Landscape Lens (Page 2): For shooting in the Canadian Rockies you will likely want a longer lens than 105mm because in many scenes the peaks will be a considerable distance away. A...

Wanderer2 Loc: Colorado Rocky Mountains

For shooting in the Canadian Rockies you will likely want a longer lens than 105mm because in many scenes the peaks will be a considerable distance away. A usual landscape lens recommendation is for wide angles and that applies in many situations, such as the canyons in the US southwest, but shooting in mountain ranges has different needs. I don't have a specific lens to recommend but I would get something that goes out to at least 200mm.

I've been to the Alberta Rockies six times and the scenery along the Icefields Parkway is the most beautiful alpine scenery I've ever seen. You are in for a real treat. Don't miss Lake Moraine, several miles off the main highway.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

You should do fine with the 24-105. I am a Nikon owner but I have seen many beautiful landscape shots made with the Canon 24-105.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

CHG_CANON wrote:

Your 24-105 on the 6D is a fine choice for landscape work, both wide and using the zoom to better frame distant vistas.

I purchased a Sigma 18-200, which basically lives on the camera. It covers my other two zooms.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I agree that you are covered pretty well for basic photography. The reason that 24-70mm lenses are so popular is that they cover such a majority of the focal lengths that we need and use. (I also use a 17-55mm f2.8, which is equivalent to that, on my remaining crop sensor camers). But it doesn't cover everything, which is why there are so many other lens choices available.

This is a first trip here for you, so my suggestion is to think about times that you have visited similar locations. Did you feel that you had everything you needed? If not, did you find yourself wanting to see wider or further? The answer to those questions will tell you if you "need" anything and what you need more. If wider, then you would look for a wide angle prime or zoom for your full frame camera. If further, a longer lens for whichever body you expect to be using most now and in the future.

Whatever you decide, I hope you have fun deciding and that you have a great trip.

wds0410 Loc: Nunya

koosh wrote:

I shoot with Canon 6d and 7D Mark II. Birds and wildlife are my usual subjects, but I now need a good lens for landscape in the Canadian Rockies. Already have a 24-105, 15-55(kit) and 50mm. What else would you suggest either instead of, or in addition to? Budget is modest, less than $500.

I also had the Canon 24-105 but I found it a bit soft so I upgraded to the L version of the same lens which I found refurbished on the Canon site and it is definitely a sharper and my go to lens for 80% of my landscapes. The other is the 70-200 L series which is a fantastic lens.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

koosh wrote:

I shoot with Canon 6d and 7D Mark II. Birds and wildlife are my usual subjects, but I now need a good lens for landscape in the Canadian Rockies. Already have a 24-105, 15-55(kit) and 50mm. What else would you suggest either instead of, or in addition to? Budget is modest, less than $500.

I have a Canon 10-18 that I really likenot sure if that will mount on your camera that's my choice

anotherview Loc: California

I too shoot with the Canon 6D (and the 6DII). I mount the Sigma 24-105mm lens to the 6DII for nearly all my landscape photographs. I also own and use the 6D with the Sigma 100-400mm lens mounted to it. With these two lenses, I can do all my landscape photography. I try to keep it simple via this gear when on my road trips.

When I come into some spare cash, I want to buy a refurbished 6DII for mounting the Sigma long zoom lens.

I'll likely then mount a prime lens to the 6D.

koosh wrote:

I shoot with Canon 6d and 7D Mark II. Birds and wildlife are my usual subjects, but I now need a good lens for landscape in the Canadian Rockies. Already have a 24-105, 15-55(kit) and 50mm. What else would you suggest either instead of, or in addition to? Budget is modest, less than $500.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

You can go wider, but what you have is fine. Save the money or use it to enhance your trip.

Some landscape links -

https://www.lightstalking.com/3-quick-tips-on-when-to-use-a-telephoto-lens-in-landscapes/
https://www.lightstalking.com/9-best-landscape-tutorials-2017-far/
https://digital-photography-school.com/find-best-locations-landscape-photography/
http://www.lightstalking.com/how-to-improve-your-landscape-photography/
http://www.dpmag.com/how-to/shooting/10-lessons-for-your-best-landscape-photographs/
http://digital-photography-school.com/10-tips-for-better-landscape-photography/

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

If your landscape is w-i-d-e, use a wide lens. I like my Sigma 10-20 for my crop frame D7000. Used it exclusively in the Utah parks. Worked great.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

camerapapi wrote:

You should do fine with the 24-105. I am a Nikon owner but I have seen many beautiful landscape shots made with the Canon 24-105.

Ditto
And if you need to go wider than 24mm you can stitch 3 or more shots.
An ultra wide angle lens used in the Canadian Rockies will be a HUGE disappointment to you as it will make near objects appear larger and those distant mountains (which are the reason for the shot in the first place) will be reduced to relative insignificance in the image.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

koosh wrote:

I shoot with Canon 6d and 7D Mark II. Birds and wildlife are my usual subjects, but I now need a good lens for landscape in the Canadian Rockies. Already have a 24-105, 15-55(kit) and 50mm. What else would you suggest either instead of, or in addition to? Budget is modest, less than $500.

You have gotten a lot of good solid advice here. One thing to keep in mind is that when you look at a scene make a decision on what you want the final photo to look like. Then decide if you want to get it in one shot or if stacking and stitching might be better. You have enough equipment for now. If you find you are not getting the results you want, then think about the possibility that equipment might help. But there is not much you cannot do with what you have and a little bit of planning.

You might also want to hang out in the Landscape forum and ask for more advice there. https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/s-132-1.html

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

You’re covered on the 7d2 with the 10-18. I have the same body combination. My 6d2 has the 24-105 or 16-35, both f/4, mounted 75% of the time.

HarryPurcell

You have all the lens you need. Be sure you have a “l” bracket to get easily from horizontal to vertical. I would also practice taking 3 or 4 verticals and stitching them together to get one shot

James R. Kyle Loc: Saint Louis, Missouri (A Suburb of Ferguson)

koosh wrote:

I shoot with Canon 6d and 7D Mark II. Birds and wildlife are my usual subjects, but I now need a good lens for landscape in the Canadian Rockies. Already have a 24-105, 15-55(kit) and 50mm. What else would you suggest either instead of, or in addition to? Budget is modest, less than $500.

======================

I think that you are set good for landscape work.

I have the 24-105 for my Canon 5D Mark II -- The Mark VI --- and 7D. (With the 7D I also use a 10-18 for doing Wide work.)

I do have other lenses that are for portraits. But you inquired about landscape.

Enjoy....

=0=

Bullfrog Bill Loc: CT

consider renting a 16-35 f 2.8 if you don't expect to use it often. This will allow night sky photography and cover the wide angle landscape range.