landscape photography lens
Jan 11, 2014 10:54:44 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
I use a 20mm Nikkor (older MF lens which works with either my D300 or my D7100) which is equivalent to a 30mm on a full frame.
Did you mean to say "equivalent to a 30mm on a cropped frame" or am I missing something? Not trying to be critical just wondering if I am misunderstanding something.
Jan 11, 2014 11:06:05 #
chaprick wrote:
Did you mean to say "equivalent to a 30mm on a cropped frame" or am I missing something? Not trying to be critical
just wondering if I am misunderstanding something.
A 20 mm on a Nikon crop sensor gives an equivalent field of view as 30mm on a full frame... same focal length, different field of view
Jan 11, 2014 11:32:50 #
I think it depends on where you are shooting.
I recently was criticized for recommending the use of a wide angle lens for landscaping by a couple of photographers who shoot in the western US.
They use long telephotos to pull in the distant mountains.
I live in Eastern Pennsylvania where the predominant landscape consists of rolling hills and short sight distances. In my case a long telephoto just wouldn't work, but a 24mm (on full frame) or wider is just right.
Jerry
I recently was criticized for recommending the use of a wide angle lens for landscaping by a couple of photographers who shoot in the western US.
They use long telephotos to pull in the distant mountains.
I live in Eastern Pennsylvania where the predominant landscape consists of rolling hills and short sight distances. In my case a long telephoto just wouldn't work, but a 24mm (on full frame) or wider is just right.
Jerry
Jan 11, 2014 11:39:26 #
Bear2
Loc: Southeast,, MI
I used a 18-200 VR ll in Kauai for ten days, and it was so sharp, it was the only lens i took on the trip. Bought is just before the trip because we had a 'doors off' helicopter trip and you can not have anything loose, no lens changes. This lens has not been off my camera since I bought it.
rdgreenwood wrote:
This past spring I traded in my D300S for a D800E. The only regret I have is that I don't have the 18-200 mm lens I so loved and depended on. It was great for landscapes and great for portraits, and it wasn't bad as a telephoto. The D300 is a great camera; go to a camera shop and try the 18-200 mm and see if it doesn't satisfy the needs of many roles.
Jan 11, 2014 13:28:47 #
Davet,
As has been stated before by others, landscape photography depends on your perspective and what you are trying to reveal.
Using 35mm equivalents, I find that most of my work is done at around two lengths: 28mm and 70mm. This is true of my 35mm, medium format and large format work, all in film.
I hope this helps.
Arca
As has been stated before by others, landscape photography depends on your perspective and what you are trying to reveal.
Using 35mm equivalents, I find that most of my work is done at around two lengths: 28mm and 70mm. This is true of my 35mm, medium format and large format work, all in film.
I hope this helps.
Arca
Jan 11, 2014 13:49:20 #
I'm surprised I never hear anyone mention Sigma's 8-16 mm lens on the UHH forum. I use it and really like it when including an interesting foreground and wanting to emphasize the perspective. It gives me options that no other lens offers with my Pentax K-5, (1.5 crop factor).
However my 16-45 Pentax lens is often more useful. I also use my Pentax 55-300 frequently, in fact it has been the lens most often found on the camera.
It all depends on what you are trying to do with a scene. I've found that trying the shot with different lenses promotes some creative thinking.
I just got the Sigma 18-250 and suspect it will be on the camera much of the time. However, the other lenses will likely get used more when really working a shot.
However my 16-45 Pentax lens is often more useful. I also use my Pentax 55-300 frequently, in fact it has been the lens most often found on the camera.
It all depends on what you are trying to do with a scene. I've found that trying the shot with different lenses promotes some creative thinking.
I just got the Sigma 18-250 and suspect it will be on the camera much of the time. However, the other lenses will likely get used more when really working a shot.
Jan 11, 2014 13:59:28 #
I loved using my nikon 70-200 last year at the Grand Canyon and Sedona. Also used the 10-24 a whole bunch.
Jan 11, 2014 17:45:57 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6... Less expensive, but sharp...Equivalent FOV to a 15-30mm on full frame... You don't need a fast aperture when doing landscapes since the camera is often tripod mounted & wide open , the DOF suffers.
I would also recommend highly, from Sigma's new Art series lenses, take a look the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 - very high accolades. Or for a semi-wide angle prime the 30mm f1.4 or the 35mm f1.4. The 35mm would be closer to a 50mm at least in angle-of-view on an APS-C size sensor. But the 35mm in particular and the 18-35mm f1.4 both get very high marks. I would also seriously consider the Tamron 24-70mm f.2.8 VC, 17-50mm f2.8 VC or non VC version (rated slightly sharper by some reviewers than the VC version), or the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, 16-24mm f2.8, or the slightly older 12-24mm f4.0. As you can see, there are many choices. And it's certainly hard to go wrong with lenses from/by the camera manufacturer, but if choosy and wanting more lens than a manufacturers' cheaper kit-type-lens, a third-party lens can offer better results while being cheaper than the high-end versions of the same lens from the camera manufacturer...
Jan 11, 2014 18:35:51 #
I have about all of those--but find that I will use the Sigma 8-16 by far the most. And when I am using it, very often I will turn my camera (D800) vertical and do panoramas The natural angle of view of an 8mm lens is pretty close to what your eye sees--and I like the affect it gives.
Stan
Stan
Jan 11, 2014 18:38:45 #
Jan 11, 2014 19:00:13 #
Jan 12, 2014 12:23:22 #
stan0301 wrote:
I have about all of those--but find that I will use the Sigma 8-16 by far the most. And when I am using it, very often I will turn my camera (D800) vertical and do panoramas The natural angle of view of an 8mm lens is pretty close to what your eye sees--and I like the affect it gives.
Stan
Stan
I had thought of doing vertical panoramas with the 8-16 Sigma but thought the perspective might be way off. Does using only a very narrow portion of each frame solve this? I'll have to give it a try.
I'd like to see some of your panoramas, but don't want to hijack this discussion of lenses. However, ideas on how to use a lens may be as fitting as what lens to use. If that is too much of a stretch you might consider starting a new subject on panoramas. Could be very interesting.
Jan 22, 2014 20:16:14 #
Jan 22, 2014 20:32:44 #
Davet wrote:
what are your thoughts on the Nikkor 17-55
I have two at work.
The only pro level DX zoom lens Nikon makes.
This was made at a time when Nikon didn't make a full frame camera.
When I shoot with a DX camera, I prefer the 17-55 over the 16-85.
It think it's sharper and has a bit more contrast too.
To be fair though, I don't shoot that many landscapes.
Most of my work is inside and I need the faster aperture.
BTW, Dave, if you use the "quote reply" button instead of just "reply", who you are responding to becomes clear.
Jan 22, 2014 21:21:48 #
Great, thanks for the info.
GoofyNewfie wrote:
I have two at work. br The only pro level DX zoom ... (show quote)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.