cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

I, and you as you have determined, find those two lenses are the perfect Nikon glass for landscapes.

CWGordon

Looks like a lot of good advice!

Bill P

[quote=CamB]There is no “landscape” lens. Different landscapes need different lenses. I shoot half my “landscapes” at 200 and 300mm. I like the compression and that slightly gritty in your face feel to them.

Finally, someone with a brain on this list. No, there is NO one lens for landscapes, just as there is no one lens for any of the other things we see questions about. There is a good lens for a given scene, but real photographers have their own unique vision, and don't borrow someone else's. A scene you think would be good with a 20 or a 28 I might prefer with a 135 or 200.

Questions like this are just looking for the easy way out.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Doing that you are basically shooting yourself in the foot!

The 24-70mm you mention is a fine "walk around" zoom on a full frame camera, covers a nice range for many things, landscapes included.

But it's not a good choice on an an APS-C camera like a D5600. Sure, it will work fine... but it isn't particularly wide when used on a DX camera. And "wide" is often wanted for landscape shots. A 24-70mm f/2.8 is also pretty large and heavy... not to mention expensive!

I'd recommend you get a Nikon AF-P 10-20mm VR DX lens. True, it won't be useful on a full frame camera (if and when you ever get one). But it will be a far better choice right now on your current camera. It's also quite affordable, at around $300 brand new. Even so, it's quite capable. Do some research... it will probably surprise you!

The Nikon-made alternatives.... Nikkor 10-24mm and 12-24mm are both massively over-priced.... and not really any more capable. They also don't have VR image stabilization, which the cheaper lens has.

The 10-20mm VR also is more compact and lighter weight. Don't let it's f/4.5-5.6 variable aperture concern you. For landscape work you're very likely going to be stopping down to f/8 or f/11 anyway.

There are also Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 (big, heavy), Sigma 8-16mm (the widest of the wide), Tamron 10-24mm VC USD, Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 DX, Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and a few others... but they tend to be a little to a lot more expensive than the little Nikkor 10-20mm. There's a Sigma 12-24mm "Art" that's full frame capable, but it's big, heavy and 5X as expensive.

Do yourself a favor... get a DX lens now to use on your DX camera. Later - if and when you get an FX camera - you can sell off the DX lens and replace it with something a lot bigger, heavier and much more expensive. The AF-P 10-20mm VR DX lens will work fine on your D5600, where it will give you roughly the equivalent of a 16-35mm lens on full frame.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/compare/Nikon_AF-S_NIKKOR_24-70mm_f_2.8E_ED_VR_Lens_vs_Nikon_AF-S_NIKKOR_16-35mm_f_4G_ED_VR_Lens_vs_Nikon_AF-P_DX_NIKKOR_10-20mm_f_4.5-5.6G_VR_Lens_vs_Nikon_AF-S_DX_NIKKOR_10-24mm_f_3.5-4.5G_ED_Lens/BHitems/1175033-REG_675838-USA_1341603-REG_619515-REG

P.S. Considering what you shoot... I'd recommend you also get an AF-S 18-140mm VR DX as a general purpose, walk-around lens. It can replace both your 18-55mm and 70-300mm "kit" lenses. Granted, 140mm isn't 300mm.... But you mention having a 200-500mm Nikkor and that would pair up well with an 18-140mm. The "gap" between them isn't all that critical.

In other words, three Nikkor lenses: AF-P 10-20mm VR DX, AF-S 18-140mm VR DX and AF-S 200-500mm VR FX. Especially for the latter, you may want to put some of the money you've saved toward a good, solid tripod with a ballhead and a gimbal adapter.

Dossile

I use three lenses for landscapes, Nikon 20 f1.8, Nikon 24-70 E2.8 and, most often, Nikon 70-200 E2.8.

In a wide angle, I use a Nikon 20mm f1.8. Light, sharp and fast. I really like it a lot. I have the 16-35 f4, but it duplicates the range of the 24-70 f2.8 and is heavy. I did not like the 16-35’s barrel distortion even after PP correction in the 16-18 focus range. However, the 16-35 does accept a circular filter, which the 14-24 does not. All 3 are great lenses. Simply choose your compromises. Sigma Art series has some nice wide angle lenses as well.

In a medium zoom, the 24-70 f2.8 is a good distance. The newer Nikon E version has VR and an electronic shutter, possibly slightly more responsive focus according to some reviews. I handhold inside and for evening low light shots, so I did get the VR. I think the 24-70 D2.8 is a great lens with filter size that matches the 16-35 and the 70-200 2.8. The newer 24-70 offerings from Tamron and Sigma also get great reviews and are well worth looking at.

In longer zoom, save up if you need to and buy the Nikon 70-200 E2.8. Don’t compromise on the D version or any other lens company. This is head and shoulders a better lens, one of the best lenses Nikon makes at any price. I use it as my main landscape lens, something that I would not have said 5 yrs ago. I enjoy the compression illusion and the intimacy that the effect creates. With PP and the ability to weld images, the detail rendered is amazing.

CWGordon

You know, you are correct that there is no “one/single” lens for anything. But, really, the common lens that most people think of when they think of landscapes is a wide angle. Everyone, pretty much, assumes that for purposes of conversation. Your point is well taken, though.

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

Landscape photographers typically prefer longer focal lengths. But you are correct - most people think of wide angles.

Dossile

[quote=amfoto1]”Doing that you are basically shooting yourself in the foot!

Do yourself a favor... get a DX lens now to use on your DX camera. Later - if and when you get an FX camera - you can sell off the DX lens and replace it with something a lot bigger, heavier and much more expensive. The AF-P 10-20mm VR DX lens will work fine on your D5600, where it will give you roughly the equivalent of a 16-35mm lens on full frame.”

I bought full frame lenses when shooting a D300S and am very glad that I did. The financial bite of an upgrade was halved. Agreed, a 24-70 becomes a 36-105 for awhile, but I use a wide angle less and less for landscapes. Selling lenses is a pain and, when they are Dx lenses, unprofitable. if you must, buy a used Dx wide angle. For that 36-105 range though, you will have a lens better than your camera.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

I am going to have people who detract from my recommendation but here goes: You have a D5600 crop sensor body. That means that the field of view on a 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom lens will give you an image similar to a 42mm lens on a "full frame" i.e. 35mm film equivalent sensor. That is not the wide-angle that you're looking for. To achieve a wide-angle field of view you will need a lens that has a minimum 14mm to 18mm PHYSICAL focal length. You're next problem is that a DX lens is not the best for you if you plan to go to an FX body at some future point in time. So, what I'd do (and did) is pick up a Nikkor AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED. The IQ is great, build quality is great and use on DX and FX bodies is not a problem. The lens is well made so if you want to economize, a used copy will serve you well.

Hamltnblue Loc: Springfield PA

IMO, you don't need a F2.8 for landscape shots however the Nikor 16-80 F2.8-4 is an excellent lens for that camera.
A 24-70 lens may not be wide enough for landscapes on the 5600. It is equivalent to a 36-105 due to the crop sensor.
Also why wait for your skills to improve to move to the D850? The 850 is a great learning camera :)
Also consider the Z's for future. Loving my Z6, especially for landscapes. The 24-70 and 14 to 30 F4 lenses are nice and light and tack sharp.

OregonCoaster

I went from a D5500 to a D850. I had a 12-24 DX lens that was a winner. When I moved to the 850 I found that a 16-35mm f/4 was a terrific lens with a similar field of view. $750 used. Lighter and cheaper than 2.8 lenses. Nice bokeh. Worth a look. With the 850 you have more wiggle room with ISO.

CWGordon

As a child of the 60’s I enjoyed the LowerSlower,Delaware (LSD) thing.
I left PA for the LSES; Lower, Slower,Eastern Shore. Maryland, that is. Enjoy yerself in Delaware. A great place for a photographer type.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

The only thing about a 10-20mm is that I use the 24mm end of my 10-24mm as much as anything else.

Leitz Loc: Solms

An excellent replication of sewage treatment plant outflow. So realistic one can almost smell it.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

Consider the Tamron line. FX lenses include the 17-35 f2.8-4 and the 35-150 f2.8-4. Also the 28-75 f2.8 constant 2.8 aperture. These are FX lenses that can be used right now on your D5600 with the 1.5 crop factor. Also for super wide DX only is the Tamron 10-24 f3.5-4.5 and wide DX is the 17-50 f2.8. These lenses are a great value with excellent quality that will not break the bank. I use the 28-75 and the 17-50 with my D3400 and D90 and have been very pleased with the results.