16-35 F2.8 is it practical or 24-70 F2.8 is it practical to take pictures of scenery and portraits on the road?

The focal length of 24-70 is more suitable. Small wide-angle to medium-long focal length, travel photography is very suitable, and this focal length is also the focal length of my hanging lens. I just came back from photography in Europe for a month, and I mainly used this focal length. Share some films.

First of all, thank you very much for your trust and invitation. This problem is actually a struggle that every photographer has had.

I think you should use the Canon series. Canon 24-70mm f/2.8l II USM and 16-35mm f/2.8l II USM are all red bull's heads with large aperture, quiet and fast focusing, and neck and neck in image quality, which are rare good lenses in their respective functional fields.

Let's start with the lens 16-35mm f/2.8. 16-3 5 mm is a wide-angle lens with wide field of vision and high utilization rate of shooting scenery films and architectural landscapes, such as shooting large scenes such as seashore, desert, grassland and magnificent buildings. Although the ending distortion of 16 is inevitable, it can be said for sure that 16-35mm is a sharp weapon for shooting scenery during the journey.

Let's take a look at the 24-70 mm f/2.8 lens. 24-70 mm covers three commonly used focal lengths of 24, 35 and 50, and the 70-end is also the portrait focal length we often use. Although the 24 ends of this lens are not as wide as 16, they can also be used to shoot landscapes. The focal length of 50-70 is very suitable for shooting people on the road. So 24-70 can be regarded as a medium-wide angle lens, which is why many people regard it as a hanging head.

Analyze your needs. I don't know whether you focus on taking pictures of scenery or portraits. To put it simply, if your trip is mainly about shooting scenery, you must undoubtedly bring16-35; But if you want to take pictures of both landscapes and portraits, for example, if you travel with your family, you should naturally take some photos of your family. In that case, 24-70 is more practical than 16-35.

Besides, I wonder if you have these two lenses, 16-35 and 24-70. In fact, I have seen some people go out at two ends every three days. I mean, if you have 16-35 and 24-70, you might as well take them all, pat them for a while, and see which one is your favorite, 16-35 and 24-70. You will definitely have your own judgment.

I hope my answer can help you.

Judging from the pictures sent by the subject, these two lenses are classic red circle lenses of Canon Dayuan, and the imaging quality is hot. The problem is that these two shots overlap and repeat between focal segments 24-35, which becomes a kind of entanglement in the hearts of all photographers.

In fact, this entanglement is precisely the pain point that the Japanese have subtly poked photographers all over the world, which makes you want to stop-16-35 F2.8 Shooting natural scenery is an artifact, but any tourist destination has a humanistic theme in addition to natural scenery. Even the longest end of 16-35F2.8 is slightly wider and the shooting distance is closer. However, when facing the vast natural scenery, the shortest finish line of 24-70 is obviously very difficult. ...

What if it's swollen? The Japanese had a good time-

When your photography hobby is still in the primary stage, because the scenery in 24-70 years is slightly weaker than portraits, traveling photography should be the first choice for beginners, and its imaging quality will definitely make you fondle admiringly. However, when you clap your hands and find that 24-70 is more moderate with the accumulation of experience, well, Canon's meal is here-congratulations, photography has a considerable foundation. In order to make a film that looks good every time you travel in the future, bite the bullet. 16-35 is an absolute scenery artifact. ...

When you are very skilled in using these two lenses, suddenly, you find that the focal length after 70 is a nightmare lingering in your mind-congratulations, photography is starting to have a fever, 70-200, which is a big killer in travel shooting! If you don't chop your hands, when will you wait?

Therefore, as long as you are interested in photography, the smart Japanese will give you so many regrets that you can't stop. So, do you buy many functional lenses or not?

Having said so much above, it seems that it has nothing to do with the topic, but it is actually very relevant-

From the point of view of the subject, it seems that it is only in the primary stage of photography hobby. At this stage, it depends on the subject's interest in travel photography. If he is only "sick", it is recommended to go into lens 24-70 first, which can basically cope with various scenery and portrait shooting scenes. If the status quo is maintained as the number of trips increases, it is not bad for you to travel around the world in front of the mirror at 24-70. However, in case your condition deteriorates gradually, you have a lot of complaints about the moderate performance of 24-70, and you have infinite yearning for wide-angle scenery, and there is nothing you can do. The only way to cure your illness is to keep it tightly 16-35.

Answering the Lord is not as simple as standing and talking. I also started as a rookie, then got sick, and then tasted the taste of "poor three generations" step by step. There are almost all lens groups from fisheye to 400 lenses. However, only16-35,70-200 and Zeiss 50F 1.4 are commonly used in travel. These three lenses can deal with almost all kinds of scenes such as day and night telephoto and wide angle.

I still have a say in this question. When you go out to take pictures, you basically hang 16-35, and you have both shots. I found that 24-70 is basically not as good as 16-35 except for its larger aperture.

Shooting the scenery requires a tense lens.

The wide-angle end of 24-70 is only 24, and the focal length of 16-35 is the ultra-wide focal length of 16. Find out! The gap between 24 and 16 is not a fraction of a star. The gap is quite large. You don't need a big aperture to shoot scenery. Can there be a wide angle or a wide angle? What's more, except for the 24 end of 24-70, all other focal segments are made for photographers. There is basically no difference in viewing angle except for the longer focal part at the 50 and 70 ends! This is one of the reasons why I take 16-35 when I go out!

Needless to say, people like it

16-35 is also a member of Canon's Big Three. Unlike Nikon's big three yuan, Canon's big three yuan can completely take portraits without ambiguity. 16-35 just has a human focal length of 35mm, but the picture quality is not as good as 35mm, and the composition effect is still there, and the blur ability is also worth mentioning! You can also shoot portraits in 24-70, and all kinds of focal segments can shoot various effects in situ! Except that the scenery is not very powerful, the portrait is still ok, which depends entirely on the subject's own consideration!

Pay attention to "aperture and shutter", and more exciting information is waiting for you!

16 mm-35 mm and 24 mm-70 mm have different uses. 16 mm-35 mm is mainly used to shoot scenery, and 24 mm-70 mm is an all-around player, and both scenery and portraits can be taken into account. 16 mm-35 mm is a wide-angle zoom lens, and 24 mm-70 mm is a wide-angle to medium-focus zoom lens. When shooting landscape photography, some people like to use a wide-angle lens because it covers a wide range of scenery and has a large angle of view. However, some scenery themes need a medium telephoto lens to produce the effect, such as shooting the sunset and shooting the red sun, and it is not appropriate to use a wide-angle lens. Therefore, for scenery themes, telephoto lenses and wide-angle lenses are needed.

Wide-angle lens is rarely used in portrait photography, because the perspective deformation of wide-angle lens is very serious (near large and far small). If you shoot with a wide-angle lens, it will have a disproportionate effect on the subject, especially when shooting close-ups, and even the facial features are distorted. It is barely acceptable to take a full-length photo of a person with a 35mm end of 16mm-35mm. Never use a shorter focal length for portrait photography.

24mm-70 mm zoom lens is suitable for shooting landscapes and portraits. The viewing angle of the 24 mm end is large enough, and the photos taken also meet our aesthetic requirements, which is completely qualified for the general scenery in tourism. The 50 mm-70mm focal length end will also be used when shooting scenery. Although the 70 mm end is a little short, it is still acceptable to shoot scenery with it, which has a slight compression effect on the foreground and background. The 50mm end belongs to the focal length of the standard lens, and the picture taken is closest to the visual effect of the eyes. The 24 mm-70 mm zoom lens includes a 35mm focal length end, which can be used when shooting portraits in large scenes. The 70mm end is very suitable for taking portraits, especially the 70mm end has a little compression effect on the foreground and background of the image, which can well shoot people together with memorable tourist scenes. The 70mm end combined with the aperture of F2.8 can get a semi-blurred background effect.

16-35 and 24-70 are big ternary series. It's all good shots with red circles. They are the best zoom lenses. There should be no one. However, 16-35 belongs to wide focus zoom, and 24-70 is from wide focus to medium focus zoom. The theme of these two shots is biased: 16-35, with a wide angle of view, which is suitable for shooting scenery, documentary and humanistic themes; And 24-70 is a stable lens, which is often used to hang up, and it is also a popular lens. But when shooting landscapes and portraits on the road, my advice is ...

24-70 2.8

16-35 this lens is quite good for taking scenery during the trip, which is its strength, but it is not good for taking portraits with it, not because of the image quality, but because of its wide angle of view and large depth of field, which is not suitable for taking portraits. Of course, it's good to take pictures in the environment!

As far as single scene is concerned, 16-35 is the best choice, I mean on the zoom lens.

If it's a portrait, I'm afraid I can only take some environmental portraits. Because of its large depth of field, it is not easy to highlight the subject through the depth of field, and people will be easily deformed if they are too close to the edge of the picture. Some people say that they can be close, and when they are close, they are seriously deformed, which is not comparable to portraits.

And the 24-70 lens, its wide focal end can not only shoot scenery, but also take portraits at the telephoto end. It's a little short, but it's generally no problem.

24-70 wide focal end can not only shoot scenery, but also have light distortion.

Although the wide focal angle of 24-70 is not as good as that of 16-35, it can be made up by splicing if necessary. As shown in the above two pictures, you can not only connect left and right, but also connect up and down, which can supplement the problem of wide focus.

24-70 telephoto end portrait, basically no problem, 2.8 large aperture plus 70mm focal moment, small aperture is no longer a problem.

In terms of scenery and portrait, the advantage of 24-70 is telephoto, and the other two lenses have good image quality. If you choose one, 24-70.

I am the south of the south, welcome to pay attention.

I feel that 24-70F2.8 is more practical for most photographers to take pictures of landscapes and portraits on the road. Why do you say that?

First of all, we often say that traveling is not hiking in the wild, but going to cities or characteristic villages, and going to the seaside and grassland at most several times. There are fewer places to really go to the big scene. So there are not many opportunities to shoot big scenes and scenery. For big scenes, you may stand on high and take three or five pictures. What should I do? What may be more room for play is a lens like 24-70 or even 70-200.

Through the above analysis, 24-70/F2.8 may be suitable for more photographers, because most of the photos taken by more photographers are within the focal length of 24-70, and rarely within 16-35. So on the premise of only one lens, I think 24-70 is more practical.

Of course, you should think carefully about what photos you want to take before buying. If you like taking scenery photos of big scenes very much and have time and energy to go out and take such photos often, then choose16-35/f2. 8.

This should be a struggle that many photographers have had.

Personally, if it is purely for the purpose of tourism. Only used to shoot people and scenery on the journey. Not suitable for professional use or special lovers. In fact, a tourist 24-70 is usually enough.

I bought 27-70 as soon as I played photography. Standard lens. It's good to shoot scenery, people and portraits. Canon has three basic focal lengths of 24-70mm f/2.8, 24 mm, 35mm and 50mm, which can basically cope with various shooting scenes of landscapes and portraits. So 24-70 is still awesome in the eyes of many photographers. Some beginners, aged 24-70, will travel all over the world in one machine.

Let's talk about 16-35 again. Compared with 24-70, it is wider. So take pictures of scenery, especially big scenery and big scenes. It will definitely be much better than 24-70. Although it is undeniable that the distortion at the end of 16 is inevitable, it can be said for sure that 16-35 is a very practical ptz for shooting travel scenery.

Ok, so if you just want to buy a lens and take portraits and scenery, I suggest buying a 24-70 first, which is more practical for you. Photography is a road of no return. I believe that if you really start shooting with your heart, don't worry, don't worry, you will definitely start shooting more in the future, haha ~

Both are fine. Choosing one of these two depends on machine specifications and personal needs:

1. Half width machine: suggestion 1635.

If it is a half-size machine, the wide angle after 2470 conversion is insufficient, so it is not recommended to consider 1635, and consider the coefficient of Canon 1.6, which is equivalent to 26 to 56. 2.8 large aperture, scenery and portrait can basically take into account:

Borrow two half portraits for reference:

As shown above, the blur is not obvious, but it is enough to highlight the main body of the character.

Second, the full-width machine: both, the first push 2470. If you prefer scenery and give consideration to portraits, you can consider 1635.

Although the focal length of 2470 is moderate, it is very practical. There are no special requirements, and the scenery of 24 shots is basically enough:

There are also 70 portraits, and the effect is good:

Of course, 1635 can also be considered if the scenery is the mainstay and portraits are taken into account. After all, 16 has a stronger impact:

Personal opinion, for reference only, welcome to pay attention, * * * with the improvement.

This question is a bit tangled. When shooting landscapes and portraits, these two lenses are ideal, but a lightweight focusing lens should be added, such as135mm; Of course, if you are strong, it would be more perfect to bring another 70-200.

Firstly, the advantages and disadvantages of 16-35 and 24-70 in tourism scenery and portraits are comprehensively analyzed. 16-35, wide-angle lens, is the first choice for shooting scenery, especially large-scale scenery. Take Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM as an example. Its nearest focal length is 0.28m, its weight is 635g, and its end distortion at 16mm is small, and its imaging is sharp, so it is a red circle bull's head.

24-70, standard lens, covering three basic focal lengths of 24, 35mm and 50mm, is the real king of mirrors. Scenery, people and portraits are not delayed. Take Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM as an example. The mobile phone with a recent focus of 0.38mm and a weight of 805g has been out of the chart. Recently, the technical parameters of focal length and weight are basically the same, so from a more practical point of view, 24-70 is better, except that it can't be wide-angle, and it is enough to take ordinary scenery photos at 24 ends.

So you have to think about it. Do you pay more attention to scenery or portraits on this trip? Do you have the opportunity to shoot big scenes like mountains and rivers? Personally, I think how to focus on scenery and shoot big scenes, such as traveling to Tibet, and then 16-35, with 50 and 85 thematic portraits; If you prefer portraits, 24-70 is enough. If you still have such a sharp weapon as 14mm, you might as well bring it. After all, it is very convenient to fix the focus with your head.