topic Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations in EF & RF Lenses

RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

bejjet — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:10:27 GMT

I currently own three RF lenses: the 24-105mm f/4, 50mm f/1.8, and 28-70mm f/2. I'm only a hobbyist and I enjoy capturing family events, doing travel photography, and might eventually try astro. I’m now considering adding a fast wide-angle lens to my kit since I don’t have one yet. I’m torn between the 15-35mm f/2.8 and the new 24mm f/1.4. Renting isn’t an option where I live, so I guess the real question is whether I’d actually need anything wider than 24mm for what I shoot. Budget is not a concern for this purchase.

Has anyone faced a similar decision between these two lenses (or even the 24mm f/1.8)?

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

ebiggs1 — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:08:23 GMT

The 15-35mm without hesitation. Zooms always before primes. They are way more flexible and you will get 24mm included in the zooms FL.

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

shadowsports — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:27:05 GMT

Greetings,

I agree with Ernie. Having owned the 15- 35 a few years now, I will say it's one of my favorite lenses. Curious what body you will be using it with?

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

AtticusLake — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:37:48 GMT

You haven't said what camera you're using -- is it full frame, or crop? It makes a difference.

I've been shooting landscapes for a while now, mostly on full frame, and even there 24mm is often not wide enough for me. I have the 15-35, and I love it, and I've used the wider focal lengths a lot.

And shooting in daytime, I'm rarely opened up more than f/10. So for me, the wider focal length would matter a lot more than the brightness. And the flexibility of a zoom is super useful.

However, if you're thinking about wide-angle astrophotography, like the aurora, then the f/ number may matter too. I have a 33mm f/0.95 for that.

If your camera is crop, you might want something even wider.

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

justadude — Tue, 21 Jan 2025 21:15:23 GMT

I do quite a bit of astrophotography. If you are going to shoot anything like the Milky Way, or aurora, you will wish you had wider than the 24mm. The 15-35mm f/2.8 is a great option from all I've heard from others that own it.

If you are going to use the lens ONLY for astronauts photography, a more budget friendly option would be a prime. I have owned three different versions of the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 (EF, RF, & Pentax mount). These lenses are very popular with night sky photographers. However, I did sell them last year once I tried the Venus Optics Laowa RF 15mm f/2 Zero-D lens. It has a very solid build, and is machined much nicer than the Rokinon lenses, and lens distortion is a lot easier to correct on the Laowa than the Rokinon.

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

justadude — Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:20:13 GMT

"If you are going to use the lens ONLY for astronauts photography"

Astrophotography, not astronauts photography. This is why we shouldn't type replies at the same time we are having a conversation with our wife. 🙂 lol

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

ebiggs1 — Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:23:28 GMT

Hey ya never know astronauts are people too. 😁

Re: RF 15-35 f2.8 vs. RF 24 f1.4: Wide-angle lens recommendations

justadude — Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:51:22 GMT

"Hey ya never know astronauts are people too."

True, but with a 14mm lens they would look like fat astronauts. 😄