Help deciding on a lens

[WWA]

Hi,

Recently I've been finding my Tokina 11-16 too wide for a lot of the landscape shots I've been doing and I'm not happy using my 18-140 kit lens for them. So I've decided to treat myself to a new lens, can't decide which one though. It needs to be sharp for landscapes and not too short on the long end so I can take it on days out/ walks etc and get general photos with it. Camera is a Nikon D7200.

So far I'm looking at the Sigma 17-70. Anyone have any opinions on this lens? Is it sharp?

Or a Nikon 16-85 but worried that this lens is getting old now and my D7200 will show it up?

Or am I better digging deeper and getting the new Nikon 16-80? Doesn't seem to get the rave reviews that id expect from a lens of that price?

Any others I should be looking at?

Thanks

 

[minnnt]

What are you not liking about the 18-140?

 

[Brazo]

Tamron 17-50 2.8

 

[WWA]

What are you not liking about the 18-140?

Sorry, I should have said in my OP. Distortion at the wide end (which can be fixed in PP but I don't like how bad it is. No focus ring which I like to have for landscapes. Also in my head I think need more image quality for landscapes but the 18-149 isn't too bad.

I think I just want another lens!!

 

[WWA]

Tamron 17-50 2.8

Thanks, I'll check that out.

 

[JJ!]

The Nikon 16-85 is not really old, still a modern day lens - used to use it before I went FF.

Also used the 17-50 Tamron which is also excellent.

 

[PaulButler]

... No focus ring which I like to have for landscapes.

It has a focus ring ... do you mean aperture ring? if so you really do not need that for landscapes

Also in my head I think need more image quality for landscapes but the 18-149 isn't too bad.

Whilst I haven't used it, I'm sure the IQ is fine - particularly at the apertures you will typically use for landscapes

I think I just want another lens!!

and ... so we get to the real reason

fwiw the 16-85 will be fine on the 7200, though not sure that would be the best bet simply because the current lens will just about match it where they overlap for landscape use. If you already have the tokina 11-16 then the 16mm-18mm gap is not really relevant imo, and the 16-85 also distorts at the wide end (in fact just about every zoom of this nature does). The tammy and sigma 17-50's are pretty good though and offer the option of using f2.8 if needed. I wouldn't get the sigma 17-70 only because it isn't really any improvement over the 18-140. Another option to think about is the sigma 18-35 f1.8, by all accounts it is very sharp, though I've never used it so cannot confirm that.

 

[WWA]

It has a focus ring ... do you mean aperture ring? if so you really do not need that for landscapes

Whilst I haven't used it, I'm sure the IQ is fine - particularly at the apertures you will typically use for landscapes

and ... so we get to the real reason

fwiw the 16-85 will be fine on the 7200, though not sure that would be the best bet simply because the current lens will just about match it where they overlap for landscape use. If you already have the tokina 11-16 then the 16mm-18mm gap is not really relevant imo, and the 16-85 also distorts at the wide end (in fact just about every zoom of this nature does). The tammy and sigma 17-50's are pretty good though and offer the option of using f2.8 if needed. I wouldn't get the sigma 17-70 only because it isn't really any improvement over the 18-140. Another option to think about is the sigma 18-35 f1.8, by all accounts it is very sharp, though I've never used it so cannot confirm that.

Thank you for your detailed reply. It's definitely just a case of wanting a new lens rather than needing on. Although I do want my 16-35 range to be as sharp as possible. I shall check out the sigma and also the 17-50s. Thank you.

 

[WWA]

It has a focus ring ... do you mean aperture ring? if so you really do not need that for landscapes

Whilst I haven't used it, I'm sure the IQ is fine - particularly at the apertures you will typically use for landscapes

and ... so we get to the real reason

fwiw the 16-85 will be fine on the 7200, though not sure that would be the best bet simply because the current lens will just about match it where they overlap for landscape use. If you already have the tokina 11-16 then the 16mm-18mm gap is not really relevant imo, and the 16-85 also distorts at the wide end (in fact just about every zoom of this nature does). The tammy and sigma 17-50's are pretty good though and offer the option of using f2.8 if needed. I wouldn't get the sigma 17-70 only because it isn't really any improvement over the 18-140. Another option to think about is the sigma 18-35 f1.8, by all accounts it is very sharp, though I've never used it so cannot confirm that.

Oh and by focus ring, I mean the bit with the distances marked on for manual focus, is that an aperture ring or does it have a different name? Aperture ring to me is the small ring on older lenses.

 

[WWA]

The Nikon 16-85 is not really old, still a modern day lens - used to use it before I went FF.

Also used the 17-50 Tamron which is also excellent.

Thanks. I've just been looking at the Sigma 17-50 which takes the same size filters as my Tokina 11-16 so that's a massive plus.

Looks like I've made my mind up unless anyone else comes with a suggestion?

Interesting that no one has any experience of the new 16-80 Nikon. A forum search returns no info either.

 

[PaulButler]

Oh and by focus ring, I mean the bit with the distances marked on for manual focus, is that an aperture ring or does it have a different name? Aperture ring to me is the small ring on older lenses.

That is a focus distance window, and no it doesn't have one of those. imo/e they are not essential for landscape work (and nor do I or would I rely on them either ).

 

[minnnt]

Sounds like GAS to me. I doubt the Sigma/Tamron will offer anything over the 18-140mm for normal landscape shots.

Nothing wrong with wanting a new lens of course, just don't go expecting massive improvements.

 

[JJ!]

Sounds like GAS to me. I doubt the Sigma/Tamron will offer anything over the 18-140mm for normal landscape shots.

Nothing wrong with wanting a new lens of course, just don't go expecting massive improvements.

Talking of which... hows the 58mm pot looking?!

 

[WWA]

That is a focus distance window, and no it doesn't have one of those. imo/e they are not essential for landscape work (and nor do I or would I rely on them either ).

Ahh that's what it's called, thanks. I must need to change my technique as I use them all the time, mustn't be doing it right but very new to landscapes.

 

[WWA]

Sounds like GAS to me. I doubt the Sigma/Tamron will offer anything over the 18-140mm for normal landscape shots.

Nothing wrong with wanting a new lens of course, just don't go expecting massive improvements.

Hmm definitely GAS. Birthday next week you see...

Maybe I shall save my money and use the 18-140 for now. And learn to focus without the focus distance window

 

[retrosi]

Have a read here; https://photographylife.com/best-nikon-lenses-for-landscape-photography

 

[PaulButler]

Ahh that's what it's called, thanks. I must need to change my technique as I use them all the time, mustn't be doing it right but very new to landscapes.

The reason why I don't use the distance scale is because of scale ... i.e. I cannot be sure that if I think I have set it to say 3 feet I really have done so as a relatively small movement of the focus ring can shift the focus point several feet yet it still lines up with the marker.

I'm guessing that you are trying to use the hyperfocal distance method when taking landscapes? Also with you mentioning "sharp as possible" I'm wondering if you are stopping down too far? (too large an f number e.g. f16, f22 etc)

 

[WWA]

The reason why I don't use the distance scale is because of scale ... i.e. I cannot be sure that if I think I have set it to say 3 feet I really have done so as a relatively small movement of the focus ring can shift the focus point several feet yet it still lines up with the marker.

I'm guessing that you are trying to use the hyperfocal distance method when taking landscapes? Also with you mentioning "sharp as possible" I'm wondering if you are stopping down too far? (too large an f number e.g. f16, f22 etc)

Yes you're right, I'm trying to use hyperfocal distance. Is this not the right method?

I just mention as sharp as possible as in I want the detail throughout the shot to be as good as it can be. I've learnt that stopping down too far is bad, I know that f8-f11 ish is the best most the time. My Tokina seems best at f8.

 

[WWA]

Have a read here; https://photographylife.com/best-nikon-lenses-for-landscape-photography

Thank you, I read that earlier, very interesting.

 

[PaulButler]

Yes you're right, I'm trying to use hyperfocal distance. Is this not the right method?

It is one method that is commonly used and it would be wrong of me to say it wasn't correct. I do use it myself sometimes, but usually I will have something I want to focus on in the image, be it near or far. Personally I expect objects in the distance to be less in focus than objects near to me so I try and reflect that in my landscapes.

I just mention as sharp as possible as in I want the detail throughout the shot to be as good as it can be. I've learnt that stopping down too far is bad, I know that f8-f11 ish is the best most the time. My Tokina seems best at f8.

Generally on the 7200 I'd agree that f8 - f11 is the sort of range you should be using, though don't get too constrained by that, instead think of what you are trying to achieve and use the most appropriate aperture for that.

With the 18-140 you should be able to achieve perfectly acceptable sharpness at f8. If not, and assuming all is working as it should, then it may suggest your support system isn't up to the mark (tripod etc) or possibly your technique. No offence meant here btw.

I perhaps should have said earlier that my favourite lens for landscapes when I was shooting DX was the Nikon 17-55 it was/is rather good, albeit a tad heavy.

 

[minnnt]

Talking of which... hows the 58mm pot looking?!

Pretty poor tbh.

Try using manual focus and live view. Zoom in to 100%, adjust the focus until it is bang on and press the shutter. (either with a remote or using the built in timer). Also turn off VR and use a tripod for best results.

With regards to the Nikon 17-55... I used to have one and it is an absolutely brilliant lens. Pro build, instant focus, big beefy thing of a lens. Problem i found with it was that it flares uncontrollably when shooting into sunlight. It doesn't have Nikons Nano Crystal Coating like other pro spec lenses as it is quite an old lens now. If i still used DX as my main system though it would be in my kit bag as it does everything else perfectly.

A bit of a random suggestion, but have you considered a longer lens? A 70-200/300 can be an invaluable lens for landscapes. The compression of the longer focal length can really add drama to a picture.

 

[WWA]

It is one method that is commonly used and it would be wrong of me to say it wasn't correct. I do use it myself sometimes, but usually I will have something I want to focus on in the image, be it near or far. Personally I expect objects in the distance to be less in focus than objects near to me so I try and reflect that in my landscapes.

Generally on the 7200 I'd agree that f8 - f11 is the sort of range you should be using, though don't get too constrained by that, instead think of what you are trying to achieve and use the most appropriate aperture for that.

With the 18-140 you should be able to achieve perfectly acceptable sharpness at f8. If not, and assuming all is working as it should, then it may suggest your support system isn't up to the mark (tripod etc) or possibly your technique. No offence meant here btw.

I perhaps should have said earlier that my favourite lens for landscapes when I was shooting DX was the Nikon 17-55 it was/is rather good, albeit a tad heavy.

I shall look at my focusing techniques as I had learned that Hyper focal was the way to go but evidently not the case. I have a decent tripod and I was hankering after a decent landscape lens, but if the 18-140 is up for the job then I guess its just time to practice!

Thank you very much for taking the time to reply to me in such a detailed manner.

 

[WWA]

Pretty poor tbh.

Try using manual focus and live view. Zoom in to 100%, adjust the focus until it is bang on and press the shutter. (either with a remote or using the built in timer). Also turn off VR and use a tripod for best results.

With regards to the Nikon 17-55... I used to have one and it is an absolutely brilliant lens. Pro build, instant focus, big beefy thing of a lens. Problem i found with it was that it flares uncontrollably when shooting into sunlight. It doesn't have Nikons Nano Crystal Coating like other pro spec lenses as it is quite an old lens now. If i still used DX as my main system though it would be in my kit bag as it does everything else perfectly.

A bit of a random suggestion, but have you considered a longer lens? A 70-200/300 can be an invaluable lens for landscapes. The compression of the longer focal length can really add drama to a picture.

I shall give the live view method a go, thank you.

Your suggestion of using a longer lens for better compression is something I have been reading about. I think I need to get my technique sorted with my normal lens and then when I feel the need I would love to invest in a 70-200.

 

[minnnt]

The downside of a 70-200 is the weight. Whilst optically sound and one of the best lenses ever made, dragging it up a mountain can quickly become a ball ache. The Nikon F4 version is a nice weight saving option over the F2.8 so that could also be worth considering. It's also cheaper.

Not the best example, but here's a quick couple of shots to show how even a small amount of focal length can change the perspective of the scene.

24mm

Blea Tarn by David Raynham, on Flickr

60mm

Lake District - 2015 by David Raynham, on Flickr

 

[WWA]

Wow, thanks for posting them, great to see a real world example. Superb images.

Ive just been re-reading about focusing on landscape scenes and its all coming back to me now, I got way to hung up on hyper focal distance.