Do many people use a lens wider than 24mm?

[ugoor]

I recently got a 24-70 to complement my 16-35. I mostly shoot travel / family / landscape photography and always figured I needed something super wide like the 16-35. Now, after getting the 24-70 I feel like 24 is plenty wide. I shoot on an R8 so with the FF sensor I kinda feel like I might not need the 16-35, especially given the deformations wider than 20.

Would love to know for people who have both what they use / if maybe I’m just in the honeymoon phase with this new lens

[shadowsports]

Greetings ,

I do 😀.  I have the RF15-35 f2.8 and it's a fantastic lens.  It's great for WA photos and video.  It's gotten me out of some pretty sticky situations when you're not able to back up far enough.  

[Jkarl]

I have a 14-35 f4L that I use for indoor and close quarters out door work and find it very useful. The extra 2mm can make the difference. As to the distortions once you get used to working with a wide lens you usually can frame the shot to minimize the problems. If you mostly are doing landscape you might want to stay with the 24-70 because you are correct about the distortion problem especially with large scenes.  I use my 24-105 for most of my outdoor work. 

The key is what do you need from your lenses to accomplish what you want do. Work with what you have for awhile and then you can determine what you will need.

[mdphotography]

I use an 18-50mm.  With crop factor, it's 28.8mm equivalent and it's just enough for me.  Seriously considering a 10-18mm (16mm equiv) as I've had a handful of situations where I could have used a little more width.

[MPBACK]

Hello,

I have always had a Canon EF 24-105 f4 L and now RF 24-105 f4 L lens.   I probably shoot 75% of my photos with this lens.  Having said that, the 24 mm wide end of this lens is generally wide enough, until...you need a wider lens which will happen, trust me.  I solved this minor issue by purchasing a RF 16 mm f 2.8 prime lens.  Now, I leave my 24-105 lens on my R5 and carry the 16 mm in my coat pocket!   It's great and the RF 16 mm 2.8 lens is not very expensive. The lens is sharp, however It does suffer from extreme distortion, but can be digitally corrected in post.  I  used this lens combination on a recent trip to Iceland and the entire set-up worked out fine.

Hope this helps

MP BACK

[March411]

Like Rick I own the RF15-35 f2.8 and use it frequently. Right now it's mounted on my R5 to do some product shots for a friend. It's also one of my go to lenses when walking around in the city.  

[Tintype_18]

Interesting question. There isn't a "one size fits all" for lenses. For me, it depends on the photo opportunity. If you note my list of lenses with my signature, that might explain my thoughts here. I do find myself reaching for the 28-135mm lens for a lot of photos.

[ebiggs1]

"Now, after getting the 24-70 I feel like 24 is plenty wide."

The best general purpose lenses are the 24-70mm and 70-200mm zooms by far. Not even close. On either end there are lenses that extend that usefulness range and one is the 16-35mm zooms. The other side there are lenses like the 200-800mm. They all fit a person's preferred interest in photography.  Yes, they are less useful for GP work.

Personally, I currently have lenses from 8mm to 600mm. No, the 8mm doesn't get used every day but when you need it, you need it. My 150-600mm super zoom is almost always with me. Day in day out. So, you see it is what the personal needs are.

[p4pictures]

I mostly shoot portraits, products, sports so for me even the 28-70mm is wide enough, I don't even need 24mm. I do have a 16-35mm lens but it gets used very rarely, in fact I have used it for one shoot this year, and that was because I hadn't used it for over a year before that. 

[shadowsports]

@ugoor,

I sold my EF16-35 f2.8 II before upgrading to mirrorless so I never adapted it, but I would think that it would work fine on an R8 with a Canon adapter.  The only reason why you may want to consider an RF lens is because Canon is no longer servicing the EF16-35 mkII and previous.  The mkIII is still under support but I don't know for how much longer.  Other compelling reason might be if you own the f4.  Having the f2.8 for indoor no flash photography has proven itself useful for me.  

24mm is often enough, until it's not like others said.  I only own one prime lens currently.  A Rokinon 14mm f2.8 that I used for Astro on my 6D MarkII.  Fun lens that I used a hand full of times the last year before I upgraded to mirrorless.  It's retired now. 🙂

Most later generation EF lenses remain valuable and perform well adapted to mirrorless bodies. The biggest caveat is reduced maximum frame rates, and in some cases focus acquisition may be a little slower.  Not a big deal if you're not shooting fast action or some wildlife.