Landscape Lens (Page 2): You might want to go for a little more reach, say 35mm.

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Landscape Lens

Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>

Apr 2, 2021 08:51:38 #

leftj Loc: Texas

tcanzano wrote:

I am looking for a landscape lens. I want to spend between $400 and $600.
I am looking at:
Nikon AF-P DX 10-20 F4.5-5.6 $306.00
Signa EX DC HSM 10-20 F3.5-22 $399.00
Tokina ATX-I 11-20 F2.8 $529.00

Any other suggestions?

You might want to go for a little more reach, say 35mm.

Apr 2, 2021 09:20:07 #

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I have the Sigma 10-20 for my crop frame Nikons. Works great. Just remember to avoid big foregrounds or to put something interesting in them. Plus you can get vertical lines tipping in or out depending on how much of an angle you’re shooting up or down. Best to hold it level as much as you can.

Apr 2, 2021 09:32:15 #

GKarl Loc: Northern New Hampshire

I have been using a Nikon 12-24. However, after looking at what I choosing most of the time in my landscape pictures I found most of the shots were at the upper end. I believe I will be selling the 12-24 and buying a Nikon 16-35 f4. Just a personal anecdotal story. Good luck.

Apr 2, 2021 09:35:01 #

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

I shoot M4/3 exclusively (12 years). I have a 14-42 (28-84 equiv) which is my "landscape lens". I am awaiting delivery of a 25mm (equiv. of a nifty fifty) which I think I might use for the same purpose. Guess I want to compare a fast prime with my slower 14-42. I have a 45-175 which I don't often need for my sort of landscapes. However, I remember Linda from Maine posting some superb landscapes with a longer reach telephoto. Having said that, I do believe that you should start with a SHORT range "standard zoom". Whatever - you will need it anyway.

Apr 2, 2021 09:35:30 #

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

[quote=tcthome]

Gene51 wrote:

Ultrawides are special purpose lenses with limited... (show quote)

I have a 14-24 and use it occasionally but it doesn't fit well in my bag so it doesn't get a lot of use. Landscapes get stitched using the 24-70 frequently. One place I was happy to have the 14-24 was when I was shooting a wedding breakfast in a tight space. The scene was dynamic so stitching would have been a problem.

I should note also that I have used stitching on dynamic scenes such as the audience in a concert. I repeated the shot sequence 3 times and none of them did well using Photoshop to do the stitching. However, I took the one that came closest and was able to use Photoshop to edit the masks to the point where I could get the stitching to work acceptably.

Apr 2, 2021 09:57:59 #

Bonsai123 Loc: Puerto Rico

Tokina ATX-I 11-20 F2.8 is your best bet look for reviews

Apr 2, 2021 10:06:18 #

The Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD is considered to be ultra wide zoom lens for cropped sensor cameras right now. I have one that I use on my Nikon D500's. It's fully weather sealed and has vibration compensation. I don't know of any other ultra wide zoom lenses for cropped sensor cameras that are fully weather sealed. Its HLD (High/Low torque modulated drive) focusing motor focuses very accurately. Flare and ghosting is very well controlled.

Beware of the Tokina ultra wide zoom lenses. They have suffered from horrendous flare and ghosting. See reviews and sample photos on LensTip.com.

Apr 2, 2021 10:21:23 #

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

DirtFarmer wrote:

I have a 14-24 and use it occasionally but it does... (show quote)

Totally agree - I too have a 14-24 F2.8, and it gets used a couple of times a year, in special situations. I prefer the more natural perspective provided by longer focal lengths, free of the extension distortion that plagues most very wide lenses. I've not gotten great results stitching images with lenses wider than 28mm.

Apr 2, 2021 10:24:42 #

MountainDave

Living in the rocky mountains, I take a lot of landscape shots. The vast majority are shot between 35-60 (full frame) which offers the most natural perspective. I sometimes use 24 if I'm standing on the shore of an alpine lake but that's about it. Depending on the situation, a 70-200 can be useful too. Wide angles produce vertical compression which ruins mountain shots. Stitching is a much better solution.

Apr 2, 2021 11:03:55 #

inclinerr Loc: South Carolina, United States

I use the Nikon AF-P DX 10-20 F4.5-5.6
and I am very pleased with the results.

Apr 2, 2021 11:04:29 #

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

From some inside knowledge, take the Nikon lens.
--Bob

tcanzano wrote:

Apr 2, 2021 11:24:50 #

Carl1024 Loc: Kaneohe, HI 96744

Theses are all wide-angle lenses. If you're looking 4 distance, i'd go 4 the 70-200?
.........................................message ends..........................................................................................

Apr 2, 2021 11:58:13 #

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

I don't think a 20 or non full frame camera 30mm lens is the max you want but all 3 are worth the money. Less choice and quality will go crazy on this blog.

Apr 2, 2021 13:42:13 #

speedmaster Loc: Kendall, FL

tcanzano wrote:

Travel a lot with a Nikon AF-P DX 10-20 F4.5-5.6 $306.00. Extremelly happy with the results moreover considering its low price. It is light, fast, very sharp around f 5.6/f 11... I can't say about the others as I never used them.

Apr 2, 2021 14:28:24 #

Bill_de Loc: US

I think you are doing well with the lens you used here.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-669815-1.html

Too wide a lens for landscapes screws up the perspective IMHO.

---

Page <prev 2 of 5 next> last>>

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum