Burning a 24mm hole in my pocket

I've been looking at two 24mm lenses for some time now - the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L tilt-shift and the EF 24mm f/1.4L USM. I realize that these are very different lenses, so let me explain my intended purposes and questions/concerns.


TS-E 24mm f/3.5L - I enjoy shooting landscapes, and this seems to be one of the best lenses out there for doing so. In particular, living in Minnesota my favorite place to go is the north shore of Lake Superior. I make at least a few trips every summer, and I'm considering going up for a first winter trip to capture some frozen waterfalls. Besides waterfalls, I often find myself in the woods, taking pictures of anything that strikes me as interesting or beautiful.


For owners of this lens: The 82mm filter size concerns me, at least in terms of additional cost. Buying a polarizer and ND filter or two will add some significant cost to this lens. Would my 77mm filters work with a step down ring as long as the lens wasn't shifted to one of the extremes? How often do you find yourself using this lens? Besides landscape and architecture, what do you use it for? What are your overall opinions of this lens?


EF 24mm f/1.4L USM - I would use this lens primarily indoors at family events and on my 7D for indoor sports - specifically karate. Unlike so many other sports, often you're really close to the action with karate, and getting two people sparring in the frame sometimes requires a relatively wide-angle lens.


For owners of this lens: What is the AF speed and accuracy like for you on this lens? Bryan indicates it's fast, but was occasionally missing for him. What's your experience with sharpness wide-open?What are your overall opinions of this lens?


I'm interested in any thoughts or opinions and suggestions any of you may have. I've looked around the net at other forums, but sometimes I feel lost in a sea of cynics and ignorance. I thought here I could get a clearer and more useful opinions on these lenses.

Probably the two best 24mm lenses that anyone makes. I have the 1.4 and it is a sweet lens. AF speed is very fast, accuracy is very good but 1.4 takes a bit of practice and I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

EF 24mm f/1.4L USM - I would use this lens primarily indoors at family events and on my 7D for indoor sports - specifically karate. Unlike so many other sports, often you're really close to the action with karate, and getting two people sparring in the frame sometimes requires a relatively wide-angle lens.


For owners of this lens: What is the AF speed and accuracy like for you on this lens? Bryan indicates it's fast, but was occasionally missing for him. What's your experience with sharpness wide-open?What are your overall opinions of this lens?

---

I have never used the lens on the 7D, only on FF 5D. The lens is excelent and does a great job. As for the AF, the 24mm and the 35mm F1.4L both perform similiarly. AF is fast enough but not extremley fast. As far as accuracy, with the 24mm your DOF is so great that unless you are shooting at the extremes, what I mean is F1.4 and very close (10 feet or less)accuracy is not going to be an issue. Close up wide open your keeper rate is going to drop. How many do I loose shooting extreem situations? With the 35mm lets say at 3' acrross from the table in a resturaunt, low light, high ISO slow shutter speed at F1.4 if the subject sits sitll AF maybe misses 1 in 4. Using the 24mm in the same sitution with the 5D the keeper rate goes up because of the greater DOF, but it will occasionaly loose one.


The reason I compared the 35mm and the 24mm, my 5D with the 35mm has a DOF of .18 feet, the 7D with the 24mm has a DOF of .25 feet. In my experience the AF on both perform similiarly as they are sister lenses. I think you would get similar results to the 35mm with the 24mmon the 7D.


Example is that the DOF at F1.4 at 10' is 2.88 feet, and at F2.8 it is 6.13 feet. This much DOF your not going to notice the accuracy as much and my keeper rate above these levels is very high. The AF could be off an inch one way or the other, its not going to matter. Greater distances you will never notice a problem with the AF.


Other comments:


It seems you know the strengths of both. With the TSE its doubtfull you would use it to do indoor events. But it will give youthe best landscape IQ. The 24mm F1.4L will do both, image quality is still excelent.


Good Luck


Rick

Hi Trowski,


I don't own either lens, but I have researched them as I have been deciding between 35mm/1.4 and the two 24mm lens that you mention.


A few major differences between these lens is that the 24mm TS-E is Manual Focus only and it's not weather sealed. You mentioned shooting winter scenes and waterfalls so that may be a concern of yours. The other major difference are the apertures. You mentioned shooting in the woods which can sometimes be light limited, and shooting Karate, keep in mind that besides the TS-E not having autofocus, I don't think you will be able to get a fast enough shutter speed to use for indoor sports without a flash or strobe, since f/3.5 is its widest aperture. For focusing you would probably have to pre-focus as well.


As you mentioned the 24mm/1.4 uses the more common 77mm filter size and this lens is also a few hundred dollars cheaper than the TS-E lens.


I would say that the 24mm/1.4L II seems to be the better all-arround lens when compared to the 24mm f/3.5L TS-E II, unless you had a specific reason for the tilt feature.





Rich

Thanks for the feedback guys, it's much appreciated!


Perhaps I should have mentioned some of gear I currently own that would be relevant to this conversation.

• 5DII
• 7D
• EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM
• EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
• EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
• EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
• EF 50mm f/1.2 USM
• 580EX II Flash
• 430EX II Flash

Usually for landscape I use the f/4 lenses, and most everything else the f/2.8 lenses get used. For karate I usually have to use flash, since f/2.8 still isn't fast enough for an action stopping shutter speed even at ISO 3200. Honestly even with f/1.4, I might end up using flash, but at least it wouldn't need to be as strong, and maybe if I'm lucky and the place is well-lit, I wouldn't need the flash.


Of course if I got the TS-E lens I wouldn't consider using it for sports. Likely I'd always use a tripod with the lens so I could use LiveView for focusing. When shooting landscapes, particularly waterfalls, I already had to haul a tripod with me, so that's no problem. The lack of weather sealing could be a problem, since sometimes I get some overspray going over my camera, but it's not like I'm getting drenched with water. I was looking to use the TS-E lens for what tilt-shift lenses are good for: making sure my lines are straight in my landscapes and getting everything in focus without having to use very narrow apertures.


This is a little off topic from my original 24mm dilemma, but another lens on my want is list is the MP-E 65mm Macro lens. I enjoy taking close-up pictures of flowers and anything else interesting, and chasing insects around taking close-ups of them with the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS. I already own the MT-24EX flash, so the MP-E 65mm has been tempting me. With a flash, how hand-holdable is this lens?

Since you have 4 lenses that cover the 24mm focal length, from f/2.8 to f/4 why get another one, unless you really have your heart set on the tilt feature.


The 24mm f/1.4 will be a better low light lens for walking around without a tripod, as well as a faster lens for indoor use, and a slight divergence from your current assortment, not to mention; price, AF, and weather sealing.


Perhaps Neuro will join in soon, since he has the TS-E.


Rich

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Lane

Since you have 4 lenses that cover the 24mm focal length, from f/2.8 to f/4 why get another one, unless you really have your heart set on the tilt feature.

---

That's sort of what I was thinking, even with the 24mm f/1.4, I felt a little crazy wanting another lens that covered 24mm. I've considered selling the 17-40mm, I've kept it around because it was one of the first L lenses I bought and it uses 77mm filters, so I still take it with me for landscape.


I am looking forward to Neuro's opinion, since he seems to have this same crazy lens disease that I do, and owns the TS-E and MP-E.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

That's sort of what I was thinking, even with the 24mm f/1.4, I felt a little crazy wanting another lens that covered 24mm. I've considered selling the 17-40mm, I've kept it around because it was one of the first L lenses I bought and it uses 77mm filters, so I still take it with me for landscape.

---

Couple things: The 24mm at F1.4 DOF is probably going to be to narrow for good pics for a Karate event. Sure you can do low light with the lens no flash, but I think you might still need a flash to freeze the action.


Why the 24mm F1.4 over the other lenses, its IQ is going to be much improved for landscapes. The TS-E a little bit more so.


Don't forget to conciser the 180mm F3.5L macro either, better IQ than the 100mm. Of course the MP-E 65mm Macro will be my next macro lens to add. Niether of these will be very hand holdable.

Another two cents worth from me since we have now seen your lens list, would be to go for the TS-E. It would add a big old slice of creativity and enthusiam to you and your kit bag.


Between your 2.8

Hi All,


I wanted to have a few minutes to do a couple of tests before chiming in. As some of you know, I've been debating the 24mm f/1.4L II vs. the 35mm f/1.4L recently, and while I understand that it seems 'weird' to have so many lenses that cover a single focal length, that's not really a relevant factor since the lenses each have their own purpose and use (although I don't think I can see a significant use for having both the 17-40mm and the 16-35mm...).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

I am looking forward to Neuro's opinion, since he seems to have this same crazy lens disease that I do, and owns the TS-E and MP-E.

---

Yeah...well...I'll just keep buying lenses, not that I expect it to 'help'... [:P]


The two 24mm primes you're considering are obviously very different lenses with very different uses. I suppose you need to decide which type of shooting is your priority right now and for the near future.


If you'll probably be using a flash in any case, the f/1.4 of the 24mm prime may not be much benefit. Perhaps you can look at your EXIF (if you have any non-flash shots) and see if two extra stops of shutter speed (vs. the 16-35mm) would make enough of a difference for your karate matches.


Although I can't speak to the quality of the 24mm f/1.4L II, the TS-E 24mm is a very fun and creative lens. It's great for landscapes and architecture.


I misinterpreted your initial post - I'll presume you intend to use the TS-E on your 5DII (I hadn't even mounted mine on my 7D until your post, to test the potential for vignetting. To answer your question about that, when not tilted/shifted, you could use a step-down ring and a 77mm filter with not vignetting. On the 7D, you could do that even at full shift. However, with the lens on a 5DII you'll get some vignetting even with a moderate amount of shift applied, based on my quick testing.


Hope that helps...


--John


Ps. I haven't tried the MP-E 65mm with the MT-24EX handheld yet. Perhaps Jon Ruyle has, and will chime in. I'll give a try sometime in the next few days.

The MP is not a good lens for handheld macro photography. Because it starts at 1.0x magnification (where all other Canon macro lenses stop) and goes all the way to 5.0x, you generally need a focus rail to mount the MP to (which is why it comes with a tripod ring).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

although I don't think I can see a significant use for having both the 17-40mm and the 16-35mm

---

<div>


I kept the 17-40mm largely because it let me carry fewer filters with me when I would do landscapes. I never bought a 82mm polarizer or ND filters. In 77mm, I have a polarizer and 4 different ND filters. Maybe it's a poor excuse to keep the lens, and I have thought about selling it. Especially if I did get the TS-E, then I'd probably invest in a few 82mm filters and there would be no reason to keep the 17-40mm. It just seems unfortunate that after eBay and PayPal fees, I'd be lucky to get $500 for the lens and I'd probably go and spend $400 on 82mm filters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

If you'll probably be using a flash in any case, the f/1.4 of the 24mm prime may not be much benefit.

---

</div>


This is what I'm thinking... two stops of light would probably let me get away with no flash, but the ISO would still be unacceptably high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

I'll presume you intend to use the TS-E on your 5DII

---

Yep, it would primarily be on the 5DII. I suppose it could find use on the 7D if I wanted a ~35mm TS-E lens for some reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

I haven't tried the MP-E 65mm with the MT-24EX handheld yet. I'll give a try sometime in the next few days.

---

I gave it a quick try this morning, and the MP-E 65mm with the MT-24EX works decently for handheld shooting, with some patience and appropriate selection of subject (pick something with multiple interesting points of focus...or develop even more patience!). The following two shots were handheld. The first was on an outdoor tree (we mount one on the deck that we decorate with handmade, natural ornaments - dried orange slices, pinecones spread with nut butter and rolled in birdseed, etc). It was blowing in ~20 mph wind, so a tripod would not have been much help. The second was on the indoor tree - a close-up of patterned glitter on an ornament. Both are at 5x.



http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5246/...8449c305_b.jpg
EOS 5D Mark II, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro @ 5x, 1/60 s, f/14, ISO 400, MT-24EX



[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-35-15/Ornament.jpg[/img]
EOS 5D Mark II, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro @ 5x, 1/60 s, f/14, ISO 400, MT-24EX


--John

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Both are at 5x.

---

Ok John, I am impressed. As much as it is at 5x hand held, but even more so that it is a manual focus lens. Your hands are definitely more steady than mine, no way I could manual focus and get the shot.


Now I will be even more impressed if you tell me these were close to the minimum focus distance. The bottom might be, the top one looks like you were away from it a bit.


This lens is on my list to get in the near future, its not even one I have to decide if I should get or not. I will have it before long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

As much as it is at 5x hand held, but even more so that it is a manual focus lens. Your hands are definitely more steady than mine, no way I could manual focus and get the shot.


Now I will be even more impressed if you tell me these were close to the minimum focus distance.

---

The MP-E 65mm is not a manual focus lens in the traditional sense. There's only one ring - and it both magnifies and changes the focus distance. So, you either hold the distance constant and turn the ring until you've got focus (changing magnification as you do), or set the magnification and move the camera back and forth until you've got the focus you want. For thses shots, I did the latter, rocking slightly backward/forward and pressing the shutter release at the right moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

For thses shots, I did the latter, rocking slightly backward/forward and pressing the shutter release at the right moment.

---

When I saw your post, that was my first thought of how I would have done it as well. But still its very tuff to hit that right point, for me any way, I shake to much.


The OP was asking if a person could hand hold the MP-E 65mm. I know if comparing the 180mm L Macro with AF and no IS, I would tell someone Yes you can even without flash, but its not the best way to get the best pictures and that they would be better served hand held with the 100mm L IS. I would think with the 65mm it would even be harder to hand hold, but then I do not have the lens in my hand yet.


Rick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

the MP-E 65mm with the MT-24EX works decently for handheld shooting, with some patience and appropriate selection of subject

---

Thank you very much for trying this Neuro. I'll be considering this lens in the future. I always see people taking close ups of insects with this lens, and I assumed they were doing it handheld. I'm more than willing to set up a tripod and focus rails, however for a lot of subjects I'm interested in shooting close up, a tripod isn't very practical. For now I've been pretty happy with the 100mm f/2.8L IS. I haven't had the flash for that long, I think I want to get more experience with what I have now before I spend more money on macro.


As for my 24mm dilemma, I believe I'll be adding the TS-E to my kit. I decided my priority is landscapes, and I will love the creative potential this lens has. Plus with the rebate, now is a good time to buy the lens. I'll be selling the 17-40mm f/4L since there isn't a good reason for it to exist in my kit (really wasn't much reason before either... guess I just held onto it for nostalgia). I'll have to invest in some 82mm filters, but they'll be well worth it, since now the filters will work for two lenses.


Thank you all for your comments and suggestions, they were very helpful!

I use the 24 mm TSE for my landscapes, and absolutely love it. It's crack cocaine for photographers. For filters, I have an 82 mm polarizer so I can't tell you if the 77 mm would work without vignetting. However what I use most often is a 4x6 graduated ND filter, on a Lee filter mount. I have a few of them:both a2 and 3 stop soft edge, and a 2 stop hard edge. Plus a 5 stop solid ND which I can use in combination. I can't imagine doing landscapes without them. Happy shopping!

I just ordered an 82mm polarizer and an 82mm 4 stop ND filter.


I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

an 82mm 4 stop ND filter

---

What brand and where, if you don't mind my asking? I am looking for something as dark as possible, best I've been able to find is the Singh-Ray 5-stop, and I'm reluctant to pay for their marketing hype.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

What brand filter mount and what type and brand of filters do you suggest?

---

<div>Generally, I use B+W across the board. I have a standard F-Pro UV on the TS-E 24mm and an XS-Pro 82mm UV on the 16-35mm II. Will be getting at least the 82mm SlimK&auml;semannCPL before my trip.</div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

an 82mm 4 stop ND filter

---

What brand and where, if you don't mind my asking?

---

Hoya 82mm Pro1 Digital ND16 from buyphotogear.com(a small site I found through eBay, limited selection but low prices, and in the USA). Same brand for the Cir-PL and a clear protector.


I've been very happy with these filters. I've found them easy to clean, I like that the filters have a slim frame, and seem to be of the same quality as any B+W filter I've seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

What brand filter mount and what type and brand of filters do you suggest?

---

I should have been more specific, I meant for 4x6 mounts and filters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

EF 24mm f/1.4L USM -For owners of this lens: What is the AF speed and accuracy like for you on this lens?

---

I don't have the origina 24mm f/1.4 any more, just the Mark II. But as I recall, I was very pleased with the AF speed. Not sure about accuracy.



<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="content-type" />

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

What's your experience with sharpness wide-open?What are your overall opinions of this lens?

---

Sharpness was great (on a 5D) and my overall opinion was that it was my very favorite lens -- until the Mark II came out. Now the 24mm f/1.4 II is my favorite.


The 24mm f/1.4 gets a bad rap because people compare it to 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm lenses. But you can't really do that -- it's a totally different beast. Sure, it's not as sharp as the 85mm f/1.8, but it's a whole lot sharper than any other Canon lens this wide and fast (well, because there are none).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

The 24mm f/1.4 gets a bad rap because people compare it to 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm lenses.

---

Really? In many reviews I found, the 24L II was compared very favorably to the 35mm f/1.4L. The 24L II has the edge in build quality with the weather sealing, but in terms of image quality they seemed very similar. Basically when choosing between the 24L II and 35L, it really just comes down to what focal length you want.


I intend to get the 24L II someday, and actually that day might be very soon. I decided to get the TS-E while the rebate was available. I think I'll buy the 24L II some time early next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trowski

Really? In many reviews I found, the 24L II was compared very favorably to the 35mm f/1.4L.

---

I was referring specifically to the original 24mm f/1.4 L. The Mark II version is definitely a lot closer to the 35mm in sharpness in contrast, but the original 24mm f/1.4 is noticeably softer (though still plenty "good enough" for my purposes).