and help to keep the site free for all
Lenses suited for landscape newbie
- Thread starter Tulipone
- Start date
Hi,
maybe I am just a photography-grumps with strong opinions, but
ad.filters) GND filters are relict from analog (film) photography .. they are ancient reptiles in today's digital era .. forget them and use bracketing instead .. for serious landscape photography you need to blend exposures in postprocess .. to blend in postprocess two shots like if you were using a GND filter is the most easy task in the world and it takes (if you do it all manually with applying gradient at mask) exactly 30 seconds if you're slow so it's nominally quicker than to set up that horrible, expensive and distracting filter holder and square filter out there in the field .. there is only one exception when using GND filters is OK - the exception is if you just like it and if it makes you happy (which is unlikely for 90% photographers because using filters in general is distracting and just meh ....)
ad.glasses) I use for my landscape ventures only two glasses for 15 years and was never considering a change - I use 16-35 and 70-200 with FF ... very rarely I take out also 24-70 or 200-500 ... these two guys are my dust catchers home the most of the time ... landscape photography for me means hike and spending time in great outdoors .. so I want to be light .. Actually my favourite set for "bigger hikes" is just an APS-C with 18-140 + 11-20, but yeah, in 90%+ cases when I go out with my FF camera I have in backpack just two lenses 16-35 (or 17-35) and 70-200 .. But it really depends on your style ... There are some landscape (weirdo) photographers who go out with only 24-70 lens instead ..
maybe I am just a photography-grumps with strong opinions, but
ad.filters) GND filters are relict from analog (film) photography .. they are ancient reptiles in today's digital era .. forget them and use bracketing instead .. for serious landscape photography you need to blend exposures in postprocess .. to blend in postprocess two shots like if you were using a GND filter is the most easy task in the world and it takes (if you do it all manually with applying gradient at mask) exactly 30 seconds if you're slow so it's nominally quicker than to set up that horrible, expensive and distracting filter holder and square filter out there in the field .. there is only one exception when using GND filters is OK - the exception is if you just like it and if it makes you happy (which is unlikely for 90% photographers because using filters in general is distracting and just meh ....)
ad.glasses) I use for my landscape ventures only two glasses for 15 years and was never considering a change - I use 16-35 and 70-200 with FF ... very rarely I take out also 24-70 or 200-500 ... these two guys are my dust catchers home the most of the time ... landscape photography for me means hike and spending time in great outdoors .. so I want to be light .. Actually my favourite set for "bigger hikes" is just an APS-C with 18-140 + 11-20, but yeah, in 90%+ cases when I go out with my FF camera I have in backpack just two lenses 16-35 (or 17-35) and 70-200 .. But it really depends on your style ... There are some landscape (weirdo) photographers who go out with only 24-70 lens instead ..
My two cents.
Lenses.
My 17-40 was good on a crop sensor. Now it's full frame I find it distorts the sides of the frame.
Some of my favourite images I've taken have been with my 70-200. Sometimes it's not how much you get into the frame but what you leave out.
Filters. I started with some cokin p filters years ago and everything developed a purple hue that while easily corrected, it annoyed me.
I have a set of Lee polarisor, ND and graduated and a fotmatt ND I got discounted a couple of years back (and I've not used it yet).
As mentioned above. The grads largely stay in the bag.
Lenses.
My 17-40 was good on a crop sensor. Now it's full frame I find it distorts the sides of the frame.
Some of my favourite images I've taken have been with my 70-200. Sometimes it's not how much you get into the frame but what you leave out.
Filters. I started with some cokin p filters years ago and everything developed a purple hue that while easily corrected, it annoyed me.
I have a set of Lee polarisor, ND and graduated and a fotmatt ND I got discounted a couple of years back (and I've not used it yet).
As mentioned above. The grads largely stay in the bag.
- Messages
- 4,989
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For the majority of what I shoot i use a 24-120 lens which is ideal for 90% of what I shoot.
I bought a 14-30 Z lens 18 months ago and find it way too wide for most uses and it rarely comes out of the big - in fact it rarely comes out with me now. I really should have bought longer not wider.
Filter wise I bought a set of K&F magnetic filters as they are much more manageable than the larger square set I have from NiSi and a hell of a lot cheaper too. To be honest, I’ve found them very good for the price with barely any colour cast.
I bought a 14-30 Z lens 18 months ago and find it way too wide for most uses and it rarely comes out of the big - in fact it rarely comes out with me now. I really should have bought longer not wider.
Filter wise I bought a set of K&F magnetic filters as they are much more manageable than the larger square set I have from NiSi and a hell of a lot cheaper too. To be honest, I’ve found them very good for the price with barely any colour cast.
- Messages
- 1,097
- Name
- Alistair
- Edit My Images
- No
I mostly shoot landscapes and I find about 80-90% are taken with my 24-105 (I'm on Canon full frame). I have owned two ultra wide lenses, a 16-35 and a 17-35. But currently 24mm is the widest I have. I find that I don't often miss having anything wider than 24mm, except for the odd occasion wanting to shoot in a tight space where you are close to something (eg in a narrow valley trying to shoot a waterfall).
The 24-105 is wide enough to get most landscape shots and gives enough zoom to get in fairly close. If you want a wider shot, you can just shoot a panorama and stitch it later.
It also depends on the landscape. I shoot mostly in East Anglia and find that a wide lens just makes a fairly flat landscape look even flatter. If you use a longer focal length it adds more depth and doesn't show the flatness so much.
As for the filter question, grads are useful but it depends on your preference. Some people get on with them, some dislike the faff.
Bracketing and exposure blending can be fine and works well if you are always using a tripod, but I'm not always on a tripod. It also doesn't work so well for all scenes.
It's a personal choice and the only way to work it out is to try the different methods yourself. Try bracketing and blending as that isn't going to cost you any money. Then also try some filters. You can pick up second hand filters from the classifieds here or from MPB/WEX, Lee filters are decent quality and can be found secondhand for reasonable money.
All the methods are there for you to use, try all the tools, mix and match, see what works for you.
The 24-105 is wide enough to get most landscape shots and gives enough zoom to get in fairly close. If you want a wider shot, you can just shoot a panorama and stitch it later.
It also depends on the landscape. I shoot mostly in East Anglia and find that a wide lens just makes a fairly flat landscape look even flatter. If you use a longer focal length it adds more depth and doesn't show the flatness so much.
As for the filter question, grads are useful but it depends on your preference. Some people get on with them, some dislike the faff.
Bracketing and exposure blending can be fine and works well if you are always using a tripod, but I'm not always on a tripod. It also doesn't work so well for all scenes.
It's a personal choice and the only way to work it out is to try the different methods yourself. Try bracketing and blending as that isn't going to cost you any money. Then also try some filters. You can pick up second hand filters from the classifieds here or from MPB/WEX, Lee filters are decent quality and can be found secondhand for reasonable money.
All the methods are there for you to use, try all the tools, mix and match, see what works for you.
- Messages
- 9,910
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A good article here, that also confirms what ecoleman said earlier: https://digital-photography-school.com/wide-angle-versus-telephoto-lenses-landscape-photography/
If you want the perspective and compression gained from a telephoto, but still want a wider shot then as previously mentioned stitching into a pano can sometimes be an option. It doesn't have to be a super wide pano either, sometimes it can even be a just two stitched together.
Also worth considering the various ways to achieve focus as well.
If you want the perspective and compression gained from a telephoto, but still want a wider shot then as previously mentioned stitching into a pano can sometimes be an option. It doesn't have to be a super wide pano either, sometimes it can even be a just two stitched together.
Also worth considering the various ways to achieve focus as well.