So what's wrong with the traditional wide angle landscape photography

=ReBeL=

=ReBeL=

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,095
Name
Adrian
Edit My Images
No
For some time I've noticed a tendency to use long lenses for landscapes, especially by people shooting landscapes for a long time already. Those who do that sneer at other who use wide angle lenses and think that their approach is better just because it is different. Why is that? Yes, the wide angle is the traditional and could be argued "done to death" approach, but the long lens one is not new either.

Surely both are equally viable and just tools to get the image the photographer intended.
 
:shrug: just use the appropriate lens for what you're trying to convey. don't worry (or better still, don't even think about) what anyone else will / has already do/done. Take YOUR image, not a "me too"
 
Last edited:
But I've noticed the opposite. People insisting on wide angle lenses for landscape. Long focal lengths have always been useful for landscapes. In one panoramic wide angle shot, there are lots of individual detail shots to be had.

Decide by composition and not fashion.
 
Last edited:
=ReBeL= said:
For some time I've noticed a tendency to use long lenses for landscapes, especially by people shooting landscapes for a long time already. Those who do that sneer at other who use wide angle lenses and think that their approach is better just because it is different. Why is that? Yes, the wide angle is the traditional and could be argued "done to death" approach, but the long lens one is not new either.

Surely both are equally viable and just tools to get the image the photographer intended.
Click to expand...

Sometimes a wide angle is well, just too wide or the focal point you want or it is too far away and a zoom/long lens is needed to get the composition needed/wanted.

I would say 90% of mine are using the 16-35 WA but I do occasionally use my 70-200 or 24-105.

The advantage of using a long lens is that it also compresses the objects in the scene so that those hills don't seem so far away.
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
But I've noticed the opposite. People insisting on wide angle lenses for landscape. I've been using long focal lengths for landscapes since forever.
Click to expand...
Why do you think "they insist". If you are presented with a nice scene, a nice view - do you try hard to find a tiny point to of it to aim your long lens at it, or would you take that hated UWA lens out of your bag to capture it all. Or is this a question of forced "style", ie I won't use UWA lens because that's not my "style"?
 
=ReBeL= said:
Why do you think "they insist". If you are presented with a nice scene, a nice view - do you try hard to find a tiny point to of it to aim your long lens at it, or would you take that hated UWA lens out of your bag to capture it all. Or is this a question of forced "style", ie I won't use UWA lens because that's not my "style"?
Click to expand...

No. I meant they insist on buying one and then state 'for landscapes'. I see a lot of different uses of wide angle lenses. Not primarily for landscapes.

You wildly misread my post. Hated? Style? Quite the opposite of what I wrote. Re read it without jumping to conclusions.

To repeat, "decide by composition, not by fashion". Meaning use the appropriate focal length that suits the framing. Rather than being influenced by what other people supposedly do or what is supposedly 'traditional'.
 
Last edited:
Buck said:
Sometimes a wide angle is well, just too wide or the focal point you want is too far away and a zoom/long lens is needed to get the composition needed/wanted.

I would say 90% of mine are using the 16-35 WA but I do occasionally use my 70-200 or 24-105.

The advantage of using a long lens is that it also compresses the objects in the scene so that those hills don't seem so far away.
Click to expand...
Of course, but that's not always what you / photographer wants.

I am just surprised photographers sneer at each other for using different tools. But thinking about it, maybe it is because they try hard to follow their "style".
 
I don't understand the issue here. Isn't this a case of stating the bleeding obvious. People have been shooting landscapes with both telephotos and wide angles for years. It's knowledge of how the considered focal length on the subject will produced the desired outcome.
 
you could say the same for other areas of photography too. I often shoot portraits with my 150-600 at the long end.. personally don't give a stuff what other people think, theres no right or wrong and I let the results speak for themselves. There are only 2 people that matter. yourself and the client ( if doing a person/ portrait shot ). everyone else I personally don't give a rats about what they think.
 
The right lens is the one that gives you the results you want !
Today there are no set rules to photography :)
 
My only comment is that the ultrawide-angle is the more recent fashion, the normal and longer focal lengths are a return to a more traditional landscape photography.
 
ianp5a said:
But I've noticed the opposite. People insisting on wide angle lenses for landscape. Long focal lengths have always been useful for landscapes. In one panoramic wide angle shot, there are lots of individual detail shots to be had.

Decide by composition and not fashion.
Click to expand...
this. Forever reading "needs more foreground interest" - something that comes with wide angles.
 
simon ess said:
Can't say I've noticed this sneering you refer to.
Click to expand...

Cant say I have either. I certainly dont.
If the wider landscape holds interest, then take that.
If the landscape has a point of interest you want to show then take that.
Horses for courses and all that!
 
=ReBeL= said:
Of course, but that's not always what you / photographer wants.

I am just surprised photographers sneer at each other for using different tools. But thinking about it, maybe it is because they try hard to follow their "style".
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I recognise the issue here. There will always be a group of people that want to shoot in a certain style or complete a project with a certain lens if that floats their boat but I've never seen any sneering that you mention?
 
I think the argument goes that a lot of wide scenes have all been done before (depends where you shoot obviously) and it's impossible to put your own style into the scene as they can be seen as cliched record shots. I agree with that view to a point but it's horses for courses really (as has already been pointed out), and if you think about it all styles of landscape photography are cliched, including close ups of misty woodland using long lenses. All you can do is use the lens that captures the scene to your liking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top