Jump to content

23mm f2 + 35mm f1.4


MonGoose

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I'm looking for a (small) companion lens to the 35mm f1.4. I was first thinking the 18mm f2 but it feels kinda 'snapshoty'. Thus I am looking after something else. 

 

The 23mm f1.4 being too large, what about the 23mm f2? 

 

Who has exchanged his 18mm f2 for a 23mm f2 ?

 

Who is using both 23mm f2 + 35mm f1.4 ? What subjects are you shooting these with?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I changed my 35mm and 23mm f1.4 lenses for the f2 versions. The size, weight, portability and WR meant I kept my camera with me in more situations. Then I changed the 35mm f2 for the 50mm f2, because there was too much of an overlap between the 35 and the 23. With those two lenses I can shoot almost anything: the 23 for most things, and the 50 for when I want bokeh, separation and compression, or for when I can't get close enough to my subject. However, I also keep an 18mm lens because it's great for tight spaces or when you want to exaggerate perspective, or when you want to tell a story by seeing your subject in a fuller situation

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

About 95% of my photography is done with the 23mm or 35mm, both in the f/1.4 versions. I don't have a problem with the f/2 models, but whenever possible I strongly prefer to go with lenses that are optically corrected. The f/2 lenses rely heavily on digital correction to get their physical size reduced. The f/2 lenses still have great quality, it's just a personal preference. I shoot a variety of subjects with these two lenses ranging from landscape to street. In the past year I've traveled to Budapest, Norway, San Francisco, Utah, Colorado, Upper Peninsula Michigan, Montreal, Vermont, Washington DC, North Cascade National Park, and Olympic National Park. I have never felt like I've missed out using mainly these two focal lengths.

 

The 16mm was used briefly in Muir Woods to help capture the immense scale of that forest and I do like having the 55-200mm on a second body, but it doesn't get used very often. My 10-24mm mostly stays at home, but I keep it around because there are very specific times when I will bring it, such as architectural shots in old, dark European cathedrals. Those cases are more about the stabilization than necessarily being ultra-wide though.

 

My personal style of shooting has evolved to be less focused on wide angle over time, particularly with landscapes. The 23mm is wide enough for almost everything I do, but not so wide that I feel like I need to crop the images to get a good composition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed - I'm a big fan of the 23mm. I've just made a different choice when it comes to the advantages of the two 23s. I chose size and WR over absolute quality. I also, like you, also use a longer standard lens - but I've gone for the 50mm.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...