what is the best lens for HDR photography?

T

torque22

Suspended / Banned
Messages
684
Edit My Images
No
I was origionaly looking for a wide angle lens that would also be ok for HDR but wide angle distortions work against that.
So what would be the best prime lens for HDR photography.
 
I think Peter Carr uses a 10-20mm sigma lens, that seems to make good High Dynamic Range photography.
 
The lens will make little difference to the process of creating a HDR image :), so shop freely. My last post was in jest.
 
Marcel told me to be polite.

So. In short.

The lens makes no difference at all to HDR. HDR is a processing technique and can be (note: can be, not should be) with any lens you want.

It is only required a process should the camera be incapable of correctly capturing a wide enough dynamic range in the first place.
 
torque22 said:
I was origionaly looking for a wide angle lens that would also be ok for HDR but wide angle distortions work against that.
So what would be the best prime lens for HDR photography.
Click to expand...

Why would wide angle distortions not be good for HDR? HDR can be done with any lens. All you have to do is bracket your shotsm then HDR them. At least im not aware of any problems with wide angle lenses.
 
As they said, its not the lens. The body will be more important due to how it processes the digital data. You're best with RAW.
 
I'm interested as to where the notion 'wide angle distortions' work against HDR came from though...
 
Hi thanks for the replies
I will want to stitch 3 pictures together and the distorions at the edges typical of wide angle would hinder that process, or so i am lead to believe.

I am a total noob to photography but really like the HDR images i have seen and would like to do some shots of the Grand Canyon when i visit later this year
 
If your shots of the Grand Canyon are like anyone else's that I've seen, you'll have no trouble getting it all in ;)

I take your point about edge distortion if you're stitching, but I'm 99% certain that even with a kit 18-55, you'll have plenty of width.

Cheers,
James
 
torque22 said:
Hi thanks for the replies
I will want to stitch 3 pictures together and the distorions at the edges typical of wide angle would hinder that process, or so i am lead to believe.

I am a total noob to photography but really like the HDR images i have seen and would like to do some shots of the Grand Canyon when i visit later this year
Click to expand...

Are you mixing "HDR" and "panoramic" up? Panoramics are really wide shots sometimes up to 360 degrees, and HDRs (High Dynamic Range) are the shots you might have seen on here where there is detail in both the highlights and shadow areas of the image that would otherwise be blown out - it can give an image an almost surreal, computer-generated look.

You're quite right about the distortions, but they can be easily fixed in post-processing.

HTH :)
 
Indeed, I think you may have got the meaning of High Dynamic Range confused. It's a processing technique to get a higher range of light into a photo than a camera can otherwise capture.

http://www.vanilladays.com/hdr-guide/

I think you're actually wanting to take panoramic photographs, in which case, the standard kit lens will be fine. I've taken panoramic photos with both my 18-70mm and my 10-20mm :)
 
Also, to add to this, there are specific pieces of software [pt lens and nshift] that can correct barrel distortion, whether its the minor distortion you will get on, say for example, a kit 18-55 or 18-70, or the more obvious seen with 10-20/12-24 lenses. Both are available as free downloads, and pt lens is about £8 to buy full version. Both allow automatic correction and/or degrees of correction to your own taste.

I have HDR'd several shots from the 10-20 with no problems, but like others, I am wondering if you are perhaps confusing panoramics and HDR...perhaps you might want to post a link to a picture that demonstrates what you want to achieve.
 
DGITAL CAMERA magazine
HDR panoramas
We join Digital Camera reader Peter Jackson for a masterclass on panoramic High Dynamic Range photography.
http://www.dcmag.co.uk/Digital_Camera_issue_62_on_sale_now_Issue.YQxftQVoo2oJ6A.html

I am not confused...you can do HD Panoramics and thats what i would like to do. but I don't want to go out and buy a lens and then somone say, if you had got a XXXX lens it would have been so much better.
 
I don't think anyone said you can't. They said you maybe confused between HDR and panoramics but now you're saying you want to do HDR Panoramics which is fine and entirely possible. I used a 24-70 for mine. A 10-20 may provide a little too much distortion depending on where you are. Also, why not just buy that mag if it has an article on what you want?
 
torque22 said:
I am not confused...you can do HD Panoramics and thats what i would like to do. but I don't want to go out and buy a lens and then somone say, if you had got a XXXX lens it would have been so much better.
Click to expand...

Ah ok, didn't mean to patronise if it came across like that :)
 
Hi
I did buy the mag but for some reason they don't say what the lens is they used. they do say that they used the camera in portrait mode to reduce distortion but not what lens.

Also, they used spot metering to do foreground, shadows and highlights, but my 400d does not do spot metering:( (i don't think so anyway).

is a 24-70 still a wide angle? sorry if thats a stupid question.
My kit lens is 18-55 but everyone says its rubbish and canon are letting themselves down with such a lens. Would a 24-70 be just a replacment kit lens?
 
Bah thats quite silly of them isn't it. The kit lens is 18-55 (?) which is wider than my 24-70. I did this with my 24-70...

skylinehdr.jpg


But then of course with my 10mm I did this...

CRW_1152-02.jpg
 
Your 18-55 should be OK for doing panoramas. Stop it down to F8 and the sharpness should be fine. It's not the best for colour reproduction but it's not really as bas as is made out (plus colour can be sorted in Photoshop).

The 24-70 is a nice lens but not very wide (about 40mm equiv. at the widest end). You might be better off with something a bit wider for a replacement (something like the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8) but I'd only buy a replacement if you are noticing limitations in your kit lens and they are bothering you.
 
WOW, WOW and WOW again, those shots are absolutely amazing

I love the bottom one with the amazing sky/clouds, it looks like the clounds are racing towards the tower.
 
Mohain

I don't know when or if i will return to vegas and the Grand Canyon again (4th visit this time, might be time to go somwhere else) so i just wanted to try and ensure that the pictures i get are half way reasonable.
thats why i wanted to make sure i have a half decent lens.

I am still at square one, wide angle zoom or wide angle prime or std lens?
 
Also evaluative metering should be fine on your 400D. Besides, if you're shooting 3 bracketed shots for making HDR photos later (at +/- 2EV) you don't really have to worry too much about metering as you're covering a range of about 8 stops :)
 
torque22 said:
Mohain

I don't know when or if i will return to vegas and the Grand Canyon again (4th visit this time, might be time to go somwhere else) so i just wanted to try and ensure that the pictures i get are half way reasonable.
thats why i wanted to make sure i have a half decent lens.

I am still at square one, wide angle zoom or wide angle prime or std lens?
Click to expand...

You will get half way resonable shots with your kit lens ;)

I think it depends on your budget. I've replaced my kit lens with 2 lenses, a sigma 10-20 and a Sigma 24-70. That covers a range of approx. (35mm equiv.) 16mm to 110mm (superwide to telephoto). You should be able to pick these two up for around £500. As you have already worked out the 10-20mm is not good for pano at the widest but will be fine at around 20mm, it has little distortion at the 'longer' end.

EDIT: You could also then get a 70-200 F4L and that would cover you for just about anything in 3 lenses. If however you are just looking for a replacement for your kit lens then something like the Canon 17-40L f4 or Tamron 17-50 f2.8 depending on budget.
 
torque22 said:
I don't know when or if i will return to vegas and the Grand Canyon again (4th visit this time, might be time to go somwhere else)
Click to expand...

Changing the subject slightly, but if you've got the time and the means when you're out there, you ought to go to Bryce Canyon in southern Utah - smaller than the Grand Canyon, but better (in my opinion :)) and less people know about it - and also Antelope Canyon which is just outside Page, Arizona. For a pic of this see:

http://suefisher.shutterchance.com

Oh and Monument Valley of course.

You lucky thing, wish I was going back there.
 
Thats funny that you should metion Utah, thats where i was thinking of going.

Like the photo in the train :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top