Wide-angle lens, newbie question ...

B

bryanvr6

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11
Edit My Images
No
Hi there people, hoping someone can give me a bit of advice here.

I am new to photography, so if possible, try not to baffle me with too much technical stuff :lol:

I am heading off to Australia soon, and something I would love to do is get some good wide-angle shots (super wide if possible!) out in the various landscapes that I am likely to encounter. I just love that effect in landscape images.

My trouble is this, I am a complete beginner, and really just playing at this just now. So, what I DON'T want to do is go out and spend £1k (or anything like that to be frank !!!) on a camera and lens just to realise that it's not for me. I am wondering if there is a cost effective (fancy words for cheap) way for me to introduce myself to the world of wide-angle photography without spending a fortune ? I'm thinking 2nd hand for starters, so I am more likely to get more for the money. All I am looking for is for the images to be clear, and of reasonable quality. I'm no pro, and not experienced enough to know the difference between relatively decent picture quality from a pocket camera, and amazing picture quality - so there is really no point in me spending lots of money. I have looked at some of the point and shoot compacts out there for £100 or so, that claim to do a bit of wide-angle, but the sample images I have seen just don't show the degree of effect I am looking for.

Can anyone point me in the direction of a solution, something between say £100-£200, 2nd hand obviously, that will let me "play about" with it and figure out if it's worth me going out and spending more money ?

I'm trying to learn from experience here. In the past I have been bad for taking a notion for something, going out and buying the best money can buy, then it sits in a cupboard for a year or three before I sell it on for a fraction of what I have paid. Having a family now means I need to be a little more frugal with my hard earned pennies !

Any help or advice would be very much appreciated.

Thanks !
 
KC Leblanc said:
It might help if you tell us what camera you have.
Click to expand...

I don't. I am looking for a cheap camera & lens. Not bothered if it's a cheap crappy thing that most people would scoff at, I just want to play around with it a bit just now :)
 
Try a compact with a sweep-panorama mode, they work amazingly well and dead easy. Sony, Samsung and probably a few others have it.

Edit: those wide-angle adapters are best left alone.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
Try a compact with a sweep-panorama mode, they work amazingly well and dead easy. Sony, Samsung and probably a few others have it.

Edit: those wide-angle adapters are best left alone.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the sweep panorama thing - any time I have seen example iages it's not looked anything like the kind of effect I'm looking for. Do you have links to any good image examples of this type ?

Any particular reason why the adapters are best left alone, other than that they are cheapy crappy ?? :lol:
 
bryanvr6 said:
Not sure about the sweep panorama thing - any time I have seen example iages it's not looked anything like the kind of effect I'm looking for. Do you have links to any good image examples of this type ?
Click to expand...

Sony sweep-panorama here http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/cyber-sho...gy/innovative-features/article/sweep-panorama

Any particular reason why the adapters are best left alone, other than that they are cheapy crappy ?? :lol:
Click to expand...

That's surely reason enough. They're not very wide either.
 
HoppyUK said:
That's surely reason enough. They're not very wide either.
Click to expand...


I'm not normally one for discounting something just because it's cheap :)

Thanks for the link - I'll take a look !

One thing you can maybe help me with here though (and remember, like I say, I am VERY new to all of this). What do the numbers actually mean ? i.e. you know from the number that it isn't very wide - how so ? Obviously I have no idea what I am looking at ... sorry for being a bit thick :|

Completely turning it on its head, and say I do decide to just buy another compact (sigh...), how do I tell which ones will give more wide angle shots than others ?

Currys seem to have a few on offer just now. Any good ??

http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/photography/compact-digital-cameras-344-c.html

Thanks for advice so far :)
 
bryanvr6 said:
Would a cheapish 2nd hand dslr camera work.....
Click to expand...

The standard 18-55 kit lenses that come with most cheaper DSLRs are to an extent wide angle when used at their widest setting. It might well be worth trying one of these.
 
bryanvr6 said:
I'm not normally one for discounting something just because it's cheap :)

Thanks for the link - I'll take a look !

One thing you can maybe help me with here though (and remember, like I say, I am VERY new to all of this). What do the numbers actually mean ? i.e. you know from the number that it isn't very wide - how so ? Obviously I have no idea what I am looking at ... sorry for being a bit thick :|

Completely turning it on its head, and say I do decide to just buy another compact (sigh...), how do I tell which ones will give more wide angle shots than others ?

Currys seem to have a few on offer just now. Any good ??

http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/photography/compact-digital-cameras-344-c.html

Thanks for advice so far :)
Click to expand...

The Currys link is to cameras costing from £60 to £450. You should probably pop into Jessops or somewhere and have a look, narrow the field a bit. They will be able to explain things like angle of view and focal length etc, and show you what it all looks like.

Edit: there's nothing wrong with cheap, it's the 'crappy' bit you mentioned that's the worry.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure that I've ever seen a non-SLR that offers genuinely ultra wide angles. If ultra wide angle is what you're after, I'm not sure that there is a substitute. Maybe worth posting an example picture that you like to clarify.

If you do need a DSLR, I know this is above your budget but with a bit of luck on ebay or on here, you could pick up a Sigma 10-20mm lens for around £200 and a Nikon D40 for around £100. So a fair bit over budget but that is a very wide lens and a very good camera albeit a few years old now.
 
For truly wide results in a wide aspect ratio, without going to the extreme of an anamorphic lens, use a camera with a standard lens (kit lens will do), tripod and stitch a panorama. If you're careful you can even get away doing it without the tripod.


Lindisfarne - Sigma 30mm, tripod, stitched panorama using MS ICE


Præstø Fjord - Sigma 30mm, hand-held, stitched panorama using MS ICE
 
What about 35mm (film) with something like a cheap manual focus 24mm lens? Just had a flick through the completed listings on flea bay and there have been Minolta and olympus-fit 24mm lenses going for as little as £20. Team it up to a body and I bet you could have a combo for 3100, although it'll do no focussing our metering for you, with might be a nightmare at this early stage in your photographic journey....

If you're going to go digital and have half-decent quality I think you may need to increase your budget to buy modern gear, or mix an old MF lens with an old DSLR and that might scrape in below £200....

From a personal POV, why not just get a decent compact? You admit photography isn't something you know (yet) so why not take the hassle out of it, just enjoy the trip and snap away, pretty much guaranteeing you'll have some useable shots at the end of the trip?....
 
Last edited:
I got a canon 40d with kit lens for £200 2nd hand so it is possible. Not wide angle but I mostly do buildings and landscapes and am happy with what I get. Haven't tried panoramic stitching yet but that is on my 'list'.
 
HoppyUK said:
They're not very wide either.
Click to expand...

Does that make sense? It's a 0.45x adapter so the wideness depends upon what you fit it too. As does the chance of it getting in the optical path and giving you a big black ring in your shots. I've had a couple of these things, one was pretty bad really and the other was pretty good but I suppose that deciding if they're good or bad really depends on personal opinion. Generally I'd say they're fun things rather than giving the very best optical quality.

I'm not a great fan of panorama, I like the wide angle perspective you get with a true wide angle shot but again this is a matter of opinion.

Back to the OP and the budget of £100-200. I'd say that this is a real challenge :D but there are maybe three ways of doing it...

Firstly would a film camera and wide angle lens be acceptable? I'm certain that with a bit of hunting you could get a 35mm film SLR and a 19-35mm lens (or something in that range) for some true wide angle shots for around the £100 mark or maybe less, you could then get the processing lab to put your shots on a CD and then you'd have both the film in your hand and digital images on your computer too :D A film SLR might not be ideal, especially if you haven't used one but I can't see any other way of getting true wide angle kit for that budget.

Secondly it may be possible to get an early DSLR and 18-50mm "kit lens" for about the £200 mark. 18mm is equivelent to 28mm (or so) and some would consider that wide angle.

Thirdly, Maybe a Panny LX2 or other compact could be found within budget? Again these would probably be about the 24 or 28mm equivalent.

Other than those few options I suppose another answer is... panorama.
 
gad-westy said:
I'm not sure that I've ever seen a non-SLR that offers genuinely ultra wide angles. If ultra wide angle is what you're after, I'm not sure that there is a substitute. Maybe worth posting an example picture that you like to clarify.

If you do need a DSLR, I know this is above your budget but with a bit of luck on ebay or on here, you could pick up a Sigma 10-20mm lens for around £200 and a Nikon D40 for around £100. So a fair bit over budget but that is a very wide lens and a very good camera albeit a few years old now.
Click to expand...

Agree with this 100%, that's the cheapest way I could think of to go ultra-wide, although I suspect it'd be nearer £400 for the D40/10-20 combo... depends how well you can haggle! :)
 
sturisoma said:
I got a canon 40d with kit lens for £200 2nd hand so it is possible. Not wide angle but I mostly do buildings and landscapes and am happy with what I get. Haven't tried panoramic stitching yet but that is on my 'list'.
Click to expand...

40 or 400?
 
Get a Samsung EX1
I bought one, great for landscapes. Not so good for portraits, but there's no 'one size fits all'.

I also own a 10-22 which is great, but you'll need more than that range on your trip, I feel.
 
Hi folks.

Well, firstly, apologies for not posting sooner. Makes it look like I haven't appreciated you all putting the time into replying - but I honestly do appreciate it ! Problem is my phone (which much of the time is my main access point to the internet) is goosed, so have not been online as much as usual.

Anyhoo, to the point ! After giving it all some thought, and taking on board all of your comments, I decided that given my budget and my situation, perhaps I should walk before I run. I therefore decided to go with the compact option, and feel like I have done the right thing (although time will tell lol). I know I wont get the kind of shots that I really want, but it will get me into trying things out and getting used to looking out for good shots. I spent some time with the guy in Jessops, and it was handy as he actually had prints to hand from each of the cameras that we were looking at. After some consideration, and with memories of reviews still fresh in my mind, I went for the Panasonic TZ18. I know it's not the best all singing all dancing camera, but I think it will do. Maybe mess around with it for a year or so, see what's what, and go from there.

Actually, just to address one particular things that's come up .... I don't like stitch panorama thingys. I can't explain exactly why, I just don't seem to even like looking at the pictures. They are just too wide, like, physically wide. Not comfortable to view IMHO. I know everyone is different and each to their own, but although I really like wide angle lens effects, the stitch thingy doesn't do it for me. It's almost as if my eyes are panning from side to side to look at the image, rather than looking at the image as a whole. I'm probably not making much sense, but hopefully someone knows what I mean :)

Anyway, just wanted to say thanks for the advice, and let folks know which way I had decided to jump :thumbs:
 
Panasonic Lumix LX3 second hand for about £150 will give you a 24mm lens which is as wide as you'll get on a compact. The long end of the lens is only 60mm unfortunately, but if you can stretch to an LX5 the longer end is something like 100mm which is much more useful. They're good little cameras, I use my LX3 as a travel camera when I can't be bothered hauling an slr and bag of lenses around. Image quality is very good as well.
 
Could I suggest getting on ebay, and try to source a dslr camera and lens (even just the kit lens) for around your price budget or a snippet more. £200 I think you could easily get something a bit older.

Tripod would be useful, just get a cheapie thats sturdy enough for a dslr. £25 or so from argos?

Take it on holiday, give it a go.

Then if you enjoy it, fantastic, keep the gear you have brought and build on it from there!

Or

If you feel it is not quite your thing, chuck it all back onto ebay and you should get around what you paid for it minus ebay / paypal fees. Provided you dont leave it for ages, a month or two should be fine, the prices shouldnt flucuate greatly. Then the way to view it is that, what ever the difference in price is and ebay fees is essentially what its cost you to "rent" the camera.

I think you could very easily keep the second option under £50, which is a more than reasonable price for "renting" the camera for a holiday. Just dont break it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top