wide angle lens for landscape

[justine]

somebodys here recommend me a wide lens for landscape?, like to hear some suggestion who often shoots wide perspective, my price range would be $300-400 anyone? thanks

[rpcrowe]

Justine... Welcome aboard...

With which camera are you shooting and what lens do you presently have in a wide focal length?

If you are shooting with a crop camera, the cheapest wide lens is the 18-55mm kit (Nikon or Canon - depending on your camera).

If you are looking for a wider lens, the 12-24mm Tokina f/4 is a very good lens and one which you should be able to find within your price range.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw...na&_sacat=3323

There are two versions of this lens; Mark-I and Mark-II...

For Canon cameras the difference between these two lenses is coating on the Mark-II which is said to reduce flare. There have been complaints about flare resistance (or the lack thereof) in the Mark-I. However, I shoot with a Mark-I and have not been troubled with flare. I usually shoot with a lens hood and seldom shoot towards the sun and that may explain my lack of flare problems.

For Nikon cameras, there is a difference in coating and also in which Nikon cameras the lens is compatible with.

The IQ and build of this lens is excellent...

[justine]

thanks rpcrowe, i have a nikon d5000 with 18-55mm kit lens, yes my kit is good enough to shoot wide but it will not last long as mine is almost tearing apart so i needa replacement i heared about the tokina you mentioned and lots of positive feedback on that lens thanks for that link as well i will try it,,

[Mark von Kanel]

Hi justine, remember your camera has no internal focusing motor so the lens will need to have its own focus motor. The tokina 11 - 16 is another good lens and the mark 2 has a focus motor in it it might be more money than you have though, im not sure

one of our members use the mark 1 11-16 for a long time on a D5000 befor he even noticed it didnt have a focus motor built in EEK! this was because the depth of field is so deep with this lens that focusing often isnt an issue.

[ktuli]

Justine,

If your budget can go up a bit, the Sigma 10-20mm is a great extra-wide angle lens. But it is usually $600.

- Bill

[Manfred M]

When I dropped my camera bag, it sheared the plastic lens mount off my 18-55mm. I just replaced it with another because it was so versatile and cheap. The non-VR version is even less expensive, and I find stabilization is not required at those focal lengths.

[justine]

thank guys for your kind adviced let me see this 2 lenses tokina or the sigma i'm sure this will be in my priority choices as they are affordable to me. tokina 11-16, 12-24 and the sigma 10-20. i'm excited

[justine]

When I dropped my camera bag, it sheared the plastic lens mount off my 18-55mm. I just replaced it with another because it was so versatile and cheap. The non-VR version is even less expensive, and I find stabilization is not required at those focal lengths.

yes, it sad that this lens is not a tough made, i love this lens from the beginning as its a compact and light and shoot sharp images and well comfortable with my small hand the only reason i will replace or have added new lens is the build quality, though we are not worried because of its low price lens, mine is almost breaking the focus ring rubber is bulging and is not sticking in the ring anymore and has a bit crack i can still use it, but i think i need a new lens now

[justine]

Justine,

If your budget can go up a bit, the Sigma 10-20mm is a great extra-wide angle lens. But it is usually $600.

- Bill

im thinking about it, thanks Bill

[justine]

Hi justine, remember your camera has no internal focusing motor so the lens will need to have its own focus motor. The tokina 11 - 16 is another good lens and the mark 2 has a focus motor in it it might be more money than you have though, im not sure

one of our members use the mark 1 11-16 for a long time on a D5000 befor he even noticed it didnt have a focus motor built in EEK! this was because the depth of field is so deep with this lens that focusing often isnt an issue.

ohh,, so there were two version so what is really the lens for my d5k if fcusing is not an issue? theywere having a constant f/2,8 aperture right? how does this lens work in dimlight i love to shoot mykids running around my house esp when at night

[Mark von Kanel]

ohh,, so there were two version so what is really the lens for my d5k if fcusing is not an issue? theywere having a constant f/2,8 aperture right? how does this lens work in dimlight i love to shoot mykids running around my house esp when at night

Justine,

Yes the aperture is constant the 11-16 mark 1 is the lens that i have and it is wonderful, it produces nice sharp images but it has no focus motor so you would have to manually focus it, but the depth of field with this lens is so deep that it often (but not always ) doesnt matter. If you think your going to shoot wide open often then your DOF will be at its shallowest and so you may get problems and the mark 2 may be better for you.

You should also remember that when using any lens at it widest aperture you wont get its sharpest images most lens's perform their best when used from F5 to F11 depending on the lens.

i cant comment on the sigma or the tokina 12 -24 because i dont have either of them.

[woodyew]

I agree with Bill, I have used the Sigma 10-20 with exceptional results and cannot rate it high enough. Great lens.
Paul.

[Manfred M]

Justine - the Tokina f/2.8 11-16mm is available in two versions; the one that needs a in-camera focusing motor and one that came out a few months ago that has an in-lens focusing motor. I have the older version and it is an extremely well built lens and easily matches anything that Nikon puts out. The newer version is optically identical to the older one.

That being said, it is a bit of a specialty lens (ultra-wides tend to be) and it is not my first choice when it comes to shooting landscapes. I prefer something a bit longer. If you are not careful with the ultra-wide angle lenses you end up with shots that are virtually all foreground and sky. I tend to use the 18-55mm on my D90 or my f/2.8 24-70mm lens on my D800 for landscapes.

[justine]

thanks a lot guys, im a bit confused now rather i have to try the lens first before deciding to pick one

[rpcrowe]

Justine,

Often a photographer's mindset automatically turns to UWA focal lengths when it comes to landscape photography. Sometimes using UWA lenses is not a great idea, especially if your desire is to get the greatest coverage left to right. The UWA lens will often result in a large area of sky and a large area of uninteresting foreground with a small strip of interest somewhere in between.

Although we see a large expanse when looking at any vista, our eyes have selective vision and can concentrate on the interesting portion of what we see. The camera doesn't have this selective vision. When shooting landscapes, I like to concentrate on specific interesting images within the landscape and thus will often use a longer lens. If using a UWA lens, I like to concentrate on an interesting object (rock, plant, etc) in the foreground to achor the image and to provide an illusion of depth.

I used a 24-70mm f/2.8L lens on a 1.6x camera (38.4-112mm equivalent) for this shot of Yosemite.



If I had used an UWA lens, I would have captured a broad expanse with a tiny little waterfall.

I used a wide lens for this image but, my main subject was the lava rock formations in the foreground. The tree just balanced the shot and the lava rock formed leading lines bringing my attention to the tree.



If you need a wider left to right coverage, a several shot pano is easy to shoot (even hand-held) and is equally as easy to composite using an editing program like Photoshop Elements or Photoshop. If you have a tripod with you, shooting with a longer lens with the camera in the portrait position will provide wider top to bottom coverage. Left to right coverage is predicated on the number of images you composite into the pano...

BTW: There is one advantage to the Tokina 12-24mm lens over the 11-16mm. The 12-24mm "can" be used as a "normal range" zoom since its 24mm side has a 38.4mm equivalent. I brought my 12-24mm Tokina to China to use if I needed a wide shot. However, I also thought that I could use it for my "normal" zoom; if the 17-55mm f/2. IS lens died while I was in China...

OTOH, the 11-16mm is 1-mm wider which can be important. It also has a constant f/2.8 aperture which is one stop faster than the 12-24mm f/4. However, I most often shoot my UWA images at smaller apertures to gain the widest DOF. Another advantage of the 12-24 models over the 11-16mm lenses is the lower price...

[Manfred M]

The issue with ultra-wide angle lenses is that you have to have something to fill the image space and that can be a bit tricky. Here are a couple of shots done with the Tokina f/2.8 11-16mm at 11mm. These are both shots from fairly remote parts of Iceland:

Viti crater:




Dettifoss - the largest waterfall in Europe (based on the colour of the water, we started referring to it as Dirtyfoss)

[jcuknz]

I have yet to buy a wide-angle lens, used to work with 35mm and now a 28mm, and if I want the wide/high view I stitch .... doesn't work for some subjects but I have yet to experience them and none of the subjects shown above really need a WA. Last one I did, a few months ago, was shot at around 88mm. I guess it is like a lot of accessories ... we spend for convienience

[Colin Southern]

Hi Justine,

I wrote an article for premier filter manufacturer Singh-Ray on the subject of why "wide isn't always better" when it comes to landscape - you might find it interesting:

http://singhray.blogspot.co.nz/2009/...-for-your.html

[Melkus]

I'm not completely convinced that a wide-angle zoom is a must for landscapes. "Landscape" can mean many things, from sweeping vistas to a tight composition of a distant building. I always suggest for someone just starting out to sticking with there 18-55 for now. Maybe practice using it only at 18mm or 20(ish)mm as an exercise. If you do that for a while and you find yourself wanting to get even closer to your subjects and wanting to exaggerate depth (foreground-background) more than you can at 18mm, then consider going wider. But only then

[Donald]

Justine

By now, you are probably quite confused by all the high quality advice that had been offered to you by our colleagues.

Some key points are, I think:

• An ultra-wide angle lens, such as the Tokina 11-16, is not essential in order to make good landscape pictures.
• If you are able to afford one and wish to learn about getting the most from such a lens, then it does provide many more opportunities for creative and imaginative work.
• But, you must never think of such a lens as just a way to get more scenery into the image. If you do that, you will not make good pictures. Such a lens does require a different approach to your photography and, as with all equipment, the only way in which you can learn how to make it work for you is to practice, practice, practice.
• As others (Colin, Richard) have said above, many great landscape images can be made with a much longer lens. I very much enjoy using (and I think quite successfully) my Canon 70-200mm and Sigma 120-400 lenses for landscape photography.

Keep us informed of the decision you make.