October 22, 2017, 06:59:31 PM

Author Topic: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!  (Read 4698 times)

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 5-1500mm f/1.0L IS
  • ***********
  • Posts: 13575
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2017, 02:20:43 PM »
You always have the option of stitching multiple shots, Lightroom does a good job with them.  That way, you can later crop shots that are too wide to get the composition you like.  I've been able to stitch shots from multiple hand held images that cover a far wider range than a 16-35mm lens.  Put the camera in portrait mode and tale 7 or 8 overlapping images, be careful to hold the camera reasonably close to the same angle as you pan.  Obviously, a tripod or monopod works even better.

The other advantage of stitching is that your final image has more detail.  The file is also much larger.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #15 on: October 12, 2017, 02:20:43 PM »

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5569
  • USM > STM
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #16 on: October 12, 2017, 03:28:09 PM »
You always have the option of stitching multiple shots, Lightroom does a good job with them.  That way, you can later crop shots that are too wide to get the composition you like.  I've been able to stitch shots from multiple hand held images that cover a far wider range than a 16-35mm lens.  Put the camera in portrait mode and tale 7 or 8 overlapping images, be careful to hold the camera reasonably close to the same angle as you pan.  Obviously, a tripod or monopod works even better.

The other advantage of stitching is that your final image has more detail.  The file is also much larger.

(MSP, I think you mean Portrait orientation, not Portrait mode above -- correct?  Shoot a pano with vertical frames?)

+1, handheld panos are great in a pinch, even if you are just messing around on a friend's porch.   :D 

This is a 24-70 f/4L IS shot in portrait orientation to get a much wider FOV.  Consider losing the polarizer for these shots and tweak color in post instead -- wide FOV + CPL + clear sky = bad mojo as I'm guessing you know.

Though I'm generally an Av shooter, I typically shoot handheld quick/crude panos in M for even exposure across the pano.  I set an appropriate aperture for the FOV, and then I 'tinker' with shutter.  (When I think I'm close, I swing the camera through the FOV looking through the VF and I watch the Exposure needle move across the entire vista.  Depending on which way the needle dances, I season to taste per my personal histo goals/preferences.)

I also recommend taking them in either RAW or a set WB.  Using an JPG + AWB may color cast the shots differently. 

- A
« Last Edit: October 12, 2017, 03:31:54 PM by ahsanford »

ethanz

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
  • 1DX II
    • my website
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #17 on: October 12, 2017, 03:52:25 PM »
If you are looking for light traveling, I would recommend just the 16-35 f4 and the 70-200. It handles well at 35mm. I've never used the other lenses besides the 24-70 f2.8 so I can't provide much more. The 16-35 f4 doesn't feel heavy to me, but considering my other lens that might be why.
1DX II, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L f/2.8 II, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 200-400L f/4 IS w/1.4 EXT
http://ethanzentz.com/

monsieur_elegante

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 26
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #18 on: October 12, 2017, 04:56:36 PM »
Just wanted to chime in here about my good experience with the 16-35 f/4L. 

I don't own it, but I rented it for a trip to Kyoto, Japan last year to use with my 6D.  I was quite impressed by the image quality, but even more so by its versatility.  The IS works extremely well and opens up a lot of options for general walk-around/handheld photography.

I also used the 16-35 f/2.8 II before; between the two, for traveling, I would pick the f/4L over the f/2.8L II 10 times out of 10. The f/2.8 is heavy, surprisingly long, and lacks IS.

I did notice, though, that I stayed within the 24-35mm range for probably 95% of my shots, which is why I never ended up buying the 16-35. Nowadays I just travel with my 24-70 f/4L -- there are times when I wish I had the wider focal lengths available, but those times are rare.  But this is more a personal preference more than anything.

I attached some shots taken with the 16-35 f/4L for your reference.  All of them were taken @35mm. First shot was handheld at 1/6 sec; second shot handheld at 1/10 sec; third shot handheld at 1/40 sec; and fourth one handheld at 1/30 sec.

 
6D | 7DII | 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM | 50 f1.8 STM

Mikehit

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2086
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #19 on: October 12, 2017, 05:02:24 PM »
Thank you all for your input.
I am tempted by the 16-35 and to hear all the good comments about it makes it more tempting. I am thinking the 16-35 with the 70-200 as an ideal pairing and forget the gap. I have the 50mm plastic fantastic for anything in between.

I can see a lot of fun experimentation in the next 6 months...tough life, eh? ;D

Larsskv

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
  • Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #20 on: October 12, 2017, 05:10:05 PM »
Thank you all for your input.
I am tempted by the 16-35 and to hear all the good comments about it makes it more tempting. I am thinking the 16-35 with the 70-200 as an ideal pairing and forget the gap. I have the 50mm plastic fantastic for anything in between.

I can see a lot of fun experimentation in the next 6 months...tough life, eh? ;D

Scrolling through the posts, I was just going to suggest that combination.

I find the 16-35 more versatile for landscapes than the 24-70 offerings. Whenever I take a 24-70 for hiking, most of my pictures are in the 24-35 range anyway. Sometimes, you want to go longer, and 70mm might be to short.

16-35 and 70-200 both f4 for light weight and landscapes. A fast 50mm for low light and supplement to the other two. Perfect!

snoke

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #21 on: October 12, 2017, 05:53:37 PM »
I am tempted by the 16-35 and to hear all the good comments about it makes it more tempting. I am thinking the 16-35 with the 70-200 as an ideal pairing and forget the gap. I have the 50mm plastic fantastic for anything in between.

How many people recommend 16-35 was in New Zealand and make photo?

Any example of 16-35 photo from New Zealand?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #21 on: October 12, 2017, 05:53:37 PM »

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5569
  • USM > STM
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #22 on: October 12, 2017, 06:03:07 PM »
I am tempted by the 16-35 and to hear all the good comments about it makes it more tempting. I am thinking the 16-35 with the 70-200 as an ideal pairing and forget the gap. I have the 50mm plastic fantastic for anything in between.

How many people recommend 16-35 was in New Zealand and make photo?

Any example of 16-35 photo from New Zealand?

You can use shutterdial to aggregate the public content out there:
http://www.shutterdial.com/#/search?s=new%20zealand&f=16-35&a=0

- A

snoke

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #23 on: October 12, 2017, 06:19:16 PM »
I am tempted by the 16-35 and to hear all the good comments about it makes it more tempting. I am thinking the 16-35 with the 70-200 as an ideal pairing and forget the gap. I have the 50mm plastic fantastic for anything in between.

How many people recommend 16-35 was in New Zealand and make photo?

Any example of 16-35 photo from New Zealand?

You can use shutterdial to aggregate the public content out there:
http://www.shutterdial.com/#/search?s=new%20zealand&f=16-35&a=0

Good example why 16-35 bad.

http://www.wildernessshots.com/new-zealand-photography-locations/

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5569
  • USM > STM
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #24 on: October 12, 2017, 06:44:04 PM »
You can use shutterdial to aggregate the public content out there:
http://www.shutterdial.com/#/search?s=new%20zealand&f=16-35&a=0

Good example why 16-35 bad.

http://www.wildernessshots.com/new-zealand-photography-locations/

Forgive me, I may be missing your point.

If you are saying the shutterdial link I gave are not good examples of 16-35mm New Zealand photography, sure, it just aggregates what is on Flickr and other public sources that have EXIF data.  The photos may not necessarily be good ones.

If, however, your link was meant to imply why a 16-35 lens is a poor choice for New Zealand, I did not understand your point.  Those are fine shots you linked, but I don't see any information about the lens used or why a 16-35 is a poor choice.  Could you explain yourself a bit more?

- A

ethanz

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 238
  • 1DX II
    • my website
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2017, 06:54:16 PM »
You can use shutterdial to aggregate the public content out there:
http://www.shutterdial.com/#/search?s=new%20zealand&f=16-35&a=0

Good example why 16-35 bad.

http://www.wildernessshots.com/new-zealand-photography-locations/

Forgive me, I may be missing your point.

If you are saying the shutterdial link I gave are not good examples of 16-35mm New Zealand photography, sure, it just aggregates what is on Flickr and other public sources that have EXIF data.  The photos may not necessarily be good ones.

If, however, your link was meant to imply why a 16-35 lens is a poor choice for New Zealand, I did not understand your point.  Those are fine shots you linked, but I don't see any information about the lens used or why a 16-35 is a poor choice.  Could you explain yourself a bit more?

- A

I'm confused too.

The Wilderness shots article did say he used a 16-35 at the end.
1DX II, 16-35L f/4 IS, 24-70L f/2.8 II, 70-200L f/2.8 IS II, 200-400L f/4 IS w/1.4 EXT
http://ethanzentz.com/

snoke

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2017, 05:32:13 AM »
If, however, your link was meant to imply why a 16-35 lens is a poor choice for New Zealand, I did not understand your point.  Those are fine shots you linked, but I don't see any information about the lens used or why a 16-35 is a poor choice.  Could you explain yourself a bit more?

"As for lenses, a standard landscape load-out of a 16-35mm and a medium zoom are what you’ll need (or equivalent primes). In reviewing all of my photos from New Zealand, I ended up most frequently shooting at 24mm. I also shot a lot at 16mm and 35mm, and then 50 and 100mm for panorama composites"

Got 24-70 or 24-105, cover most shots without new lens.
16-35+24-105, all you need maybe?

Poster has 24-105 LIS, 70-200f4LIS. Already most situations, no need anything new. 16-35 reflections and big sunset and 24-28mm without distortion. Leave 100-400 at home.

hendrik-sg

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 164
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2017, 07:38:12 AM »
If you have 24-105 and 100-400, let the 70-200 at home.

If you want inexpensive UWA use the 10-18 on the 7d, otherwise beside the zoom options, there are some great primes. My (expensive) favorite is the 17 TS/e which is a fantastic UWA without torsion, and the shifting option is really great in tight spaces. On the 7d it's a great WA. but this one Needs some technical flair and you must be ready to control your shot manually.

other than that, a fast prime might be great, why not the 35 2.0 IS or a 50 1.4? the 35 is extremely handholdable in low light, 50 if you like little longer.

When you have the 100-400 on your 6d, there might be a "emergency", when you need a wider angle without having time to change lenses. So maybe get a 18-55 IS lens as a "camera cap" for your 7d, they are optically good.

If you want really wide, the 8-15 gets it all in, Fisheye Hemi makes the distortion more pleasant in post. This lens is great, but not cheap

Depending on your interests, you may want a macro, the 100 non-L's are really cheap, a dedicated macro Flash helps a lot but needs lot of space.

generally i have a flash with me, in case you must fill shadows in a face, and dont forget a polarizer, 77mm works on the 24-105 and 100-400

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2017, 07:38:12 AM »

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5569
  • USM > STM
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2017, 10:39:34 AM »
"As for lenses, a standard landscape load-out of a 16-35mm and a medium zoom are what you’ll need (or equivalent primes). In reviewing all of my photos from New Zealand, I ended up most frequently shooting at 24mm. I also shot a lot at 16mm and 35mm, and then 50 and 100mm for panorama composites"

Got 24-70 or 24-105, cover most shots without new lens.
16-35+24-105, all you need maybe?

Poster has 24-105 LIS, 70-200f4LIS. Already most situations, no need anything new. 16-35 reflections and big sunset and 24-28mm without distortion. Leave 100-400 at home.

Sorry!  I totally missed that in your link.  Thanks for clarifying.

- A

Maximilian

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1882
  • The dark side - I've been there
Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2017, 03:48:04 PM »
"As for lenses, a standard landscape load-out of a 16-35mm and a medium zoom are what you’ll need (or equivalent primes). In reviewing all of my photos from New Zealand, I ended up most frequently shooting at 24mm. I also shot a lot at 16mm and 35mm, and then 50 and 100mm for panorama composites"

Got 24-70 or 24-105, cover most shots without new lens.
16-35+24-105, all you need maybe?

Poster has 24-105 LIS, 70-200f4LIS. Already most situations, no need anything new. 16-35 reflections and big sunset and 24-28mm without distortion. Leave 100-400 at home.

Sorry!  I totally missed that in your link.  Thanks for clarifying.

- A
Even though I found that I wasn't sure how snoke's initial post with that link was meant.

Thanks, snoke, for clarifying. Maybe next time some more words in the beginning would have helped a lot.
At least this seconds my first post where I said, 24-105L + some tele of choice is enough.
If money "must" ;) be spend a 16-35/4 L IS would be the lens of choice.
sometimes you have to close your eyes to see properly.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Lens choices for landscapes - too much choice!!
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2017, 03:48:04 PM »