Wide Angle Lens

[Fifi]

Dear Adrian, Yes I love the idea of the versatility of a WAL with constant apt. of 2.8! That would make it more useful for indoors, street, and low light-great suggestion as you said. The Tokina 11-16 has a constant apt. of 2.8 which has been highly recommended. Can't remember apt. of Sigma's right now. And again you mentioned the WAL is rarely your first choice for landscapes. All of the very helpful suggestions are making things clearer for me now with the uses and limitations of a WAL. This is all great to learn and extremely helpful once again!!!!
THANKS IMMENSELY!!!
Fifi

[Polar01]

Fifi: as I stated I use the 10-20mm sigma on my old D7000, I use it a lot to shoot pans, now I shoot them in portrait rather than in landscape this allows me to get as much of what is in front of me as I can. This is an example of a 3 shot pan taken with the 10-20mm Sigma, now each shot was 6 minutes in length however it is not the important part it is you can use the lens indoors as well as outdoors to cover large areas of view, it depends on how you use the lens.

Cheers:


Allan

[Fifi]

Dear Lex,
First, thanks for your very interesting Photos, they look great! Thanks, again the Tokina 11-16 w 2.8. Just wish it had longer focal length. Sounds like the best, esp with the low light capability and indoors. I appreciate all the different opinions. If I get a WAL want it to have more versatility than just landscaping am thinking more now! All this information is helping me see things much clearer! It is extremely helpful!!
THANKS LEX!!!!!!

[Fifi]

Dear Richard,
First I love your dog photo, that is the best! The waterfall is very, very nice also!!!
Your 17-55mm, f 2.8, which brand is that please, price? That sounds like a possibility! Do you use that alot, and for landscape?
I love all your helpful information, it took you much time, and appreciate your help, along with EVERYONE ELSE! Putting it all together, hearing everyone's views is extremely helpful. I am beginning to think I do not want to put out $850 for the Nikkon 10-24 with the variable apt. and probably not use it as much as I thought. It sounds like a fun lens, but don't think would use enough to make it worthwhile for me Now, not sure about prices of others, but I do like the constant lower apt. The 12-24 Tokina sounds good, but f/4, and now I was thinking more like 2.8
I have heard that the 24-70 is a very nice lens, my teacher, Willard Clay-well known photographer & written many books, uses that lens on his ff Cannon camera. I know that cost some money! I will google how much.
THANKS AGAIN RICHARD FOR YOUR VERY HELP INFORMATION.
(maybe I will just go out and buy a 50 mm lens-keep life normal and simple) But if you could let me know what brand is the 17-55 please

[Fifi]

AMAZING PHOTO ALAN, yes now I want one I can definitely use both outdoors and inside. But your sigma has a apt of F4.5-5.6, I would not think you could use it to get such a great photo indoors,thinking would need more 2.8 indoors with the WAL, I am confused
THANKS for your Email again, and awesome photo!!!!
Sharana Mueller

[Fifi]

Dear Ian,
Yes, I know the 14-24 is superb, and so expensive, esp for AFS-C sensor. You are fortunate to have it! Appreciate your caution about distortions, that has caused me to rethink what I want exactly! Several comments have been made like yours! I have to research more about the Sigma, but thinking if I get a WAL, want one with a constant apt like 2.8.
THANKS VERY MUCH IAN!!!

[Polar01]

Fifi: the lens is 4.0-5.6 the image in the church was shot at 11mm at f/4.1, ISO 100, now it was shot on a tripod and each exposure was 6 minutes , in length I had to use neutral density filters to get an exposure as there were people moving about inside the church. Now remember you are not going to go out and knock off something like this to start off, it only is to show what is possible to do with a UWA lens, one of the great things about the UWA lens, is it teaches you to slow down and really think you shot out because if you do not it really goes south real quick.

Cheers:

Allan

[Fifi]

Dear Andrew,
Very interesting point about "what your landscape is" regarding type of lens. Well, I live in the flat midwest, and love to be near the mountains or ocean, but since IL does not offer too many mountains or ocean I should think about the type of lens that best fit the area here. Who doesn't love to travel, and we go out West-but that happens once a year. My teachers have talked about intimate landscapes, such as Elliott Porter, which there are more opportunites for around here. I don't think a WAL is that helpful with an "intimate landscape." So, the 24-70 perhaps is more what I need. I have come full circle, still thinking, but many excellent comments have been made which I appreciate VERY VERY MUCH!! Maybe will look more into the 17-55, depending on what brand, the 24-70 I know is good, but does become wider on my cropped sensor and then the cost. Joel Sartore from National Geographic uses 14-24. Both the 24-70 and 14-24 are expensive, so must be great lens. I am watching one his excellent DVD's now from "Fundaments of Photography" with the Great Courses if anyone is interested.
I am seriously thinking of a lens with more versatility than I started out with thinking primarilyof Nikon 10-24. This could mean constant apt of 2.8 for WAL, or not as wide of WAL. Also a 50 mm, which I can't go wrong.
THANKS to ANDREW AND ALL HERE!! So HELPFUL, and raised many good questions, many helpful answers- which is always a sign of a good discussion, which I appreciate immensely
Fifi

[Manfred M]

Great shot Alan!



Looks like Notre Dame Basillica in Montreal. They let you shoot that long with a tripod? Good to know for my next visit.