Your most used Landscape lens

Hey guys, it's been a while since I started this thread and I've just had a read through again and read some more posts, very interesting :)

At the moment I'm getting more into woodland photography and less wide shots and I'm finding the gap in my focal length quite limiting indeed. At the moment I have a 10-18, 24, 50, and 55-250. But I'm really missing a lens which covers 18mm-55mm.

I'm looking at going to Full Frame soon, whether that's a FF Mirrorless Canon or a FF DSLR. I'm thinking I'll buy a 24-70mm or 24-105mm to go with my Canon 80D (APS-C) for the time being, but not sure which to get, I don't need either to be 2.8.
 
I have just bought the Sigma 24mm f1.4 ART lens, twinned with a FF Sony a7Riii. I will in due course be using that :)

Les
 
I’ve just got the canon 24-105 f4 L. That range gives a lot of options.
 
smr said:
Hey guys, it's been a while since I started this thread and I've just had a read through again and read some more posts, very interesting :)

At the moment I'm getting more into woodland photography and less wide shots and I'm finding the gap in my focal length quite limiting indeed. At the moment I have a 10-18, 24, 50, and 55-250. But I'm really missing a lens which covers 18mm-55mm.

I'm looking at going to Full Frame soon, whether that's a FF Mirrorless Canon or a FF DSLR. I'm thinking I'll buy a 24-70mm or 24-105mm to go with my Canon 80D (APS-C) for the time being, but not sure which to get, I don't need either to be 2.8.
Click to expand...

I bought my 24-105L when I was shooting on the 60D (predecessor to your 80D) and while it's a good lens, you'll find that 24mm on a crop body isn't that wide (equivalent to 38mm) and you'll still have a gap between your 10-18mm and the 24-105.
When I was using the 60D, I also had a Sigma 10-20mm, so I also had a gap, but slightly smaller between 20mm and 24mm.
When I bought the 24-105, I already knew I was going to be upgrading to full frame so I knew it was worthwhile doing.

If you are planning to stay on crop sensor for a while longer, I'd actually look at the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM as this is far better suited to the crop sensor.

If you are going to upgrade to full frame, get the 24-105. I don't see the point in the 24-70mm f4L, because the extra 35mm of the 24-105 is really useful and I'd only go for the 2.8 version if you're needing something for events or weddings, etc. For landscapes the 24-105 is brilliant. Check out Mads Peter Iverson on youtube, he's a fan of the focal range.
I can shoot all day with that one lens and not bother with anything else.
The question will be whether to buy the cheaper EF version which you can use now or to go all in and buy an EOS R series camera and the RF lens.
I tested out the EOS RP and RF 24-105L, great combo and about 100g lighter than my 6D and EF 24-105L.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smr
ABTog said:
I bought my 24-105L when I was shooting on the 60D (predecessor to your 80D) and while it's a good lens, you'll find that 24mm on a crop body isn't that wide (equivalent to 38mm) and you'll still have a gap between your 10-18mm and the 24-105.
When I was using the 60D, I also had a Sigma 10-20mm, so I also had a gap, but slightly smaller between 20mm and 24mm.
When I bought the 24-105, I already knew I was going to be upgrading to full frame so I knew it was worthwhile doing.

If you are planning to stay on crop sensor for a while longer, I'd actually look at the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS USM as this is far better suited to the crop sensor.

If you are going to upgrade to full frame, get the 24-105. I don't see the point in the 24-70mm f4L, because the extra 35mm of the 24-105 is really useful and I'd only go for the 2.8 version if you're needing something for events or weddings, etc. For landscapes the 24-105 is brilliant. Check out Mads Peter Iverson on youtube, he's a fan of the focal range.
I can shoot all day with that one lens and not bother with anything else.
The question will be whether to buy the cheaper EF version which you can use now or to go all in and buy an EOS R series camera and the RF lens.
I tested out the EOS RP and RF 24-105L, great combo and about 100g lighter than my 6D and EF 24-105L.
Click to expand...


Yes this is the thing, I'd be going for a Mirrorless Camera I think, as that's the way the Lenses and Canon are going, and also that the RF 24-105 sounds very very sharp and a fantastic lens, the R really appeals for Landscape Photography apart from one odd thing I read on the digital picture review in the comparison between the R, R6 and R5... in that the R actually produces softer images. "Another aspect that specs do not make clear is the relative sharpness of the images these cameras produce. The R produces softer images than many other Canon cameras when the images are processed using the same settings. Why? I've asked that question multiple times and have received no answers. However, that question has been resolved in the R5 and R6."

If money were no object then I'd plump for the R5 without hesitation, but the reason that I'm thinking about the R6 over the R is because of the ergonomics, the R6 being bulkier with better grip, and that I don't just shoot Landscapes, sometimes I shoot Airshows, or I might go to a Motorsport event etc and I also take photos of my kids, so the R6 sounds like a good all rounder.

I do have some reservations about the mp count on the R6 but maybe this is needless as I never heard anyone complain about the 6D when it came to Landscapes, in fact it was heralded as a superb Camera for Landscape Photography.

If I sell all my current gear, so Canon 80D, 10-18mm, 24mm, 50mm, and 55-250mm I might be able to get about £1k, and put that towards an R6 and the RF 24-105.
 
Usually it is my Nikon 35/70 AFD for both my Digital and film SLR's and if anything wider is needed I have my 20/35 AFD Nikon. Both are used in about the same proportions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top