24mm L vs 17-40mm, worth the upgrade?

[GrahamS]

Hi Guys.
Thinking of trading my 17-40 for a prime 24mm L for better image quality, anyone out there been in this position and happy with the results. I'll be using it on a 5D MkII.
Cheers for any advice.

[William W]

. . . trading my 17-40 for a prime 24mm L for better image quality, anyone out there been in this position and happy with the results. I'll be using it on a 5D MkII. . . any advice.



I have comprehensively tested the 17 to 40, but decided the 16 to 35 was better for my purposes.

I am not sure that the a choice is “EITHER a 17 to 40L OR a 24L”

The 17 to 40 is pretty slick in the middle of its focal range – so if you want crisper from the 24L and you will be using it at F/5.6, then I would suggest save your money.

OTOH – if you want to use the Prime at >F/4, then that is a different kettle of kippers.

The 24L is “fantastic” wide open (considering it is F/1.4 and 24mm).

There is optical vignette wide open and also CA at the edges across the aperture range: both can be addressed in PP to some extent and the vignette is not noticed in many scenes.

My advice is to re-asses what you want the lens for (what outputs).

I think if you generally shoot at F/5.6, or thereabouts, then you might be better off with the convenience of a zoom and better to spend your money elsewhere, not on a Fast Wide Prime.

However, I could not do without BOTH a zoom, for convenience of use; and also a set of FAST Primes, across the wide to medium telephoto range (16ish to 135ish), as this is the range of FL where I make > 80% of my Photographs and I use FAST: it is just the 80/20 Rule ad a Bank Manager likely knows that application.

***
The Pudding and the Proof:
(View Large)
Here is the 24 at ⅓Stop intervals, from F/1.4 to F/8 showing the optical vignette:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10163208-lg.jpg

***

And here is the 24 used at F/1.4 in soft light and the one of the reasons why I love this lens:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10777159-lg.jpg
JPEG from RAW – N.B.: Sharpened but NO Noise Reduction
F/1.4 @ 1/100s @ ISO800 HH


And, Bottom Right:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10777013-lg.jpg


And, Middle Left:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10777001-lg.jpg


And, Centre:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/10777003-lg.jpg

***

At Night, WIDE OPEN:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/9199113-lg.jpg
“That Side”
F1.4@1/8s@ISO1600 HH

***

At Night again:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/11991136-lg.jpg
"Circus before Daybreak 02"
F/2.5 @ 1/6s @ ISO800 HH

***

And indication of Bokeh:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/13937493-lg.jpg
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/13937492-md.jpg
Available Light Portrait #9567749
F/3.2 @ 1/40s @ ISO800 HH

***

The 24L can be used in sunlight, at smaller apertures, also:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/12352873-lg.jpg
Love Those Glasses

***

I note you have a 7D and yet you state that the 24L will be used on the 5DMkII.

The 24L makes a very good Normal Fast Prime for an APS-C . . . and I use my 24L exactly for that purpose, as the normal lens on my APS-C cameras, here is an old shot:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/13440516-lg.jpg
Text Sample #120034

In this regard: The 24 would make an excellent addition and make the perfect prime trilogy (24 / 50 / 135), for your Dual Format Kit – which is also exactly how I use those three Primes - perhaps you might consider that application, also.


WW

[GrahamS]

Thanks so much for taking the time to make such a detailed response and judging form the shots you provided the 24mm L is an awesome lens, hmmmm, now the hard part begins, saving the money :(
Thanks again for your reply it was much appreciated.
Cheers.

[davearnold]

Wow, great response Willliam, although I wish people would stop showing how good some prinmes are, as I am trying to live happily in a world of Zoom lens, without wanting(read here, spend money I have not got) to own 6 or so prime lens's as well :)