm I say, have some fun with the cheaper f/2.8 and any 50mm you want. 28mm is wide enough on a FF DSLR, so you're covered there.

Boil it down to 2, get a coin and then ask heads or tail. You'll know then which lens you want, regardless of when it hits the floor.
 
Cheers Alex, I've got the 50mm and love it but would like to have a little more image to play with so the 28 that you recommend would seem to fit the bill, especially price wise and it's not as though I would be wanting to use it in doors in poor light.

Anybody out there with hands on experience ?:help:
 
I run a setup of 24mm, 50mm and 135mm. It works well for me, the 24mm is rarely off camera.
 
I've just acquired a Canon 35mm F2 and for me, it gives the perfect FOV. I was always finding my 50mm F1.8 a bit too long for most situations I found myself in, but I do use mine for mainly indoor stuff. You would probably be better off with something wider for landscapes.
 
Last edited:
I looked at this range before and although I eventually settled on a 17-50, I did decide that a 35mm was probably too close to a 50mm to warrant the extra money. If I was to do it again and I was keeping the 50mm, I would go with something in the 20's and then you can "zoom with you feet". Have you tried any of them in a shop yet? I'll second taking a look at the review on the digital picture, there are some very thorough reviews on that site.
 
I would go for a 24mm if I were you, wide enough to feel wide angle but not too extreme like a 20mm would be.
 
Cheers guys, maybe the best bit of advice is to "try in a shop" and to be honest it wouldn't hurt to support my local photographic shop, they really are friendly knowledgeable peeps and as the saying goes 'if you don't use them, you'll loose them'....(think that's it :thinking:)

Although there's not at lot of focal length difference between the 20 24 28 and I could "zoom with my feet" as Dab says, maybe I should choose on speed or price :thinking:

Will try the link (y)
 
Alan Clogwyn said:
I run a setup of 24mm, 50mm and 135mm. It works well for me, the 24mm is rarely off camera.
Click to expand...

That's just the sort of set-up I'm hoping to end up with, should cover all bases for me.

Nice one Richard (y)
 
Last edited:
Jacal said:
Cheers guys, maybe the best bit of advice is to "try in a shop" and to be honest it wouldn't hurt to support my local photographic shop, they really are friendly knowledgeable peeps and as the saying goes 'if you don't use them, you'll loose them'....(think that's it :thinking:)

Although there's not at lot of focal length difference between the 20 24 28 and I could "zoom with my feet" as Dab says, maybe I should choose on speed or price :thinking:

Will try the link (y)
Click to expand...

There is a massive difference - think in degrees of filed of view - it is a bit like 85mm vs 300mm

Sadly I don't think canon has any cheap outstanding wide primes a bit like 85mm f/1.8. I hate to say but Nikon has some good and affordable ones and that's a shame.

btw. I'd go with 24mm or even 20
 
Dab said:
I looked at this range before and although I eventually settled on a 17-50, I did decide that a 35mm was probably too close to a 50mm to warrant the extra money. If I was to do it again and I was keeping the 50mm, I would go with something in the 20's and then you can "zoom with you feet". Have you tried any of them in a shop yet? I'll second taking a look at the review on the digital picture, there are some very thorough reviews on that site.
Click to expand...

35mm is a very different focal length to 50mm. 15mm makes a big difference, it's not close to the 50mm in it's field of view.
 
Been looking at wide primes recently, I settled on the 35L. I know you said budget was an issue but, having the 24-70L and was useful to gauge a useful focal length. Having a 50mm and 85mm prime already i found 24mm to wide for my uses, the 28mm 1.8 seems to suffer with fringing but I liked the focal length. The 35L had the quality and to me a more use able focal range.
 
daugirdas said:
There is a massive difference - think in degrees of filed of view - it is a bit like 85mm vs 300mm

Sadly I don't think canon has any cheap outstanding wide primes a bit like 85mm f/1.8. I hate to say but Nikon has some good and affordable ones and that's a shame.

btw. I'd go with 24mm or even 20
Click to expand...
I know that 'off the cuff' remark would come back and bite me on the arse :crying: Serves me right and of course your right (y)

odd jim said:
35mm is a very different focal length to 50mm. 15mm makes a big difference, it's not close to the 50mm in it's field of view.
Click to expand...
I always thought 'rightly or wrongly' that this FL was the nearest to what we naturally see, that's why I made it one of my choices.

33L said:
Been looking at wide primes recently, I settled on the 35L. I know you said budget was an issue but, having the 24-70L and was useful to gauge a useful focal length. Having a 50mm and 85mm prime already i found 24mm to wide for my uses, the 28mm 1.8 seems to suffer with fringing but I liked the focal length. The 35L had the quality and to me a more use able focal range.
Click to expand...
Ooh if Santa's really kind to me or saturday night's numbers are..........:LOL:
 
I have bought lenses and not liked the results and upgraded quite quickly after so ithought i would work my arse off get some overtime in and in 2/3 months i should be able to afford one so far i have only put away £400 for it. Got to triple that to get it. MY wife thinks im crazy but oh well the holiday will have to wait a while :p. My honest advice is finding the focal length you will use more and save for the best in its class. It will last a life time and you wont have regrets apart from the bank balance ofcourse. At the same time if for some reason funds do get tight, the resale is always better on the premium stuff IMO.
 
Jacal said:
With the festive season coming up shortly I'm hope to acquire a much coveted wide angle lens BUT the more research I do the less I learn and more confused I get, in the 'old days' anything below 35mm was considered really wide with a 20mm an extreme also I need to explain that I'm a lover of prime lens and will eventually end up with just three, a wide angle my 50mm and a undecided telephoto.

The lens is for my 5D ii and primarily for shooting landscapes. The pennies won't run to any exotica which would be overkill with my basic skills.

So if any of you knowledgeable lot could point me the right direction, maybe a few reasons why you bought your wwangle? I would be most grateful.
Click to expand...

Have you thought about the manual focus Voigtlander 20mm 3.5 or 40mm F2?

I've got the 40mm, its build quality is fantastic and its sharp from F2. I can post some photos if you like! Its not cheap mind you, and its manual focus.
 
33L said:
I have bought lenses and not liked the results and upgraded quite quickly after so ithought i would work my arse off get some overtime in and in 2/3 months i should be able to afford one so far i have only put away £400 for it. Got to triple that to get it. MY wife thinks im crazy but oh well the holiday will have to wait a while :p. My honest advice is finding the focal length you will use more and save for the best in its class. It will last a life time and you wont have regrets apart from the bank balance ofcourse. At the same time if for some reason funds do get tight, the resale is always better on the premium stuff IMO.
Click to expand...
Agree wholeheartedly with all you say but with a 1k street price it's just a bit much for me to justify Lee but never say never (y)

travellingcello said:
Have you thought about the manual focus Voigtlander 20mm 3.5 or 40mm F2?

I've got the 40mm, its build quality is fantastic and its sharp from F2. I can post some photos if you like! Its not cheap mind you, and its manual focus.
Click to expand...
Looks and sounds like superb lens but I wouldn't like to tie myself down to just manual focus but thanks for the recommend Jun (y)
 
Jacal said:
I always thought 'rightly or wrongly' that this FL was the nearest to what we naturally see, that's why I made it one of my choices.
Click to expand...

50mm has a similar perspective to your eyes. Field of view would be closer to that of a fisheye lens.

I don't know why Canon don't have a 28mm L. I know a lot of doco shooters would snap it up if they did. (Me included).
 
I'm happy with a Sigma 20 1.8 on my 5D. Not too extreme, and the 1.8 makes it a good walkabout lens for my night time street shooting. I've had it a while, a clearance item, it cost me £220. I don't know if there are many around to be had.
 
Now a 28mm 1.4 L I would love, hope canon are listening.....
 
Personally I'd find just one prime below 50mm pretty restrictive for landscapes where alot of the time zooming with your feet isnt an option.

Perhaps the 24mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2 together as there pretty cheap used? if it were me I'd go with the 17-40 L since I rarely shoot landscapes below f/5.6 on a crop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top