Which lens would be more suitable?

P

PaulP01

Suspended / Banned
Messages
32
Edit My Images
No
Hi all

I have a D40 and am looking for a new lens.
I enjoy photographing trees/forests the most & also landscapes.
I thought that I would be better off with a wide lens, but i am not so sure.
I wanted wide so that I could get closer and get better pics than the one below

3138177608_5961e4204e.jpg


However, I really like DOF pics like below.

3138189946_b97dc28046.jpg


3138172382_249cdaf8cb.jpg


So I want a decent sharp lens to do both, what are the options available? Budget is £400, Would I be better of with something like a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 HSM?
 
Personal opinion, based on my efforts, ultra wide makes for very cluttered shots in the woods. yes you can get close, but it is much harder to be artistic with almost guaranteed backgrond clutter.

Your choice of the Sigma 17-70 is probably about on the mark. Wide enough to get close to your subject but with good range to isolate smaller parts of the forest.

Personally I now walk about the woods with a much longer zoom (70-200 or 100-300) as I have found I get much more interesting shots by isolating parts of the forest.
 
Good call Dave - looking at that second shot the fungus on the end is just crying out for some macro attention
 
Would the Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro Lens be an option? Because I like taking DOF nature pics and am interested in macro too. Also I have read that this is good for portraits too (though that isn't really important).
 
PaulP01 said:
Would the Sigma 105mm f2.8 EX DG Macro Lens be an option? Because I like taking DOF nature pics and am interested in macro too. Also I have read that this is good for portraits too (though that isn't really important).
Click to expand...

I would consider that to be an option. In fact for woodland shots it would probably open up a whole new world of photography for you - definitly a fine way to get in close but still be able to isolate your subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top