Please help my buy a lens for landscapes

C

ColinB

Suspended / Banned
Messages
119
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently have a D40, but will be updrading to a full-frame Nikon body within the year. I currently shoot with the 18-55mm kit lens which seems ok, but I'm sure I could do better.

What is the very best wide angle lens (in terms of sharpness and contrast) for nikon that is available to buy new?

I intend to use it for a while on the D40 and then eventually a full-frame nikon of which I haven't decided on yet.

I'm not worried about weight, or performance at wide open apertures (as it's mostly for landscapes).

Any advice would be gratefully received.
 
The very best wide angle lens for a Nikon FF? I'd say you have 3 main options (I've been looking at these too).

1. Nikon 16-35mm f/4
2. Zeiss 18mm f/3.5 Distagon
3. Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon

Others might suggest others.

Scott
 
2. Zeiss 18mm f/3.5 Distagon
3. Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon

My personal preference would be for the 21mm due to the extra light gathering in low light/night scenario's and it would be as wide as I would need
 
iancandler said:
My personal preference would be for the 21mm due to the extra light gathering in low light/night scenario's and it would be as wide as I would need
Click to expand...

I'm still undecided. I like to get as wide as I can and I don't need the extra stop/glass (as I always shoot on a tripod), but somehow I am still also drawn to the 21mm. :bang:
 
Of the reviews I've read, the zeiss 21mm seems superb, but I'm thinking the extra facilities of the nikon make it compelling (being a zoom and having VR), I can't seem to find a direct comparison between the zeiss 21 and the nikon so I can't tell which would give best IQ and sharpness.

Thanks for the suggestions so far. I would be highly interested in hearing from people's personal experience of using any of these lenses, the reviews I've read all very technical featuring fancy graphs and sharpness tests of test-charts, but no real-world comparisons of actual proper photography
 
In practice 24-70mm f/2.8 on FF is the ulitmate landscape lens. Wider can be also nice (~10% shots), and also longer (20-30%). UWAs require prefect scenes and very strong foreground interest - this is not very easy!

A prime for landscapes sounds like a rough plan, unless you want to buy a whole bag of them.
 
There seems to be an obsession with people wanting the widest lens possible for landscapes. Most of the time the end result being a photo dominated by a bland featureless foreground - basically crap - and the main interest so far back that it's barely viewable.

Talking full frame figures here - I have a 12-24, 15-30 and 24-105. My most used lens for landscapes? The 24-105.
 
I happen to prefer wider than 24, whether my photo's are crap or not is a different matter. Also in terms of sharpness (which is my main criteria) it seems from the reviews/tests that the 16-35 outperforms the 24-70 and any other wide-zoom from Nikon, so I think at the moment that's my main choice unless anyone with experience of using the zeiss can give their feedback on it.

Digi - thanks for the link, I've read all of Ken's reviews, but i'm finding it difficult to find other info outside of the world of Ken (who I don't always trust).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top