Why Wide-angle Lenses for Landscapes? (Page 6): An 11 mm lens allows you to have in focus a near object which can st off the distant object. The depth of field with hyperfocal distance...

soli Loc: London, UK.

An 11 mm lens allows you to have in focus a near object which can st off the distant object. The depth of field with hyperfocal distance gives you the ability to do this well with a wide angle. Otherwise use any lensw depending on what you are trying to do.

washy Loc: Dorset UK

jerryc41 wrote:

That's true, up to a point. The apparent size of things we see with a 50mm lens is roughly equivalent to what the eye sees, but the left-right field of view with the eye is more like a fisheye lens.

If you keep your head still your eues will only be able to 5omm approximately, the wide angle and /or fish eye will be like having eyes in the side of ones head as well as in the front, that is why the fish eye lens is called "fish eye " cos the fish have their eyes in the side of the head. The pic attached was taken with a 10-20mm Sigma wide angle , my eyes could not see all of this shot but the lens did.

sunset

gessman Loc: Colorado

washy wrote:

If you keep your head still your eues will only be able to 5omm approximately, the wide angle and /or fish eye will be like having eyes in the side of ones head as well as in the front, that is why the fish eye lens is called "fish eye " cos the fish have their eyes in the side of the head. The pic attached was taken with a 10-20mm Sigma wide angle , my eyes could not see all of this shot but the lens did.

Not everyone's peripheral vision is the same. Some folks have tunnel vision and I'm not one of them. I see a much greater view than a 50mm normally provides, not that it's of any great consequence.

washy Loc: Dorset UK

gessman wrote:

Not everyone's peripheral vision is the same. Some folks have tunnel vision and I'm not one of them. I see a much greater view than a 50mm normally provides, not that it's of any great consequence.

I agree , Ian Botham, one of England's greatest ever cricketers had exceptional peripheral vision, (that is why he caught so many slip catches ) he saw the ball others could not see, but we are talking average here

cjeisch

Wide angle lenses include more foreground in the picture, giving the viewer a feeling of depth and distance.

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

JudyTee23 wrote:

I am just being curious, but I have often wondered why there seems to be such a popular belief that landscape photos should be made using a wide-angle lens.

There isn't. Wide angle lenses offer more visual opportunities. You can paint your house with a 4" paintbrush. You could use the same brush on a canvas. You are limited with what you can produce visually if you stay with the 4" brush.

The issue now involves as to whether or not you want to learn how to use another tool to broaden your scope and interpretation of the image you are trying to illustrate for others to view. If you are happy with just a normal or telephoto to shoot landscapes, that is OK. If you are unwilling, or unable to learn the techniques with the other lenses, that is OK as well. There isn't a specific lens for landscapes, though. Wide angle lenses are often suggested for people shooting landscapes and interiors because the normal lens would not accommodate a wide enough field of view without taking multiple shots.

You can shoot wonderful birds in flight with an 85mm lens, but it will take a lot more work to do it successfully with many species and environments.

I hope this helps a bit.

cecilia delacroix Loc: near Seattle

jerryc41 wrote:

When you use a wide angle lens, you can get an im... (show quote)

Exactly. That bit of foreground can create an experience of "being there". However, that's still not to say that a telephoto isn't also useful sometimes for landscape shots. (Check out the splendid photo at the 2nd link JR1 shared.) I sometimes try to do both foreground and telephoto, as in the image below. The word "always" should be abolished when it comes to photography.

Sokol Blosser vineyard, Oregon

ijustshotu Loc: Northern California

Sweet!

Cdouthitt wrote:

One word...Clouds...mmm, they eat them for breakfast lunch and dinner...google it for some other examples.

While not my normal wide angle lens, this was captured using my 8mm Fisheye...
http://douthittfamily.smugmug.com/2011Photos/September-2011/i-WQbjSm4/0/XL/Bay_HDR2-cropped-XL.jpg

:thumbup:

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

JR1 wrote:

You have said what I have been saying for years, there is NO reason WHY a landscape needs a wide angle lens

Interesting, but not necessarily a valid statement.

wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ

[quote=JudyTee23]I am just being curious, but I have often wondered why there seems to be such a popular belief that landscape photos should be made using a wide-angle lens. I have read recommendations on this and other forums for using lenses as short as 10 mm.

Is this just some "newbie" fixation, or is there a substantive rationale for the belief?

I shoot many landscapes, from seashore to mountains, wetlands, etc., but I rarely, if ever, use anything on my D700 shorter than 50 mm and frequently at 100 mm or beyond. To me, a wide-angle lens would make it more difficult to define a clear center of interest, would likely turn mountains into molehills and generally increase the difficulty in producing an interesting and compelling image.

Maybe some of the Forum experts can educate me as to why wide-angle lenses are so popular for landscapes.[/quote

Wide angle lenses are very often chosen for depth of field in landscapes.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Thinking about this a little more, wide angles accenuate the near-far spatial relationship - producing in the minds eye a more 3 dimensional perception. While teles do the opposite .....

wlgoode Loc: Globe, AZ

imagemeister wrote:

Thinking about this a little more, wide angles accenuate the near-far spatial relationship - producing in the minds eye a more 3 dimensional perception. While teles do the opposite .....

Eggs-ackly :!:

JBTaylor Loc: In hiding again

Cdouthitt wrote:

One word...Clouds...mmm, they eat them for breakfast lunch and dinner...google it for some other examples.

While not my normal wide angle lens, this was captured using my 8mm Fisheye...
http://douthittfamily.smugmug.com/2011Photos/September-2011/i-WQbjSm4/0/XL/Bay_HDR2-cropped-XL.jpg

Well that picture answers quite well the question of why you would use a wide angle at times. Very nice! :thumbup: :thumbup:

fototaker27 Loc: Dumfries & Galloway Scotland

fstop22 wrote:

A whole lot of nothing is a whole lot of Nothing. One of the toughest lens to use IMO. Mine gathers dust more than the rest. Probably one of the most sought after lens and use the least amount by most. Bought right at 2 years ago, in my first year of the hobby

I agree with the idea of gleaning the whole of what is in front of you using a wide angle lens. do not restrict yourself to any one lens when taking landscapes. They all give varying results on the same subject, no bad thing.

Ronbo Loc: Okanagan falls BC. Canada

Couldn't have shot this without my "newbie fixation" wide angle.