Comparing zoom lenses for landscape photography

[LenR]

You may find this list of lenses recommended by Canon for the5DS useful. Higher quality glass would give better results with the 50mb sensor and many of those listed here are Canon" L " series.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/...spx?News=15356

[ajax]

Regarding Bill's quite plentiful advice. It offers me some assurance in the sense that I think I've managed to figure out most of what you say. I certainly have NO disagreement of any significance. Therefore, it is a bit like you are preaching to the choir, so to speak.

Looks to me like my tripod has a built in head which might account for my lack of familiarity with the term. Another is that my tripod is quite old. I can't really remember how old but I'm sure it precedes any kind of digital photography. I also have a second one that is quite a bit lighter but the head is NOT as versatile.

Nice dissertation! THANKS

[ajax]

You may find this list of lenses recommended by Canon for the5DS useful. Higher quality glass would give better results with the 50mb sensor and many of those listed here are Canon" L " series.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/...spx?News=15356

What I find interesting is that there are so many lenses listed yet the 24-105mm much discussed herein is absent. While I think there is agreement that the 24-70mm has slightly better optical quality there seem to be a lot of votes for better versatility found in 24-105mm without much loss in optical quality.

[William W]

. . . Looks to me like my tripod has a built in head which might account for my lack of familiarity with the term.

I guessed that - thanks for confirming.

Nice dissertation! THANKS

You're most welcome. Glad that it was a clarifying script, that was the main intent: any point needing more clarification - just ask.

I also attempted a style so you could you to take what you need now, yet come back to it later.

Photography is a most wonderful journey - have fun.

WW

[William W]

You may find this list of lenses recommended by Canon for the5DS useful. Higher quality glass would give better results with the 50mb sensor and many of those listed here are Canon" L " series. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/...spx?News=15356

and

What I find interesting is that there are so many lenses listed yet the 24-105mm much discussed herein is absent. While I think there is agreement that the 24-70mm has slightly better optical quality there seem to be a lot of votes for better versatility found in 24-105mm without much loss in optical quality.

The Zoom Lenses on Canon's recommendation list are:

EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM
EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x

Canon's list derives from lab testing - discussion here (as far as I read) comes from users' experience. That's one factor.

I think the history is also an important factor - briefly:

Canon released the 24 t0 70/2.8L in 2002, at a time when Digital was taking off. Truck loads were sold. The lens became 'standard issue' for both Pros and Amateurs. The 24 to 105/4L IS was released in 2005. It was a buzz and I reckon that I was not the only Photographer who valued the addition of IS across that Zoom Compass; the addition of the 71 to 105 extra reach was also useful, but, it occurs to me the big advance was the IS - and we all could live with the loss of one stop of lens speed.

It wasn't until 2012 that Canon released the 24 to 70/4L IS (at the same time the 24 to 70/2.8L MkII). Both these lenses advanced Image Quality, no doubt: but at a price tag.

In 2012 there were, and still are, many Photographers with both the 24 to 70/2.8 - AND - the 24 to 105/4L IS, who, (like me) see little advantage in "upgrading". Moreover there are a truckload of Photographers who have only the 24 to 105/4L IS, because it was made available as a "Kit Lens" for a long time with the 5D Series Cameras.

I think these points underscore the amount of chatter around the 24 to 105/4L IS, and the love for it, even though it doesn't necessarily make the 1% cut in the lab tests.

All that stated: the release of the 24 to 105/4L IS MkII in 2016, saw significant improvements, in Image Quality and build - obviously this, the MkII Lens, is the lens which is under consideration in this discussion.

If my 24 to 105/4L died today, I would replace it tomorrow, with the MkII version.

WW

[ajax]

Had another thought about the referenced Canon lens list which looks like it might explain the discrepancy. My prior research on the EOS 5Ds R determined that it was released in 2015. I now notice that the referenced list was posted on 6/30/2015. Therefore, I think, you are saying, that the current model identified as "EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM" did NOT yet exist when that list was formulated.

[William W]

Good catch. I wasn't implying that at all - I missed that point altogether.

I just looked up my CPS Archives and double checked all these dates:

> Canon released the "Recommended Lists of Lenses . . ." on 29th June 2015.

> The EOS 5Ds R was marketed (in Japan) in June 2015 (no date available, I assume before the 29th) and was probably available in the USA at the same time.

> The EF 24 to 105 F/4L IS USM was marketed in Japan October 2016, again probably available in the USA the same time.

> In CPS, I could not find an update, nor a new release, of that original list of "Recommended Lenses".

All this leads me to reckon that the EF 24 to 105 F/4L IS MkII USM will be just peachy on the EOS 5Ds R.

WW

[ajax]

There is a wonderful website call Cambridge in Colour with information on all this type of stuff....

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tu...hotography.htm

Thanks so much! I should mention that prior to posting my request for help I did try to search the Cambridge In Colour website for anything about diffraction and came up empty. Is there some secret associated with how search works on this website or is it possible that this is a bit of a deficiency?

With that said, after reading the referenced article as well as some others I was able to find about the only thing I know for sure, at this point, is that my prior ideas about maximizing depth of field were pretty misguided.

I think what I've now learned is that while diffraction is a factor there are also others and there are no hard fast rules about what to do when shooting photos. It appears as though the affects are going to differ for each camera/lens combination. This kind of suggests that there is a need to learn about your own equipment. Therefore, I have undertaken to take a series of shots of a scene that looks to be representative of what might be found in typical landscape scenes. In this case, I took 5 shots of the same scene using a range of aperture settings. To minimize other differences a tripod was used and I thought it best to use manual focus without any changes. I'm thinking the result should be that the only thing other than aperture to change was shutter speed. Have yet to finish developing the pictures. By developing the raw files myself I should be able to apply the same logic to all of them. In that, avoid differences in post processing from affecting the outcome. Not sure what to expect but suspect a lot of judgment to be involved.

With that said, there are a coupled of questions that come to mind that I'd say were NOT covered in the articles I reviewed as follows:

1.) I have no idea what the camera is doing when set in automatic mode. In that, what logic it uses for picking both aperture and shutter speed. My reason for wanting aperture priority has been to prevent the camera from doing that so I could be sure to get maximum depth of field. Is it possible that rather than using using aperture priority I should try automatic mode? Maybe even try taking shots in both modes for comparison purposes. Note: This would typically NOT involve use of a tripod.

2.) The auto-focus features of these cameras are quite remarkable in many cases. However, I often find that when shooting landscapes it will pick the wrong thing. While I have learned how to use the different modes to include diverting it to other parts of the scene I sort of think there are lots of cases where the point of focus is NOT what matters. In that, it might be better to use manual focus and simply judge when the overall scene looks better. The problem with that might be whether you get a good enough view in the view finder to make a good judgment. Would appreciate learning how more experienced photographers handle this problem.

[rpcrowe]

I cannot vouch for the veracity of the following statement but, I have heard it many times and agree with it.

A Nikon executive is credited with saying, "If a photographer is using a modern DSLR or Mirrorless camera with a modern lens and is not getting very good to excellent imagery, the photographer should look to his or her technique."

In a nutshell, this alludes to the fact that modern cameras and lenses (even mid range equipment) are capable of some terrific results if used correctly.

[Manfred M]

Thanks so much! I should mention that prior to posting my request for help I did try to search the Cambridge In Colour website for anything about diffraction and came up empty. Is there some secret associated with how search works on this website or is it possible that this is a bit of a deficiency?

I don't use the search for anything other than forum posts, so I don't know how and if it works on the articles. Once you get used to their structure, things are fairly easy to find.

With that said, after reading the referenced article as well as some others I was able to find about the only thing I know for sure, at this point, is that my prior ideas about maximizing depth of field were pretty misguided.

I think what I've now learned is that while diffraction is a factor there are also others and there are no hard fast rules about what to do when shooting photos. It appears as though the affects are going to differ for each camera/lens combination. This kind of suggests that there is a need to learn about your own equipment. Therefore, I have undertaken to take a series of shots of a scene that looks to be representative of what might be found in typical landscape scenes. In this case, I took 5 shots of the same scene using a range of aperture settings. To minimize other differences a tripod was used and I thought it best to use manual focus without any changes. I'm thinking the result should be that the only thing other than aperture to change was shutter speed. Have yet to finish developing the pictures. By developing the raw files myself I should be able to apply the same logic to all of them. In that, avoid differences in post processing from affecting the outcome. Not sure what to expect but suspect a lot of judgment to be involved.

The important thing is that you are aware of the limitation of stopping down. It may not matter, but as you gain experience and test you will figure out what does and does not work well for you. When displaying relatively small files on the internet, the most common computer screen size will be 1920 x 1080 pixels; which is close to 2 MP. You can throw away a lot of data and still get a decent looking image. Display the same shot on a tablet or phone, with an even smaller screen, the photographer can get away with a lot more.

I do a lot of photographic prints and the resolution of a print is far higher than a digital device. When I do a 17" x 22" print with my photo printer, I have to great a bit of data based on the high resolution of the print and softness is easier to detect.

1.) I have no idea what the camera is doing when set in automatic mode. In that, what logic it uses for picking both aperture and shutter speed. My reason for wanting aperture priority has been to prevent the camera from doing that so I could be sure to get maximum depth of field. Is it possible that rather than using using aperture priority I should try automatic mode? Maybe even try taking shots in both modes for comparison purposes. Note: This would typically NOT involve use of a tripod.

That is, unfortunately, proprietary information that the camera manufactures do not share with anyone. In theory, they will suggest that the settings will be based on the light level, maximum aperture of the lens you are using and the focal length you are using. The idea is to give the photographer an acceptable image, but not necessarily a great one.

My camera has a Program Mode; which is like automatic, but it does not trigger the pop up flash. I don't think I have ever used it. I generally make a decision before I take a shot; is selecting a specific aperture important to getting the composition I want, then I will choose aperture priority. If motion or freezing motion is important, I will select Shutter Priority. If I want to use a specific aperture and specific shutter speed, I will shoot in Manual Mode and use auto-ISO to get a good exposure. In the studio, I will set the ISO and shoot on manual because studio flash has to be set up manually.

2.) The auto-focus features of these cameras are quite remarkable in many cases. However, I often find that when shooting landscapes it will pick the wrong thing. While I have learned how to use the different modes to include diverting it to other parts of the scene I sort of think there are lots of cases where the point of focus is NOT what matters. In that, it might be better to use manual focus and simply judge when the overall scene looks better. The problem with that might be whether you get a good enough view in the view finder to make a good judgment. Would appreciate learning how more experienced photographers handle this problem.

In 99%+ of my shooting, I use a single focus point, rather than one of the complex focus modes for precisely the reason you mentioned; the complex modes don't select the focus plane location I want. I use a technique called focus & recompose. I select where I want the focus plane to be, push the shutter release half way down to lock focus compose the shot I want and then press the shutter release all the way down.

I rarely use manual focus. When doing night photography is one time I will do so. I will also do so when shooting a panorama or shooting to bracket exposure. In both cases, I don't want the camera to change the focus point at all.

Unfortunately. most modern lenses have a very short focus throw and the viewfinder screen in not particularly good to achieve a good focus. If I need to get a sharp manual focus, I am likely shooting with a tripod and will use Live View to focus. I will magnify what I see on the camera's rear screen to get focus where I want it. Some cameras have a focus indicator (mine does). I will also use that when I am shooting in daylight conditions (I one two lenses that are 100% manual focus, so I have to).


I hope that this all makes sense....

[William W]

. . . Is there some secret associated with how search works on this website or is it possible that this is a bit of a deficiency?

I refer my students to the Table of Contents. This link is the Table of Contents: https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials.htm

. . . It appears as though the affects are going to differ for each camera/lens combination. This kind of suggests that there is a need to learn about your own equipment.

I concur. I encourage you to go as far as you need or as you want with this idea.

As a result of my ‘testing’ I define my “Rules” and “Limits”. Some are general and some are specific, some a combination of both. For example, in Post #17, I mentioned, "I can pull shots around 1 second shutter speed, hand held with the camera braced." That statement is one of my “Limits” comprising: the testing of the IS on that particular lens, (goes to Focal Length Range) and specific to testing the lens on a 5D Camera with a Battery Grip (goes to Mass and Balance) and the general testing of my ability to stand and hold steady and breath correctly prior to and during the Shutter Release.

Liken this to Music/The Piano – which you state is an interest of yours: I expect you know the pattern of the A Major Scale – w w b w w b b w – and also the intervals of a Major Scale T T S T T T S. These definites are akin to the definite of IS being able to arrest an ‘amount of’ camera shake.

Now we sit at the keyboard and we play A Major, one hand one octave: we are learning. Not very good the first time, because we mess up the fingering – this is akin to practicing the correct stance hold and breathing. We get better with practice, but the A Major Scale always stays the same – this is akin to the Physics/Mathematics of Light, Lenses, all that stuff etc (e.g. the THEORY of Diffraction). As we get really good we can play A Major two hands – four octaves, up and back, really quickly no errors – this is akin to establishing my “Limit”, "I can pull shots around 1 second shutter speed, hand held with the camera braced.”

Back to the Piano and A Major – we might be great on THAT Piano, but let’s try the Harpsicord or Grand Organ - sure the keys are the same, the Scale is the same - but the tool is different – akin to me picking up my EOSM5 with my Speedmaster 35mm f/0.95 – no IS, light weight body, heavy lens -it is a different tool to my 5D and 24 to 105, yet I still want to play the same music, so I have to practice with this new tool – doesn’t take much time to get up to speed because I have the fundamentals in my brain and muscle memory – but my resultant “Limit” for pulling excellent “no shake” shots when hand holding this gear might be different – and it is.

1.) I have no idea what the camera is doing when set in automatic mode. In that, what logic it uses for picking both aperture and shutter speed. My reason for wanting aperture priority has been to prevent the camera from doing that so I could be sure to get maximum depth of field. Is it possible that rather than using aperture priority I should try automatic mode? Maybe even try taking shots in both modes for comparison purposes. Note: This would typically NOT involve use of a tripod.

Clarification required – “Automatic Mode” meaning the Green Rectangle?

I you are referring to the Green Rectangle (Automatic Mode), then -
The camera will conform to a set of algorithms acting on (mainly):
the amount of Light on the scene
the Maximum Aperture Available (if reporting)
the lens’s Focal Length (if reporting)
the camera’s ISO capacity

In simple terms the EOS’s “Automatic” Algorithm generally seeks to arrest ‘blurry photos’ and in this case, in the first instance will strive to up the shutter speed, perhaps in the opinion of the Photographer, at the detriment of Image Quality (i.e. Noise, ISO selection) and Depth of Field (i.e. Aperture selection)

"Auto Mode" (i.e. the Green Rectangle) allows next to no user selections of ANY functionality: in most cameras ONLY the selection of FILE CAPTURE MODE (i.e. JPEG; raw; JPEG + raw), is allowed. In some EOS Cameras, there are some minor peripheral functions which are user selectable; these however are incidental to the major outcomes of the Final Image.

My advice – don’t use Automatic Mode.

In Canon EOS System Cameras, "Auto Mode" (i.e. the Green Rectangle) and P Mode (Program Mode) are ENTIRELY different. P Mode allows for the Photographer's control in the same fashion as if the camera were in the Av (Aperture Priority) or Tv (Shutter Speed Priority) Modes.

2.) The auto-focus features of these cameras are quite remarkable in many cases. However, I often find that when shooting landscapes it will pick the wrong thing. While I have learned how to use the different modes to include diverting it to other parts of the scene I sort of think there are lots of cases where the point of focus is NOT what matters. In that, it might be better to use manual focus and simply judge when the overall scene looks better. The problem with that might be whether you get a good enough view in the view finder to make a good judgment. Would appreciate learning how more experienced photographers handle this problem.

This is a great question. The answers will be varied. The following two scenarios cover my general approach for everything possible (almost):

This scenario – it is a Landscape Scene, using any wide lens up to a 50 mm Lens, on a 5D, the scene comprises the key elements of Middle Ground and Background: I will choose around F/8 to F/11. I will focus at the distance, knowing that at F/8 and using any wide lens to a lens FL = 50mm, I will have OK focus from ∞ to at least 10 metres.

This scenario - it is a Landscape Scene, I want to pick out a particular Subject in it (e.g. the Castle in Post #17) I am at 105mm, I have forgotten a rough DoF for this FL and the estimated distance of the Castle – I don’t carry computers or DoF calcs on my mobile phone – terrible practice. I am the area of ‘not sure, but have a gut feel for it’: I will focus on the Castle (obviously), then BRACKET the exposures on APERTURE, and select the most suitable in Post Production – crikey by the time I consult the DoF application on my mobile phone, the clouds have moved and I have missed The Shot with the lovely Composition.

Another scenario – (please refer to Post #17 and the Image of scene at Cronulla Beach using the 14mm Lens) - This image was made using the long-haul technique: The Image (Artist's Statement) was crafted in my mind, then planned: time of day, type of day; lens and all the other gear, this was the result of Take 2, the first day didn’t work. The camera was on a tripod and 3-way geared head. I used Manual Focus and Live View and Live View Magnification. It is was bright day, I could have used a Tether and Screen, but a Black Cloth over my head works just was well to view the screen of the 5D to attain accurate Plane of focus. DoF calcs were done at home – provided the near Flag Pole was greater than 2 mtrs from the Focal Plane, I knew I was safe at F/4 and all smaller Apertures to achieve an acceptable DoF for a 20” wide Landscape Display Print viewed at 1 Mtr. In the planning, I had an idea to use the TS-E17, which I also took with me, and muck around with skewing the Plane of Sharp Focus, but the Elements in the scene didn’t allow for what I thought would be a suitable composition for all that extra effort – I really wanted lots of people lying about on the beach – but on the other hand the Clouds looked nice, so I adapted the Composition to the “vacuuming sky” look.

The Last scenario: (not applicable to this discussion because the lenses discussed do not have the necessary features) –

I sometimes use the Hyperfocal Distance: I don’t use charts or mobile phone applications in the field – I use the lens barrel’s figures. Please see the attached two images and contrast the information shown in the Focus Windows of each. On the 14mm Prime, you can see numbers: 5.6, 11, 16 and 22 either side of the white Plane of Sharp Focus Indicator Line. This scale is a guide to the range of acceptable focus (i.e. DoF) at different the apertures indicated. For example if we set the ∞ marker to the 11 mark on the RHS, this indicates acceptable focus at infinity if we are using F/11 Aperture. The method is termed “Hyperfocal Distance Focussing”
The “Hyperfocal Distance” is: “the distance at which a lens is focussed for any one Aperture such that the DoF is the greatest.” (i.e. DoF extends from infinity to the closest possible distance to the Focal Plane).

Warning: if we want to pick nits, then DoF is a very flexible and slippery eel, and that’s another discussion for another time.

WW

[pschlute]

1.) I have no idea what the camera is doing when set in automatic mode. In that, what logic it uses for picking both aperture and shutter speed. My reason for wanting aperture priority has been to prevent the camera from doing that so I could be sure to get maximum depth of field. Is it possible that rather than using using aperture priority I should try automatic mode? Maybe even try taking shots in both modes for comparison purposes. Note: This would typically NOT involve use of a tripod.

If you delve into the camera's manual, I am sure you will find some different settings that can affect how the camera behaves in its AUTO or Program mode. On my camera i can tell it to prioritise wide or shallow DOF; or to prioritise a fast shutter speed or to prioritise the sharpest aperture with the specific lens (MTF).

This is all well and good but the key word is "prioritise". In perfect light and with an average scene it will give you as good a result as you could have selected yourself using shutter Priority or aperture priority. Note I say "as good", it wont give you a better result.

Once your light is not ideal or the subject is not an "average" one the program mode will have to make compromises...use a slower shutter speed than ideal or a wider aperture than ideal or bump up the ISO to a noisy level. These challenges to attaining the perfect image will also be present if you shoot in shutter/aperture priority, but at least you will be more aware of them and realise the limitations of what you can achieve.

For these reasons I agree with what others have posted....don't use the auto/program settings. You will learn a lot more from dealing with tricky conditions when you have not handed total control to your camera's electronics.

2.) The auto-focus features of these cameras are quite remarkable in many cases. However, I often find that when shooting landscapes it will pick the wrong thing. While I have learned how to use the different modes to include diverting it to other parts of the scene I sort of think there are lots of cases where the point of focus is NOT what matters. In that, it might be better to use manual focus and simply judge when the overall scene looks better. The problem with that might be whether you get a good enough view in the view finder to make a good judgment. Would appreciate learning how more experienced photographers handle this problem.

The first thing I do with a new camera is to change the AF points from the default multiple AF points to centre 9 points. I also often use single centre AF point. I prefer the targeted approach to the "scattergun" one !

Also look at the AF points as you get the camera to focus. You should find that your camera will illuminate the ones it has achieved focus lock with. I am able to tell for each capture if the focus is where I want it before I even review the captured image.

On a tripod I usually use zoomed Live View and manually focus, so that I am seeing exactly what the sensor sees in great detail. For me this is the gold standard of focussing, but obviously works best for still scenes when you have a lot of time to get it right.

Hope this helps.

[DanK]

It may be gilding the lily, but I'll add my voice: don't use Auto or Program. I'll explain my reasoning a different way.

A key to becoming a competent photographer is learning what settings are best for a given circumstance. You won't learn that using P or Auto. IMHO, the purpose of partially automated settings (Av or Tv) is to help the photographer get the settings they want quickly, nothing more.

For example, I just did some candids of kids jumping into a pool. Given that motion, the key setting was shutter speed. I didn't need much depth of field, so aperture was less important. So, I used Tv to set the shutter speed I wanted and checked that the camera would give me reasonable apertures at the ISO I had set. At one point, I had to increase ISO. Then I just shot, letting the camera vary the aperture as needed within what was a narrow range.

In contrast, for more of my photograpy, I find M or Av more useful, given what I shoot.

[ajax]

Bill,

It is going to take me some time to digest all of that. However, I'm most grateful for your willingness to take the time to post it. I think I'll be revisiting it for a while.

[ajax]

I've haven't yet seen any votes in favor of using Auto Mode which I now notice Canon refers to as Scene Intelligent Auto. I think it is NOT knowing what scene intelligence actually means that intuitively bothers me. I take some comfort in knowing that my intuition may have been consistent with yours on this point.

On the other hand it is pretty clear that when it comes to Depth of Field (DoF) my intuition was overly simplistic and there is need for some corrective action. This looks to me like it is an even better take-away, for me anyway, than getting some much appreciated insight into zoom lenses.

[William W]

. . . It is going to take me some time to digest all of that. However, I'm most grateful for your willingness to take the time to post it. I think I'll be revisiting it for a while.

Any questions, just ask.

WW

[ajax]

Any questions, just ask.

WW

Hope this is an easy one. You mention DoF Calculator Apps. In my case that could be Android. Looks like there are so many it is overwhelming. Any suggestions based on whatever criteria you might think matters?

[LenR]

Have a look at this one (DOF Master) as an aid to finding hyperlocal distance for a given camera, lens and f-stop.

http://dofmaster.com

[William W]

I am relatively ignorant of the range apps available for android, however, I know the DOF master which Len refers works across a number platforms and is very popular: most of the High School Photography Students I know use it.

I have f/Calc installed on my computer; it is very old, but I find it very useful because I use it only for reference when planning shoots or interrogating images and not in the field.

The "necessary" criteria for me are:

> Allowing different camera formats
> Allowing the change manually the Circle of Confusion
> Calculation of Angle of View
> Calculation of Field of View
> Able to swap between imperial and metric linear measure
> Calculation of Hyperfocal Distance

f/Calc allows a Spot Meter area of (viewfinder) View and a Magnification Calculation, these are handy mainly because it is all in one application, thought I rarely use these features

I don't know if f/Calc can be loaded onto your Android, probably not.

WW

[ajax]

Have a look at this one (DOF Master) as an aid to finding hyperlocal distance for a given camera, lens and f-stop.

http://dofmaster.com

Yes but according to this the app is NOT yet available. Thought there might be something that does NOT require network service in order to function.