Photo Arts Forum » Forum List » Cameras and Lenses » Suggestion for good landscape lens

Suggestion for good landscape lens

April 29, 2008, 08:01:07 AM

good morning. I'm looking for opinions on what would be a good landscape lens. My lenses are: sigma 24-70 2.8; nikon kit lens; 85 1.8, 50 1.4. I'm not necessarily looking to purchase another lens...although wouldn't I like that?...just looking for which you think is best for landscapes? On that sigma...thought I'd love it, but it's heavy!
Thanks in advance, Paula

Logged

Ryan Nutt

Reply #1 - April 29, 2008, 08:23:28 AM

What camera? Mine are 1.6x sensors and the 24mm is a little too long for some landscapes. I've also got their 12-24mm and it's a great lens for landscape.

Logged

Ryan

ProofBuddy Online Proofing - Free Download

BobEdens

Reply #2 - April 29, 2008, 08:43:51 AM

I shoot with the Sigma 18-200 on my Nikon. If it can't get quite wide enough I set it on 100mm turn it portrait and take as many shots as it takes, then lace them together later.

Logged

-----------------------------------
"I get up every morning determined to both change the world and have one heck of a good time. Sometimes this makes planning my day difficult. "- EB White

Chattanooga Photographer www.BobEdens.com

Mike Hodgson

Reply #3 - April 29, 2008, 10:29:51 AM

10-20mm

Logged

Travis Minnig

Reply #4 - April 29, 2008, 10:18:56 PM

Would I love the 12-24 Tokina.

Honestly though, sometimes its very beneficial to you in the long run to learn how to use what you have. 24 (or 36 equivalent) really should be good enough to do some great landscape work. The widest I can go on any lens I own is 24, and although I find situations where I would like to go wider, I can always seem to find a way to get what I'm after.

One of the biggest reasons people like a wide angle lens is because of its ability to create the look of distance. This is often done by having large foreground objects to give the viewer a size relationship to determine the depth (or in this case the distance) in an image. The thing you have to remember is this: the foreground objects aren't large because of the wide angle, they are large because of the lens-to-subject distance. Take your 24MM setting on your lens, get down close to the ground and close to a foreground object to create the perception of depth, learn how to use hyperfocal distance (or your depth-of-field preview), and try to accomplish what you envision with your current kit.

That's my suggestion anyway.

Travis

Logged

Travis Minnig Studios

BobEdens

Reply #5 - April 29, 2008, 10:33:00 PM

as much as I hate to admit it [NOT] Travis is right. One thing we all should preach is "IT AIN'T THE CAMERA" In a lot of cases it is the lens but to shoot landscapes you only need to see the result.

Somewhere I've already posted this, but its a good place to say it again:

The painter starts with a blank canvas and adds things until the painting is perfect.
The photographer starts with a full canvas and removes things until the photograph is perfect.

A landscape photo should have a foreground midground farground and edge of site.

My style is to set my 18-200 to 100 or my 50-500 to 50 and shoot portrait and lace them together later. This gives me dynamic range but also the ability to edit out things that didn't belong in my photo.

Logged

Paula

Reply #6 - April 30, 2008, 04:49:03 AM

Thanks for the suggestions. As I said in the original post, I'm not looking to purchase another lens. I was just interested in opinions. Good idea about the dop button on the camera.

By the way, I could take photos with either film or my d70. (no d300 yet and I'm a ways from that unfortunately). ...but am I ever glad I didn't succomb to the d200! Sometimes patience is a virtue!

Thanks again.
Paula

Logged

jkleb

Reply #7 - June 03, 2008, 11:24:33 AM

But it's so easy with the 10-20mm. This was with a Canon, but Sigma makes the same range for Nikon. I might suggest a polarizer and some gradient filters for landscapes too. This goes for any lens you use.

That's the Rio Grande if you were wondering.

Attachments

This post contains 1 attachment, but as a guest you cannot view attachments. Signing up at PhotoArtsForum will allow you to view attachments and post your own messages. If you already are a member at PhotoArtsForum please login.

« Last Edit: June 03, 2008, 11:27:20 AM by jkleb »

Logged

-John
Sarcasm, frustrating the clueless since 3000 b.c.

Paula

Reply #8 - June 04, 2008, 03:48:56 PM

This is gorgeous! I'm hesitant to get a sigma cuz I I'm not in love with my 24-70 2.8. But the Nikon version of the 10-20 ...yikes. Hmmmm food for thought. Thanks for all the opinions! I think I know which lens is on the list next! Paula

Logged

Mike Hodgson

Reply #9 - June 04, 2008, 06:05:06 PM

Paula, I guess practice makes perfect, keep using that 24-70
10-20 it's another lens to get used to, keep practicing.

Logged

BobEdens

Reply #10 - June 04, 2008, 10:26:04 PM

I agree with mike, learn the glass you got.

I just "upgraded" from the sigma 18-200 to the Nikkor 18-200VR
I'm not sure the Nikon is a better lens. sure the VR helps a lot but I just like the "feel" of the sigma. The Nikon doesn't seem to be as quick to focus as the Sigma but it might be the VR or some other factor.

(This was taken from a small aircraft traveling around 100mph with a sigma 18-200 (non OS))

Logged

jkleb

Reply #11 - June 05, 2008, 05:27:09 AM

Quote

10-20 it's another lens to get used to, keep practicing.

Amen to that. The one I had was borrowed of a couple weeks just for my west Texas trip. Looking back over all the shots I see so many of them that could have been a little better if I was used to the lens. Chimping only tells you so much. I had it for two weeks and it wasn't until the end I was learning some of it's quirks. Like even on a 1.6 sensor it vinettes a tad at 10mm, and I liked it best at 16-20mm.
I bought a new 50mm in January and used it three month straight whenever possible just to make sure I could use it right. DOF at 1.4 is tricky, it gets really sweet at 2.8 and up. Color is awesome a little higher, but I think that's more of a sensor thing. I wouldn't have found this out just grabbing it out of the box and taking a couple test shots.

Logged

-John
Sarcasm, frustrating the clueless since 3000 b.c.

Mike Hodgson

Reply #12 - June 05, 2008, 07:56:41 AM

Bob, I would love to have that lens. My brother has it, I used it and was impressed.
So, I guess you'll have to get used to it, practice. Big Grin

Wide open can be tricky, capture a number of shots of that particular subject, even a slight move in will blur.

I liken it to as macro, prefocus, manual, if hand holding, like a 1/16 of an inch back from point of focus, and move in, as you do, ready to press the shutter. Roll finger on the shutter to press it, not a jab style.
I got really good at it, within 6 shots I had a tack sharp image by hand holding. Now, the best tool is a tripod, and I highly recommend it.

Logged

Top of Page