Comparing zoom lenses for landscape photography

[ajax]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...achs.dof&gl=us looks like it has a few more downloads and one of the better review scores. Also, it says there is NO data collection or sharing. This is good for me because my plan does NOT include much network data usage.

Is there any first hand knowledge about it?

[LenR]

Apologies...... I did not notice that the android app was still in the works.
Although I have found the information in the DOF Master system to be of value, for some years now I have preferred to use the "Live View" function on my Canon 5D series cameras. Peter makes mention of this in post #32.
You may find the attached tutorial of interest.

https://digital-photography-school.c...rper-creative/

[ajax]

...
Although I have found the information in the DOF Master system to be of value, for some years now I have preferred to use the "Live View" function on my Canon 5D series cameras. Peter makes mention of this in post #32.
You may find the attached tutorial of interest.

https://digital-photography-school.c...rper-creative/

The article is very informative and, for me, provides some new perspective which is quite consistent with my desire to learn how to take advantage of the features on modern digital cameras. Live View is something I've been aware of but have NOT seen a reason to use. The article makes no mention of it but I have used some mirror-less cameras and suspect that Live View must be what is being displayed in the viewfinder.

Something I especially like about SLR cameras, when compared to mirror-less, is being able to see what I'd call the actual scene (i.e., rather than what the camera has developed). At the same time, I've thought that maybe I should want to see what the camera is going to develop. After all development is required.

Something I've also noticed, that I didn't see mentioned in the article, is that the display screen is affected by whatever light is shining on it and this diminishes the ability to accurately judge how the resulting photo is going to look.

With that said my whole experience with what I'd call real digital cameras has been to capture raw files that I can develop in post processing. My only use for the camera developed image, which in my case comes from the preview image, is when selecting which files to develop. In this respect it can be quite surprising what a great picture can be produced in the post processing when the preview image is extremely unimpressive. This causes me to question the idea of depending on the preview image when choosing what to develop. However, I haven't yet figured out any other way to do that.

My suspicion is that cameras are designed to produce (i.e., develop) images that appear as close as possible to what the scene really looked like. I suppose we could call this what the camera saw. I think the term "scene-referred' is sometimes used to describe this concept even though it is also used in other context for other purposes. In my case I often stray quite far away from the authentic appearance of the scene when deciding what the final result should look like. I sort of liken this to my attempt at being artistic. This has a lot to do with my interest in landscape photography which I think lends itself to this idea.

With that said I do intend to look further into Live View especially with respect to my need to refine what aperture settings I choose to shoot with. Thanks for referencing the article on Live View.

[LenR]

Being able to view the display screen using live view in bright light is a valid point. The brightness of the display can of course be adjusted in the cameras menu which may help. I have in my camera bag a rectangle of black cloth which is used to shield the screen in bright conditions as Bill mentions in post #31. There are also purpose made hoods available which attach to edges of the screen although I have no experience in using these. See attached.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...door_loop.html

[pschlute]

Live View is something I've been aware of but have NOT seen a reason to use. The article makes no mention of it but I have used some mirror-less cameras and suspect that Live View must be what is being displayed in the viewfinder.

Live View as I referenced in in my post above is relating to a DSLR camera, and checking the focus by zooming in onto the rear LCD screen to 100% view to assist accurate focus.

I don't use mirrorless cameras but I guess they can enlarge the electronic image in the viewfinder in the same fashion.

[DanK]

My suspicion is that cameras are designed to produce (i.e., develop) images that appear as close as possible to what the scene really looked like.

Not entirely. They are designed to produce what the engineers think people will like. Check out https://global.canon/en/imaging/picturestyle/index.html, which explains a bit about how the Canon "pciture styles" differ, and why they do.

[William W]

Just on the point of Canon Picture Styles -

The resultant post capture image in the viewfinder will display the "Picture Styles" selection and the Histogram and Blinkies will reflect the Picture Styles modifications.

Probably not important to note if you use only one Picture Styles, or never use them, but if you do switch about, important to remember that the Histogram and Blinkies will be set from a different base.

WW

[rpcrowe]

When considering zoom lenses for landscape photography, many photographers only choose wide angle lenses and automatically eliminate long focal length lenses. While certainly not the only choice or even the first choice for landscape, the 70-200mm range lenses are a great adjunct to a landscape kit. I personally like the f/4 versions because they are smaller, lighter and considerably less expensive and I do not necessarily need an f/2.8 aperture for landscape work. I generally shoot around f/8 or f/11 for landscapes.
BTW: this focal range can be pretty effective for cityscapes also. 30 seconds at f/14

[DanK]

When considering zoom lenses for landscape photography, many photographers only choose wide angle lenses and automatically eliminate long focal length lenses. While certainly not the only choice or even the first choice for landscape, the 70-200mm range lenses are a great adjunct to a landscape kit. I personally like the f/4 versions because they are smaller, lighter and considerably less expensive and I do not necessarily need an f/2.8 aperture for landscape work. I generally shoot around f/8 or f/11 for landscapes.
BTW: this focal range can be pretty effective for cityscapes also.

I agree. I use a 70-200 f/4 often for landscapes.

[William W]

On the Point of number of Aperture Blades, Aperture used and Star-burst Flare:

Have a detailed look at Richard's photo - the star-busrt flare is beautifully captured, eight crisp points.

This result is a function of:
> the Aperture used (smaller aperture generally goes to better detail and crispness, EXIF reports F/14)
> the number of Aperture Blades (the EF 70 to 200 F4L IS USM has eight blades)
> the Shape of the Aperture Blades

***

As a generalization - curved blades tend to enhance a Bokeh which appeals to many Photographers whereas straighter blades tend to make for a crisper Star-burst Flare - the difference of the affect may be noticeable/annoying, or not, or very debatable either way, based on personal preference; so for the purpose of this commentary I shall ignore discussing the Shape of Blades of the lenses mentioned below.

On Number of Blades -

The EF 24 to 105F/4L IS USM MkII has 10 Aperture Blades and will render 10 pointed stars, typically a tad softer than an eight pointed star.

The EF 24 to 70 F/2.8L USM MkII has 9 Aperture Blades and will render an 18 pointed star and (all things being equal) will be more difficult to attain as crisp a star-burst.

The (My) EF 24 to 105F/4L IS USM has 8 Aperture Blades and renders an 8 pointed Star-burst Flare.

***

Star-burst Flare is for many Photographers a minor or null consideration, however those interested are usually very interested (and tend to avoid odd numbers aperture lenses if possible).

WW

[rpcrowe]

Correct - the star burst pattern is a result of shooting at a small aperture (f/14) but, the star burst was not the reason I used the small aperture - I wanted a slower shutter speed to "smooth" the water of the bay.

[William W]

Hi Richard, Understood.
And it is beautifully smooth.
Nice Shot.

***

After seeing your photograph, I researched Coronado - it seems like a wonderfully photogenic area of California.

[rpcrowe]

Basically the same shot but, vertical composition at f/8 1.3 seconds


Here are several reasons for including a long focal length lens in a landscape photography kit...

Isolating interesting portions of the landscape:


Compressing distances:


Sometimes you might be lucky enough to see some wildlife:

These wild burros are descendants of the burros used by gold miners during the 19th Century along the Colorado River between California and Arizona. When the gold ran out, the miners released the burros. The habitat was ideal for these creatures and there is a large colony of them still thriving in that area.

[BobGilbody]

Got muddled up sorry.

This is the post:

I buy new camera bodies but second hand lenses.
I do not takes many landscape photos so I will try to comment with reference to the birds that visit.
I use three lenses: Sigma 150-600 C, 120-300 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8. I also have the 2x and 1.4 extenders.
If I won lotto I would buy lots of new lenses but I doubt my end results would improve much.
All three lenses I use are zooms.
The purpose of camera gear is to produce images. It is the image that matters. I am old, eyesight is not what it was, reflexes are on a par with a giant tortoise. Anyway I'll not point out the obvious.
I spent this morning rearranging the perches on the deck. I hoped it would help get better images. So far things are going ok.
I took one photo of a rainbow lorikeet using the 150-600 with flash. Then I took two more using the 120-300 with no flash. The second image of a rainbow is not much good because the light was wrong.
If I was interested in a comparison between a Sigma 150-600 C and a Canon 600mm prime I would hire the Canon lens and do so test shots. Obviously at 600mm.
Anyway enough of the chit chat, here are the three images:

Flash 150-600 07 09 22-0972-DeNoiseAI-standard by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

150-600 with flash


120-300 07 09 22-0994-DeNoiseAI-standard by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

120-300 Similar location


120-300 07 09 22-1013-DeNoiseAI-standard by Bob Gilbody, on Flickr

120-300 different location harsh backlit

[rpcrowe]

"For landscape work, you will likely be shooting at apertures between f/8 and f/11; most lenses perform very well stopped down 2 or 3 stops. You don't need high end glass when shooting landscapes; but you need to use excellent technique. Modern zoom lenses can be excellent; the introduction of low dispersion glass and aspherical elements will give far better performance that the lenses you used in the film days."

I definitely agree with you, Manfred! The quality of today's lenses, even consumer quality glass is extremely good.

Generally. if you are shooting landscapes with a modern camera and modern lenses and your image quality is not satisfactory, your technique should be the first thing that you investigate. Technique is more likely the culprit rather than equipment quality.