Best Landscape Lens?
- Thread starter Dyl
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,527
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Dyl always remember the landscape you choose to photograph is more important than the lens you choose to do it with.
On a 350D you probably want to look at something from 10mm. I'm not sure of their price but Sigma, Tamron are worth looking at but squeeze as much out of your budget as you can.
On a 350D you probably want to look at something from 10mm. I'm not sure of their price but Sigma, Tamron are worth looking at but squeeze as much out of your budget as you can.
That's difficult, because you want a wide angle (which tends to be expensive) and a wide aperture (which also tends to be expensive).
The only cheap solution I can think of is to use a free panorama stitching program like hugin and to shoot using a cheap standard lens like the 50mm f1.8. This could work very well indeed, but it does mean learning to use Hugin (which isn't very difficult if you are any good with computers).
The way you do it is to go on to manual, set the focus and aperture at the right level for the light and the scene (keep them at this setting thoughout), and shoot a series of overlapping frames that the program will stitch together later.
You can try it with whatever gear you already have without spending anything, as hugin is a free download.
Usually with landscapes you don't want to use a very wide aperture, anyway, because you lose depth of field. As long as things aren't moving it is better to shoot with a long exposure on a tripod so you can get an aperture of around f11.
The only cheap solution I can think of is to use a free panorama stitching program like hugin and to shoot using a cheap standard lens like the 50mm f1.8. This could work very well indeed, but it does mean learning to use Hugin (which isn't very difficult if you are any good with computers).
The way you do it is to go on to manual, set the focus and aperture at the right level for the light and the scene (keep them at this setting thoughout), and shoot a series of overlapping frames that the program will stitch together later.
You can try it with whatever gear you already have without spending anything, as hugin is a free download.
Usually with landscapes you don't want to use a very wide aperture, anyway, because you lose depth of field. As long as things aren't moving it is better to shoot with a long exposure on a tripod so you can get an aperture of around f11.
- Messages
- 1,527
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Oh the other thing I was going to say was why are you thinking about low light landscapes? For any proper landscapes you need to be using a tripod which means you can use a slow shutter and it doesn't matter how much light there is. You don't need a fast lens at all - you dont need to worry about the extra cost of a 1.8 or 2.8 because you won't use an apature that big for a landscape.
- Messages
- 222
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Different opinion from me - I don't think that you necessarily want a wide angle for landscapes. I have lenses ranging from 10mm all the way up to 400mm (on a crop sensor), and I rarely use the wide angle for pure landscape shots. Most are taken between maybe 40mm to 100mm so that you can isolate the intereting part of the scenery.
A pure landscape shot at say 15mm will have the detail so tiny that it will hardly be visible, and then a huge amount of foreground and/or sky. I use my 10-20mm a lot, but not for landscapes!
Just my tuppence.
A pure landscape shot at say 15mm will have the detail so tiny that it will hardly be visible, and then a huge amount of foreground and/or sky. I use my 10-20mm a lot, but not for landscapes!
Just my tuppence.
- Messages
- 8,193
- Name
- Pat MacInnes
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Although it's the trend to go ultra-wide (10mm etc), you don't need to for landscapes; these ultra-wise lenses add distortion to horizons, making them arc across the frame rathe than go in a straight line, and sometime shots can just look a bit too crazy.
Something like a Sigma 15-30mm might be a good buy, but I'm not sure you'd get one for under £250 unless you really hunted around on the used market.
Another good lens optically is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8; superb lens that you can pick up new for about £260 these days.
Have a look at www.photozone.de for lens reviews - this might help you shortlist some good lenses.
Both these come in CAF fit.
My opinion is that for landscapes you'll be using a tripod for extra security more than anything else, so you can afford to go for slightly slower (max aperture) lenses. he Tamron is good because it's f/2.8 throughout but for landscape work you'll generally be shooting around f/8-16 anyway, negating the need for a really fast lens.
As TLR has said, you don't always have to shoot landscapes with wide-angle lenses neither. Some of the best - David Noton, Joe Cornish - use longer focal lengths to compress perspective and create more graphic elements that don't rely on a major foreground interest that you'll generally need with a 10mm lens.
Do your own thing; the Pyrenees are magnificent and regardless of the lens you use, there will always be something brilliant to shoot.
Something like a Sigma 15-30mm might be a good buy, but I'm not sure you'd get one for under £250 unless you really hunted around on the used market.
Another good lens optically is the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8; superb lens that you can pick up new for about £260 these days.
Have a look at www.photozone.de for lens reviews - this might help you shortlist some good lenses.
Both these come in CAF fit.
My opinion is that for landscapes you'll be using a tripod for extra security more than anything else, so you can afford to go for slightly slower (max aperture) lenses. he Tamron is good because it's f/2.8 throughout but for landscape work you'll generally be shooting around f/8-16 anyway, negating the need for a really fast lens.
As TLR has said, you don't always have to shoot landscapes with wide-angle lenses neither. Some of the best - David Noton, Joe Cornish - use longer focal lengths to compress perspective and create more graphic elements that don't rely on a major foreground interest that you'll generally need with a 10mm lens.
Do your own thing; the Pyrenees are magnificent and regardless of the lens you use, there will always be something brilliant to shoot.
- Messages
- 7,179
- Name
- Edward Bray
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most experienced film photgraphers would agree that if weight and size were not an issue a large format camera is the best for landscapes. Not purely due to the very large negative but also due to the use of camera movements to control depth of field.
One way to acheive this digitally is with the use of a Digital body with a live view feature and a Tilt/Shift lens. It does not necessarily have to be wide angle versions either, standard and short telephoto can also be useful. Unfortunately they do not come cheap!
One way to acheive this digitally is with the use of a Digital body with a live view feature and a Tilt/Shift lens. It does not necessarily have to be wide angle versions either, standard and short telephoto can also be useful. Unfortunately they do not come cheap!
- Messages
- 1,527
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The art of a good landscape photograph is in the detail and focal points you include aswell as the image view as a whole. More often than not you will see some point of interest in the foreground with the rest of the image forming a backdrop. To say detail will be tiny with a hugh amount of foreground or sky is rather a generalisation and whilst it might be what you have come up with in your landscapes it isn't what a good landscape composition should look like.
I do agree that landscapes dont all need to be wide angle but by definition they tend to include composition featuring foreground to distant. Pick out one feature and zoom in then it becomes more a still life study don't you think?
- Messages
- 222
- Edit My Images
- Yes
No worries, no offence taken, I was just trying to suggest that an ultra wide angle need not be the automatic choice for a lanscape lens. Sometimes, as you say, a wide angle allows you to include foreground interest and a background, and sometimes a zoom allows the part that you want to be isolated (and can be cheaper than UWAs). Obviously no one lens is right for all situations (unfortunately).
Dyl says that misty mountains are his intended subject; these aren't quite the Pyrenees, but might give an idea of pictures not taken with a wide angle. All taken in the Peak District on my commute, I'm a bit of a sucker for a mist filled valley!
105mm
32mm
24mm
105mm
- Messages
- 1,527
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think what you need to do Dyl, is look on the web at landscape photographs where the photographer includes details of the lens that was used or look in photography magazines for the same thing. When you see images that are like the ones you want to make then you will need to know what focal length was used.
- Messages
- 271
- Name
- Marnie
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi DYL how about you post something youve taken with your current equipment and say how it doesn't do what you want
then someone might be able to make a siutable suggestion about which type of lens would help ( that would really help me too.... i've been whatching this thrad avidly)
then someone might be able to make a siutable suggestion about which type of lens would help ( that would really help me too.... i've been whatching this thrad avidly)
dinners
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 15,745
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As has been said - - no need to worry about large aperture (faster) lenses. You will be using smaller apertures so use a sturdy tripod for longer exposures.
The 17-85 IS USM is a good place to start. It has a good focal range and image stabilisation for when you're not using the tripod.
The 17-85 IS USM is a good place to start. It has a good focal range and image stabilisation for when you're not using the tripod.