What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

1. Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens Canon’s Best Ultra-Wide Zoom Lens Landscape photography often makes use of wide through ultra-wide focal lengths to take in large amounts of beauty and to keep both the foreground and background in sharp focus. This lens has a wider angle of view range than the 24-something mm lenses listed below this one. The 16-35mm range provides some of the most-desired landscape focal lengths, though a telephoto zoom may be desired in addition to this lens for tighter-framed/more-compressed distant landscape photos. Especially attractive for landscape photography is that this lens delivers very impressive image quality completely into full frame lens corners. Also very desired for handheld landscape photography is that this is image stabilization – this is the only full-frame-compatible ultra-wide angle Canon-mount lens featuring image stabilization. The weather does not always cooperate with photographers shooting outdoors and this lens’ weather sealed build quality is meant to help in those inclement weather situations. With a modest overall size, weight and price along with accurate autofocus, this lens is a solid choice for both amateur and professional landscape photographers.

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

Ian Cameron-Reid I’m disappointed to read your article and no mention of probably the best wide angle lens on the market. It’s the Nikon 14 – 24mm F2.8 AF-S ED lens. I own one and love it, the results are stunning. Ian Nicolaas Strik 3rd party lenses have come a long way! Probably one of the best wide angle lenses is the Tamron 15-30mm. I own that, along with their 24-70 and 70-200. If you are going to mention only Canon and Nikon, you missed the boat with the Nikon 14-24. Canon shooters have bought Nikon adapters in order to use the Nikon 14-24. elkhornsun The concept of a “normal” focal length is very misleading. We see with our minds and not our eyes which is how people overlook the tree in the background that in an image looks like it is sprouting out of the head of the person in the foreground. It is also why so many mediocre images are taken using a “normal” focal length lens as so much extraneous material is included in the image and detracts from the intended subject. When I view a scene, more often than not it is with the perspective of a lens that is double the “normal” focal length and that excludes a lot of the surrounding area and provides the same image magnification as my mind’s eye portrays. Not any different than using a 200mm lens to take a picture of a distant object to create an image that is closer to what we see when looking at it and focusing our attention on it while excluding everything on either side or in the foreground that a “normal” lens would have included in the image. The “normal” focal length is a compromise lens which makes sense if you are a war photographer and can only put one lens on your Leica camera (and where there is not the option of a telephoto lens anyway). Otherwise it is a waste of money as much better images can be created with much shorter or much longer focal length lenses. Cesar Munoz it’s kind of sad that you didnt even bothered to mention some lowe-cost alternative, maybe not the cheapest one, but for example canon have other lens and it will help to hear recomendations for people that want to start with this kind of photography

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

Hi Nasim,I have a Nikon D7100. What lens would you recommend for landscape photography? Cost isn’t really a big issue. Looking for a lens that gives the best performance. Looking primarily for 1 lens that works great in most situations.Also figured I’d ask this question since I was already writing: I currently have the newer Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G VR that I got for wildlife photography, birds predominantly, but have read some not so great reviews about it recently. I read your wildlife lens review and your review on the 80-400 mm lens (unfortunately after I already purchased it). Do you think that this is a good lens for bird photography or would you recommend something else? Looking for whatever is going to give me the best sharpness/AF/performance.Thank you! -Boe

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

I can’t agree with most of this.What filters do you want to put on a 14-24mm anyway? I used to use filters extensively with film but I’ve gone right away from that with digital, including UV filters. The only filters I use these days are polarising filters and in most circumstances you can’t use them on a lens such as the 14-24mm. Graduated ND filters I don’t favour because I believe the gradation boundary is too crude for many compositions and you can do it better with Lightroom/Photoshop adjustments or intelligent HDR. ND filters to simulate long exposures perhaps have a limited place but I haven’t been able to persuade myself to get one, I’d rather do the real thing after dark.Price is largely irrelevant here because we are talking about the best lenses, not the best value.One thing that’s missing here in most comments is recognition of what the criterion is for image quality. If it were just to view images on the web, that wouldn’t require very much. I think it has to be for images that can potentially print large, A2 or larger, with impressive image quality. In terms of sharpness, there’s a difference between adequate sharpness and optimal sharpness. Apart from post-processing technique, this often requires a very good tripod and mirror lockup, perhaps even live view, and even for the 14-24. After all, the best light is often the lowest light.So, where is the boundary between accurate tripod technique and hand holding so that there is zero loss of sharpness? There’s no simple answer for that because technique for both is highly variable with the individual. The only way to really find out is to do exhaustive testing with a resolution target. I suggest that a lot of people underestimate what is truly sharp when they make shortcuts in technique.I’ve got both a 17-35 and a 14-24. Like Allan Wood, I don’t feel compelled to upgrade the 17-35 to a 16-35. I got the 14-24 specifically for landscapes and I still think of it in those terms. True, I also would prefer it for interior shots and architecture. However, I predominately use the 17-35 for live music because I find the focal range more appropriate and the lens is much more compact. I would never use the 14-24 for photojournalism because it is far too large and obtrusive; I don’t tend to use the 17-35 either, my preferred weapon of choice is a Fujifilm X100.There’s a simple reason why the 14-24 should be the pre-eminent choice for landscape photography rather than the 16-35 and that’s image quality. The 16-35 is a very good lens while the 14-24 is an outstanding lens. It’s generally acknowledged to be the best wide angle lens produced by any manufacturer. It’s the one Nikon lens that some Canon users use (on manual) with a converter. Those extra 2mm at the wide end are a significant advantage for landscape photography, too.

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

Josh, where have you seen a 28mm lens marked as a telephoto? If you use a 28mm lens on a full-frame or APS-C camera it’s a wide-angle. On a micro four-thirds camera it’s more like a normal lens. Perhaps you have seen a ‘telephoto zoom’, in which case the word telephoto refers to the high end of the focal length range. The focal length of a lens is fixed (or the focal length range of a zoom) – a 28mm lens is 28mm lens no matter what camera you use it with. But the field of view changes according to the size of the sensor. The smaller the sensor, the narrow the field of view. So it’s probably more accurate to talk about field of view when it comes to determining whether a lens is a wide-angle, but also probably over-complicating things. Bottom line: If you use a 28mm lens on a full-frame or APS-C camera it’s a wide-angle lens.
What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

Nasim,I am new to DSLR photography. I picked up the craft from my love of the outdoors and national parks. I recently visited Yosemite. Before going, I decided it was time to purchase an entry-level DSLR. I purchased a Nikon D5100 and bought the kit lens. I also purchased a Nikkor 35mm f/1.8. I personally think the Prime lens takes much sharper photographs and does an excellent job of portraying the colours of the sky properly when compared to the kit lens (Nikkor 18-55mm f3.5-f/5.6). Unfortunately, I had to resort to using the Kit lens to properly photograph the Tunnel View and Valley View photograph at Yosemite. The 35mm was not wide enough given the crop factor of my DX sensor.I read your article about alternative lenses. Unfortunately, the price ranges of the lenses your recommend are out of my league currently. I want to learn to photograph for a few years before spending that much money on a lens. Is there a cheaper lens you could recommend to a beginner like myself with high aspirations of learning photography? I was hoping for a wide-angle lens so I do not run into the dilemma I faced at Valley View/Tunnel View again.. I plan to visit National Parks several times a year. I have also read your article on using polarizing and neutral density filters for shooting landscapes and waterfalls.. And will be investing in those soon.Thank you in advance!

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography

What Is A Good Lens For Landscape Photography