Landscape Camera

M

michaeljb

Messages
4
Name
Michael
Edit My Images
No
I have Nikon D80 with kit lens 18-105 and 50mm prime. I want to upgrade to get more detailed photos/prints. Would you invest in better lens or thought about upgrading camera (Nikon D 700 or D300s, Canon EOS7D or even Canon EOS5D mark 2). Has anybody opinion on best camera/lens for the job.
 
michaeljb said:
I have Nikon D80 with kit lens 18-105 and 50mm prime. I want to upgrade to get more detailed photos/prints. Would you invest in better lens or thought about upgrading camera (Nikon D 700 or D300s, Canon EOS7D or even Canon EOS5D mark 2). Has anybody opinion on best camera/lens for the job.
Click to expand...

I would just invest in lenses. Landscape is not going anywhere or moving so dont need to worry about fast shutter speeds etc. A new camera will not increase the amount of detail that is out there.

Not too sure on what the best lens would be but it just depends on what you want from it all. Being a forum, everyone is going to advise what they would pick but it could be out of your your price range.

Have you acutally tried using your setup? What did YOU find lacking? I personally would first of all invest in a nice sturdy tripod to give you potentially 100% camera shake free images.
 
Nothing wrong with the D70's 10.2Mp unless you want huge prints (much larger than A3). As already said, landscapes don't move, so if you are using a tripod then high ISO performance is irrelevant.

There doesn't seems anything wrong with your lens either! This review by SLRGear is very complementary.

That really only leaves technique!
Speaking from my own experience, when I upgraded from my first DSLR and kit lens there was only a slight improvement in the resultant images and the difference was not the quantum leap I had hoped for.
It was only when I started looking closer at my technique that I realised that right from the beginning I had been the biggest limitation in image quality.
I'd recommend anything that helps with the learning process. A course, a book, a bunch of photobuddies. Whatever works for you!

If I went back to my 20D with kit lens, I could get far better image quality than I did when I was using them.
However, I don't regret upgrading because as my technique improved then I was rewarded with visible improvements in image quality.

So, what to upgrade...
Unless you need the high ISO capabilities of a modern body, then I'd recommend upgrading your lenses.
Look back through your images and see if your favourite images are at the long end or the wide end of the kit lens.
Use that to help decide which new lens to get.
 
Last edited:
I'd buy a Zeiss manual focus lens - the ZF 25/2, 35/2 or the amazing 21mm. All are excellent.
 
Agree with the above , nothing wrong with your camera
Have you got a good tripod as Mitesh said thats important for landscape shots
If you need a wider angle lens I can reccomend the Tokina 11-16
 
if you need wider then 18mm then invest another lens like sigma 10-20. nikon 12-24, tokina 11-16 and so on etc.

Otherwise invest a better tripod for landscape if you don't already have one and invest on quality filters like CPL, ND, ND Grad, 10 stop etc.

That will give you better image for landscape then a new body .........
 
You will definatley get more information and better noise control with a FF camera, resulting in better larger prints.
 
Thanks for the replies. I'm printing up to A3 prints. I just feel the detail sometimes isn't good enough at this size. Will look again at my technique and will think about investing in another lens. Although the last comment about full format and larger print quality is what was leading me to go full frame with the Canon D5 mk2
 
Landscape DOES move, so you do need to worry about high ISO control when you need to up the ISO for fast shutters, unless you plan never to go out on a windy day.
 
depend what you shoot to use high iso on landscape, if you not planning to use tripod then yeah you may need high iso .....

most likely you will use tripod and maybe slow shutter speed if you start using ND
 
what tripod have you got? is it steady?

an upgrade may be needed if you feel the following features are worth something to you: mirror lock up, auto exposure bracketing, higher dynamic range.

higher megapixel count won't really help that much with getting good prints, it would only help for cropping.
 
Tonto said:
Landscape DOES move, so you do need to worry about high ISO control when you need to up the ISO for fast shutters, unless you plan never to go out on a windy day.
Click to expand...

I was just about to point out the same thing, it's all very well bolting your camera to the ground on a super strong tripod but on anything other than a perfectly still day you still need to keep the shutter speed up unless you want blury foliage all over the place. Which becomes even more of a challenge as the light falls in the golden hour and the polarizer robs you of a stop or so!

Seems alot of people have forgotten!

Back on topic as everyone has said glass and technique will make much more of a difference than full frame but if you've caught the upgrade bug you probably won't be able to resist.
 
landscape is a very broad subject. It really depend what sort of landscape you shoot, whether you need high iso or low iso it all depend on the scene. Some only use low iso and tripod and so require high iso.
 
One option you have (light dependent; it's tricky to do when the light is changing rapidly) is to use a longer FL than you otherwise would, and stitch the images together. In this way (and especially if you take the time to shoot around the nodal point of the lens) you can give yourself an arbitrarily large sensor, getting medium or even large format quality images.


ghettoiq180test - 1 by ausemmao, on Flickr

That's a proof of concept (and handheld), using an 85mm lens to get the approximate FoV of a 21mm lens. The final image is 120MP or something
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top