Landscape Lens

mant01

mant01

Suspended / Banned
Messages
849
Name
John
Edit My Images
No
Having just bought a Canon 5D Mark ii I was wondering if someone could recommend a good lens for landscape. Never had a full frame camera before so would like to get some nice wide shots. Thanks for any advice
 
Congratulations on your new camera, John. The EF 17-40 L is a popular lens and also the 16-35mm, there's newer f/4 version of the 16-35 out now with image stabilization, not that you'd need if on a tripod.
 
I've seen plenty of good landscapes shot with the 17-40, not used it myself though, just seen the results :)
 
As others have said 17-40 with a good tripod or if you really want to go mad 17 or 24mm TS-E
 
Thank you :) very excited about the camera and a nice pre-birthday gift from my girlfriend. I'll look on youtube at the ones you have recommended cheers
 
I bought a 6D a few months ago and bought a used 17-40L - its great, really sharp and i've had no issues with it focussing or corner sharpness its spot on.
I wish it had a 2,8 aperture for astro stuff but I'm thinking of a Samyang 14mm 2.8 for this.
You can pick up a decent 17-40 for about £350

If you have a look on my flickr, all of the recent landscape shots are with the 17-40L :-)
 
:p :exit:

It is though, all my fave landscape shots are telephoto - my usual thought process is "wow, look at that over there" as opposed to "wow, look at this thing I'm standing on/in"...
 
Pre birthday prezzie! Wonder what you'll get on the day. :exit:
 
My vote on 17-40 too. Have used it a few days (borrowing from a friend). very pleased with the result. If you not happy with it then you still have a chance to get the 16-35 on the actual birthday day perhaps :p
 
I use the 17-40mm, considering the difference between this lens and the 16-35mm the price isn't worth the difference. 17-40mm (£350ish 2nd Hand / £599 New), whereas the 16-35mm (£650ish / £1165 New)
 
Nawty said:
:p :exit:

It is though, all my fave landscape shots are telephoto - my usual thought process is "wow, look at that over there" as opposed to "wow, look at this thing I'm standing on/in"...
Click to expand...
I can understand that.
 
I love wide and ultrawides, but one of my best landscapes was shot on a macro lens...
 
A lot of people seem to equate landscape with wide angle but as per Jim above some of my favourite shots were taken with longer lenses, even 50mm on MFT which is 100mm equivalent FF FoV.

If you want wide I don't know what mass market lens can match the FoV of the Sigma 12-24mm. I had one when I had Canon DSLR and thought it was a very good lens indeed.
 
For landscapes I mainly use Canon 17-40 f4 and also 24-105 f4

I'm another who often uses long lenses for landscapes though - up to 400mm
 
For landscapes anything between 10mm-2000mm but don't discount anything outside of that range either :)
 
24-70mm f/2.8 II or f/4 IS would be a must. Wide angle only would be a very limiting and unwise decision IMHO.

Then get 16-35mm f/4 IS (this is the only sharp canon wideangle, the others are waste of time) and one of 70-200mm. Sorted. Maybe also 24mm TSE II...
 
As I like stating the obvious :D

The focal length is the one that best suits what you're after, just as the aperture does too

I use everything from my 11-16, 17-55, 50 and 70-200 and sometimes I'd like much more reach than my 200 end gives me

In this set (link) Lake District Landscape Photography course I was mostly using my trusty 17-55, and I guess its probably my go-to lens for most occasions, so back to the OP's question then - the 17-40 range is a good one where you specifically like very wide shots with lots of immediate foreground interest, but if you shoot like me you'll be finding it a bit short a bit too often at the longer end. My go-to 17-55 is a DX lens, so your nearest FX equivalent would be a 24-70. If I could only buy one general use "Landscape" lens, it'd be that focal length range for max flexibility :)

Dave
 
jonoooo125 said:
Tamron are releasing a 15-30 2.8 this month too, might be worth looking at:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/01/tamron-sp-15-30mm-f2-8-di-vc-coming-january-30/
Click to expand...

$1200.00 seems a bit steep to me.

Save yourself a bundle, a used Tamron 17-35 2.8. Cracking lens and can be picked up remarkably cheap on a well known auction site if you can get your hands on one. Think it achieved better results than the 17-40L which was great when I had one. Personally, would love a zeiss 18mm distagon, but alas the 'bank manager' had something to say about that. Just purchased a used Nikon 20-35 2.8 so i'll see how that goes. Might also be worth looking at the Tokina 16-28 2.8.
 
NeilA1975 said:
$1200.00 seems a bit steep to me.

Save yourself a bundle, a used Tamron 17-35 2.8. Cracking lens and can be picked up remarkably cheap on a well known auction site if you can get your hands on one. Think it achieved better results than the 17-40L which was great when I had one. Personally, would love a zeiss 18mm distagon, but alas the 'bank manager' had something to say about that. Just purchased a used Nikon 20-35 2.8 so i'll see how that goes. Might also be worth looking at the Tokina 16-28 2.8.
Click to expand...

They also reckon canon will be announcing an 11-24 f/4 that will be $3000... That's steep
 
I would seriously suggest you try the Tokina 16 - 28 f2.8 throughout the range. i am impressed with this beast.....
 
daugirdas said:
24-70mm f/2.8 II or f/4 IS would be a must. Wide angle only would be a very limiting and unwise decision IMHO.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, as I often do I find this post of yours to be one with an interesting perspective, to be polite :D

Compare a good wide angle lens to a Canon lens in the 24-70mm type range and I'm pretty sure that the wide will not just murder it but do so easily and with style (a good wide angle lens is usually much better corrected than a "standard" zoom at its wide setting) so if image quality at width is the aim going for a 24-70mm would be difficult to justify.

Wide angle lenses are possibly, arguably, amongst the most difficult to use well and their use can be overdone, I suppose, but this can be said of just about any lens/style/genre and if you want that wide look a wide lens is probably the thing to have :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top