People With Experience, Reviews Please Canon 35mm F/2 , Yongnuo 35mm f/2 , Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM

Which Would You Choose ? For Low Light Shooting

  • Canon 35mm F/2

    Votes: 4 100.0%

  • Canon 24mm F/2.8 STM

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Yongnuo 35mm F/2

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Other (Please Specify)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    4
  • Poll closed .
gothgirl

gothgirl

Messages
1,589
Edit My Images
Yes
People With Experience

Reviews Please

Canon 35mm F/2 , Yongnuo 35mm f/2 , Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM

Experience with any or all ?

Looking for a prime around £100 or under


I'm Looking for a nice fast prime for use in low light , these are the three i've narrowed it down to

I have read the reviews online and would like to hear from other people on here.

It's going on a Canon 60d , if you have some example photos aswell please feel free to share.​
 
Last edited:
Err, I've not used any of them but I can quite easily make an assessment based on criteria that might actually matter.

Canon 35mm f/2 is a good AF 35mm prime
Yongnuo 35mm is a good MF 35mm prime
Canon 24mm is a good AF 24mm prime and a stop slower than the other two

Seems to me there is enough differences between the three to make any slight differences in image quality irrelevant.
 
Nawty said:
Err, I've not used any of them but I can quite easily make an assessment based on criteria that might actually matter.

Canon 35mm f/2 is a good AF 35mm prime
Yongnuo 35mm is a good MF 35mm prime
Canon 24mm is a good AF 24mm prime and a stop slower than the other two

Seems to me there is enough differences between the three to make any slight differences in image quality irrelevant.
Click to expand...

The Yongnuo Does AF .
 
Matholwch said:
I had the Canon 35mm f2 and was very happy with it. Build is cross between the nifty 50 and the 50mm f1.4. Liked the focal range so much, that I decided to step up to the Sigma 35mm art, this was on a 5D mk3 mind.
Click to expand...

If it's anything like the 50mm STM that I have , I'd be thrilled.
Bloody love that lens
 
gothgirl said:
People With Experience

Reviews Please

Canon 35mm F/2 , Yongnuo 35mm f/2 , Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM

Experience with any or all ?

Looking for a prime around £100 or under


I'm Looking for a nice fast prime for use in low light , these are the three i've narrowed it down to

I have read the reviews online and would like to hear from other people on here.

It's going on a Canon 60d , if you have some example photos aswell please feel free to share.​
Click to expand...
Surely the 40mm is closer in FL than the 24mm?
 
I've got the y35f2. Only really used it on a 100d. It's been fine, but slow af, and sometimes throws a lens error (contacts don't seem be as secure as you might hope) a slight twist of the lens resolves this when it's happened. My wife usually uses it indoors at church events. I don't have any images i can share at the moment.
 
The IQ in the YN looks iffy in actual tests, for a 'standardish' fast lens I'd be stretching the budget for an early Sigma 30mm personally. It's a nicer and faster lens than all those on your list, but a lot more money.

So it'd be the Canon 35mm if the budget is immovable.
 
My first choice would be the Sigma 30/1.4 EX - loved that lens when I had my 40D, but I didn't realise they were still holding their value so well.

Between 24mm and 35mm there's a very significant focal length difference, I know some will say "What's 11mm between friends?" but that misses it being almost a x1.5 zoom equivalent difference in field of view.

I haven't used any of the three lenses, but like Phil I'd be picking the Canon 35mm from the three listed based on the reviews I've read from sources I trust.
 
Phil V said:
Surely the 40mm is closer in FL than the 24mm?
Click to expand...

I have a 50 , I'm looking for something further back , more wide angle .

So the 24mm is better (Or even lower if they make them ) , but the f/2 of the 35 over the f/2.8 of the 24 is also a factor for my low light needs

Budget is pretty imovable .
 
Last edited:
gothgirl said:
I have a 50 , I'm looking for something further back , more wide angle .

So the 24mm is better (Or even lower if they make them ) , but the f/2 of the 35 over the f/2.8 of the 24 is also a factor for my low light needs

Budget is pretty imovable .
Click to expand...
With the immovable budget get the old Canon 35mm - it's a better lens than the 50mm 1.8 (but not by miles). The test images I saw from the YN would put me right off.
But you need to be aware that the difference between 24mm and 35mm is bigger than the difference between 40mm and 50mm (a lot bigger). This is one of those instances where idiots say 'zoom with your feet'; the 2 focal lengths are completely different and in no way interchangeable.
 
I should probably have been more specific, but I don't think I could recommend buying a YN35f2, even at the price.
 
To give more detail , I need something to shoot in low light dog and horse shows ( Indoor with dingy crap lighting , and can't use flash ) - space is often limited , so tripod / monopod usually is a no , so I need to be shooting handheld at atleast 1/100 to ideally 1/200

And also concert shots , so again abismal lighting,

I've found the 50mm 1.8 is good, but is more often than not too close .
 
i have the canon 35m f2 and used it indoors with bad lighting mostly at poorly lit amatuer boxing shows... I now have the canon 24-70 mkII so rarely use the 35mm f2 BUT its one of those pin sharp (wide open) lenses that you really cant part with :)
 
petersmart said:
If it's indoors can you not up the ISO on your cameras and use a good NR program to reduce the noise?
.
Click to expand...


no :)

believe me I can imagine some of the places he will be photogrpahing :)
 
petersmart said:
If it's indoors can you not up the ISO on your cameras and use a good NR program to reduce the noise?

I use Neat Image and properly used it can be extremely effective.
.
Click to expand...

KIPAX said:
no :)

believe me I can imagine some of the places he will be photogrpahing :)
Click to expand...

This .

There's only so much noise reduction can do , you either have an extremely noisy image or one after NR that looks like a painting
 
Last edited:
petersmart said:
If it's indoors can you not up the ISO on your cameras and use a good NR program to reduce the noise?

I use Neat Image and properly used it can be extremely effective.
.
Click to expand...
NR just kills any resolved detail, its not a substitute for a fast lens.
 
You have a crop don't you. How wide do you need to go. £100 budget is very low,

Samyung 14mm f2.8 manual focus is a great wide lens. Around £270 new so may be available at around £150 secondhand.
Most £100 lenses will be poor, (assuming half price second hand, thats £200 new) the exception being the canon 50mm f1.8. The 50mm f1.4 is also good, might be available for a little more than your budget.

As said before, perhaps upgrade your body to one more capable of shooting in low light? Theres bound to be a glut of 5D mk3's around when the mk4 comes out.
Speak to some of the indoor sports people to see what they use? (but I bet it's not £100 budget)
 
Byker28i said:
You have a crop don't you. How wide do you need to go. £100 budget is very low,

Samyung 14mm f2.8 manual focus is a great wide lens. Around £270 new so may be available at around £150 secondhand.
Most £100 lenses will be poor, (assuming half price second hand, thats £200 new) the exception being the canon 50mm f1.8. The 50mm f1.4 is also good, might be available for a little more than your budget.

As said before, perhaps upgrade your body to one more capable of shooting in low light? Theres bound to be a glut of 5D mk3's around when the mk4 comes out.
Speak to some of the indoor sports people to see what they use? (but I bet it's not £100 budget)
Click to expand...

Not sure about £100 used primes being poor? Ok I paid a bit more for my as new Canon 35mm f/2 (£150 used) so she may have to extend her budget ever so slightly but it's do-able?

The IQ from the Canon 35/2 is very, very good, even wide open.
 
Last edited:
petersmart said:
Not if you do it properly.
.
Click to expand...

You'll always lose resolution, that's a given fact. NR is just patching, not a magic wand :)

Pretty much why gigs, weddings, Astro etc aren't shot with variable aperture zooms ;)
 
Last edited:
35mm f2, MPB have one for £189, one for £149, but thats a 50% rise in budget. Thats the issue the £100 budget. It's a pretty specific requirement, sports in a dim environment, which a small budget doesn't lend itself to, so then everything becomes a compromise, ISO speed and noise v shutter speed v aperture.

Budget wise the 40mm pancake lens is cheap second hand, f2.8. Not sure that would be enough difference to the 50mm f1.8 already got.

My shout would probably be on a 24mm lens for a difference in focal length, so the canon ef 24mm f2.8 IS USM, but thats about £300 so way outside budget
Or the Samyung f2.8 14mm. Manual focus so some prefocussing is needed but thats just old skool :D Only trouble is they are around £200 second hand.

Is there an opportunity to step back slightly with the 50mm f1.8 you already have or do spectators then get in the way.
 
odd jim said:
You'll always lose resolution, that's a given fact. NR is just patching, not a magic wand :)

Pretty much why gigs, weddings, Astro etc aren't shot with variable aperture zooms ;)
Click to expand...

It also depends on the camera - a 20MP camera will always have more noise than a 10MP camera - my 40D has far less noise at 800 ISO than the 5Ds.

And, apart from a photographer who would actually know that a picture had NR applied - after all a great many of my pics on here and elsewhere over the years have had NR applied and no one seems to have noticed that. :).
.
 
Byker28i said:
You have a crop don't you. How wide do you need to go. £100 budget is very low,

Samyung 14mm f2.8 manual focus is a great wide lens. Around £270 new so may be available at around £150 secondhand.
Most £100 lenses will be poor, (assuming half price second hand, thats £200 new) the exception being the canon 50mm f1.8. The 50mm f1.4 is also good, might be available for a little more than your budget.

As said before, perhaps upgrade your body to one more capable of shooting in low light? Theres bound to be a glut of 5D mk3's around when the mk4 comes out.
Speak to some of the indoor sports people to see what they use? (but I bet it's not £100 budget)
Click to expand...

I can manual focus, but I don't trust my skills enough to get desired results from an event with fast moving subjects, in different directions

What about the STM lens ? Canon 24mm 2.8 , my other STM Lenses are cracking quality , I have the 50mm 1.8 and the 18-55
 
Last edited:
petersmart said:
It also depends on the camera - a 20MP camera will always have more noise than a 10MP camera - my 40D has far less noise at 800 ISO than the 5Ds.

And, apart from a photographer who would actually know that a picture had NR applied - after all a great many of my pics on here and elsewhere over the years have had NR applied and no one seems to have noticed that. :).
.
Click to expand...

A 20mp won't always have more noise than a 10mp camera, my 6d has far less noise than my old 400d :). Even my 21mp (or whatever it is) even smaller 1" sensor'd RX100 has better noise handling than my old 400d (yes I know, a few generations apart!)

With NR it's relative, you'll lose the same amount of resolution with a 10MP camera than a 20MP camera. I can always tell when lots of NR is applied. It has its uses, but it's no substitute for getting more light onto the sensor!

I can shoot at 10,000 ISO on my 6d no probs, but wouldn't push my crops past 1600, 3200 at a push. I still prefer to use fast lenses in low light situation and use a lower ISO on the 6d than push the iso on it and use NR, as obviously the resultant image is much better.

This isn't even arguable, lol!
 
Last edited:
Well I'm down to a deciscion between the STM 24mm 2.8 or the 35mm f/2 .

Is the Original non IS version of the 35mm f/2 ok ?

Because my budget does not stretch to the IS version
 
gothgirl said:
Well I'm down to a deciscion between the STM 24mm 2.8 or the 35mm f/2 .

Is the Original non IS version of the 35mm f/2 ok ?

Because my budget does not stretch to the IS version
Click to expand...
They're optically the same design IIRC, the new one certainly wasn't heralded as optically better. I think the focus motor is better in the new one though.
 
I'm trying to make a similar decision at the moment, but I don't need one per se, just want one for fun. My budget is anywhere between 100-600 so whilst my heart wants the Sigma Art my head says go for the Yongnuo and see how you like having a 35mm prime. Then I can spend more later if I get on with it.

Decisions, decisions. The digital rev review of the Yongnuo is surprisingly positive! We all love the nifty fifty, it's basically the same but wider!
 
On a crop I'd have the 24mm STM just because it is tiny and a 35mm equivalent.

Saying that I had a 35mm f2 that I liked so much that I got a 35mm f2 IS! My only complaints about the original were the noisy slower af and the non round aperture if I was on a budget I'd have another one.
 
Phil V said:
They're optically the same design IIRC, the new one certainly wasn't heralded as optically better. I think the focus motor is better in the new one though.
Click to expand...

The new one has 3 more elements in 3 more groups and an aspherical element but of course it's the same [emoji6]

The new one is noticeably sharper but the old model is still very good and the bokeh in the IS lens is lovely. I know everyone says that IS is pointless on a 35mm but I've got to say it is a nice luxury!
 
Last edited:
a1ex2001 said:
The new one has 3 more elements in 3 more groups and an aspherical element but of course it's the same [emoji6]

The new one is noticeably sharper but the old model is still very good and the bokeh in the IS lens is lovely. I know everyone says that IS is pointless on a 35mm but I've got to say it is a nice luxury!
Click to expand...
IIRC :tumbleweed:
 
Well I did a gig last night and now I am torn back into the do I try and hold out for a L , or one of the better tamron / sigma lenses .

My nifty fifty stole the show over the 18-55 stm , but the lack of range of the 50 meant I was constantly swapping lenses throughout the night .

Makes me think a 2.8 zoom might be the way to go .
 
If I could get something that matches or exceeds the quality of the 50mm 1.8 STM , but is a zoom lens.. I think I could be very happy .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top