OZMON Loc: WIGAN UK

what is a good lens for landscape photography, I am currently us ing a NIKON D5100 camera with the bog standard lens that came with it,I find it is not really as sharp as I want, is there another make of lens that doesn't cost the earth which might be better.

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

It's tough to answer that. Most people think of wide angle lenses for landscapes because they want to take in as much as they can. Not long ago I picked a few dozen of my landscapes and put them in a folder to use as wallpaper on my Windows computer, setting it to rotate through them every half hour. I set it to "fit," meaning the images would fill my monitor, necessarily cropping the images as needed rather than leaving black bars to fill any gaps. I was amazed how much better many of my images looked cropped! Wider is not necessarily better.

I also recently read an article in which the author listed the focal lengths he uses for 'scapes and the percentages he uses them. He shot more in a portrait length (about 75-105mm) than any other length.

So you might consider a traditional wide, or if you go that way, an ultra-wide (on your camera, that would be down in the 11-16mm range). In that range Rokinon/Samyang makes some excellent, low-cost MF lenses! Otherwise, a decent walk-around lens like the Sigma 18-250mm Macro would give you a nice range for every day and landscapes. While not a true macro, it has better IQ than others in its class (it sometimes fools me into thinking pics I took with it were taken with my G glass!), and the close focusing distance allows you to stop down, use a hyperfocal focus point (look that up on Google), and thereby add some close foreground interest to add significant appeal to your landscapes.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

What's a bog standard lens?
"Doesn't cost the earth" is a little vague. Is anything under $13K good for you?
You don't need a different brand. Nikon has 171 good lenses to choose from.

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

I guessed the OP to mean "box standard," or kit lens.

Gobuster Loc: South Florida

In the UK (OP's location), "bog standard" would mean the kit lens, no upgrades or options added. It's a commonly used term, such as: "I have a bog standard VW Golf" meaning a base car without additional options.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Is, how sharp do you want? Have you checked the MTF charts for your lens? Maybe it's sharp enough. Often people get what is considered to be a "sharper", lens then are either dissapointed that they can't tell the difference or they rave inspite of the fact that there is no difference.
Oftentimes the "betterment" of a lens only becomes apparent when a lens is pushed to its extremes, and many never do that. And it's difficult to dicern sharpness virtually. I'm sure there will be no sgortage of favorite lenses recommended!! Good luck ;-)
SS

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

Good points, SS, and for social media or small prints, differences would be virtually indiscernible anyway. But where a lens IQ (and sensor, for that matter) could become important is during post-process composing, as I've unfortunately become so adept at.

Another thing to consider is using a full frame lens on a crop camera. One will ALWAYS get better results that way, all else being equal, because the crop camera takes its image from the central, choice portion of the image rendered by the FF lens, ignoring what would be the edges and corners of a full frame image.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

I'll accept that. You made some good points in your last post. One more is that you can use even a telephoto lens and pan for multiple shots then stitch them together in post processing for a high resolution panorama.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

I wish those folks across the pond would stop trying to reinvent proper English. :XD:

Tigger1 Loc: Surrey, BC Canada

Hello Ozmon,
As has already been said by another member, you ask a tough question given the limited information you provided. Like you I have the D5100 and started with the 18-55mm kit lens and it was not long before I discovered its limitations. I now use the Nikon 10-24mm lens for some landscape shots but I should add that I have also used my 18-200mm and on one occasion my 200-500mm lens although that big boy can hardly be called an ideal landscape lens. In looking at my landscape photos (not my speciality) I have found that I typically use either the widest or longest focal length the particular lens is capable of. Neither end of a typical consumer zoom lens is particularly good for rendering sharp, detailed images, so this another factor to consider. If landscapes is your speciality and would be willing to sacrifice flexibility, then a good quality prime lens may be your best choice. As you have not given us a budget number to base a recommendation on, it makes it difficult to make realistic suggestions for your consideration.
Do you care to give us additional, specific information?
Regards,
Garth

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

. ............
There are a number of 3rd party lens makers that would happily sell you a very good wide-angle lens. Prime isn't a must, but something in the range of 12-24mm gives good landscape pics. Read reviews of and about wide angl lenses. Sigma. Tamron
And others . Canon and Nikon both charge through the nose for their better quality lenses. I must admit, their really good lenses Are-indeed, really good, but for my money, they are generally WAY-OVER-PRICED.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art Lens
Tamron SP AF 10-24mm f / 3.5-4.5

Tigger1 Loc: Surrey, BC Canada

Oddjobber, you make me laugh! The UK was using the English language long before the USA was a reality.

OZMON Loc: WIGAN UK

thanks for all comments,and as for queerjobber if he thinks americans speak "proper" english he is sadly under an illusion.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

:thumbup: