Sell 24-70L for 35L ?

Wide open, both lenses appear to be similar in sharpness: (link)
By f2 the 35mm starts to get sharper.

Personally, I think that getting the shot is sometimes more important than sharpness for weddings. The 24-70 gives me a lot of options when I'm shooting candids/dance floor photos etc.

I also use the 24-70 when I'm shooting the family photos a lot. I like to get these done quickly so changing lenses or cameras is not an option for me. A lot of times I'm limited by space so the 24mm focal length comes in handy.

I love to shoot with primes and use them whenever I can, but the 24-70 gives me a lot of flexibility when I need to work fast.

This really is a personal choice. It'll either work for you or it won't, only you can answer that.

A zoom offers you more "options", but is larger, slower. If you only do the occational wedding/event then perhaps you'll be fine with just a 35mm prime - but what happens if this fails, do you have something else in this area as backup?

At a wedding in December (UK) I used 35/1.4 & 85/1.4 (Minolta) for 90% of the images and was very comfortable. It suited me. But I also had backups for both areas.

What other lenses do you have covering this range (24-70)?

I think you'll have to weigh the improvement in IQ (up to~f4, because beyond that, the practical difference is only marginal), with the loss of control of focal length. Weddings are an instance where you are liable for poor decisions in equipment decisions. so choosing to buy 1 prime to cover WA --> medium (replacing your 24-70) is a choice that can have considerable impact on your business. It may be a bit different if you've got a 24/28 & 50 covered also.

Frankly, despite the improved 'absolute' IQ, you'll see a marked decrease in IQ when you start to crop that 35mm FOV down to a 50mm FOV or 70mm FOV. That, and you'll see another decrease of IQ when you are trying to get a 24mm FOV out of your 35 ;-) .

Also, kids don't wait for you to change lenses, so, no matter how good you are at changing lenses, you'll end up with fewer usable cutesy kid pictures, and 35mm is not exactly an ideal FL for kids photography in general.

So while I would absolutely agree that adding a 35/1.4 to your kit is a great idea idea, selling the 24-70 to get just a 35/1.4 (especially if you've got nothing else in the 24-70 range) is maybe not such a great idea.

Fair enough Marcus, but I don't need to cover a bunch of focal lengths. A lens for reportage and a lens for portraits is all that is needed (and a good flash of course). Everything else is extra and may either improve your album or detract from it.

I don't change lenses in the middle of something important that is bound to happen. With weddings, you can anticipate the critical moments and be ready with the right equipment in hand at the right spot. I'm not sure if you are acquainted with visualization and all that.

Your point is valid but I like to steer away from that rigid thinking that a zoom is essential for weddings and events. It's certainly useful. But necessary?

PS: I don't chase children, instead I chase the bride and the groom ;) For candids I use a 135L.

If you are using a full frame camera you will get distortion, with the 35. I think if you are using the 5d-2, full frame look into a faster 50mm or if you want a lighter weight zoom take a good look at the 24-105L IS. It may be a slower lens but with the IS it's a great lens that a lot of photog's use. It also focuses pretty fast.

I like to steer away from that rigid thinking that a zoom is essential for weddings and events. It's certainly useful. But necessary?

2.8 zooms are almost always mentioned as next to essential, but once you get more experience you can make your own decisions. Clearly, they're not for everyone, many cope with a couple of primes.

Charcoal:

The 35/1.4 is my favorite lens on a full frame body. When I shot full frame, I would use 35/1.4 and 24-105/4. Toss in the 135/2 for ceremony shots.

Before getting the zoom, I'd use the 35/1.4, 85/1.8, and 135/2. The 85/1.8 is a bargain of a lens.

Eric

Many folks (not all), who use Canon primes have a four lens set-up: 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 85/1.2 or 85/1.8, and a 135/2. If they are a wedding photographer, they will have two cameras with different focal lengths attached. Which focal length will be pre-determined by the next step in the flow of the wedding events. For example, when I used Canon, I used a 35/1.4 and 85/1.2 for shooting the first dance. In a dressing room it'd be the 24/1.4 and 85/1.2; Processionals: 35/1.4, and so on. In reality, the 35/1.4 and 85/1.2 was used for 85% of my wedding shots.

Everyone that shoots wedding needs a back-up just in case. If your main lens is a 24-70/2.8, it also has to be backed up. The back-up to a prime set-up can be a 24-105/4 ... which I had but rarely used.

The common aspect to this prime line-up is they are all very fast aperture optics, which provide the maximum degree of focus placement and subject isolation to select from. At distance, wide lenses like the 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 provide for use of a lower ISO yet DOF with a wide lens covers a lot when shot at distance. In addition they provide a brighter viewfinder compared to f/2.8 or f/4 maximum aperture lenses.

For this, you pay a premium price, and only you can determine if you can really afford it based on your specific business model.

-Marc

Charcoal:
The 35/1.4 is my favorite lens on a full frame body. When I shot full frame, I would use 35/1.4 and 24-105/4. Toss in the 135/2 for ceremony shots.
Before getting the zoom, I'd use the 35/1.4, 85/1.8, and 135/2. The 85/1.8 is a bargain of a lens.
Eric

Hi Eric!

Do youfind yourself using the zoom often when having a 35L and 135L at your disposal?

Many folks (not all), who use Canon primes have a four lens set-up: 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 85/1.2 or 85/1.8, and a 135/2. If they are a wedding photographer, they will have two cameras with different focal lengths attached.

I know a wedding photog who uses 35L 85L 135L and a single body. His albums are very nice :)
I think anticipation is more important than the ability to change focal length on the fly.

Personally, I find there are few occasions that lend themselves to 24mm or wider. You have to get in tight, very close and have a great background. For landscapes, you usually need an appropriate foreground. I consider 24mm and wider a speciality lens/length. It's very powerful under the right circumstances but those occasions show up rarely.

On the other spectrum of the zoom, you have 70mm. I use that for portraits when I step in close (half shots and head & shoulders). I do not use 70mm to stand back! For posed portraits though, the 135L does better than 70mm at 2.8. Its longer length is also better suited for candids than a 70mm or 85mm lens.

The zoom at 50-70mm is great for semi macro shots. Despite the decent magnification factor of 35L and 135L, I think a 50mm lens does a better job for still life and details because a wide angle tends to distort at close focus and a tele has a longer working distance and a very shallow dof. This is the only thing I worry about.

I realize there are limitations with prime lenses but I believe a prime lens also offers opportunities that a zoom does not. Like said, I only need a lens for reportage and for portraits. The occasional ultra wide or macro shot is nice but not necessary imo.