16-35L II vs 24L 1.4 II for aurora photography.

Started Oct 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
dgehrke
Regular MemberPosts: 130Gear list
Like?
16-35L II vs 24L 1.4 II for aurora photography.
Oct 22, 2012

Please forgive me if this has already been addressed in previous threads.

I'm currently using version II of the 16-35 for aurora photography and am curious as to how a faster prime like the 24 1.4 would affect the end product.

I realize that the 24 decreases exposure times and therefore preserves more detail in a dynamic subject like the aurora but for those who have used both lenses in this way have you noticed one is appreciably sharper than the other? Some have also reported that the 24 elongates or distorts stars along the frame edges. That may be a non-issue for anyone other than pixel-peepers but if so is it enough to detract from overall image quality?

Neither lens is inexpensive but I'm willing to pull the plug for the prime if it delivers the goods.

The following images were taken using a 5DII, 16-35L II, ISO 800, exposure times from 20-30 seconds.

 dgehrke's gear list:dgehrke's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM +4 more
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow