Any Landscape lens recommendations ?

HMHB

Outstanding Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2001
Messages
31,207
Reaction score
10,315
Points
6,319
Location
Nottinghamshire
I'm wanting to get back into landscape photography which I was really into many years ago with my olf Canon T90 and 24mm FD lens ..... back in the Good Old Days ;) :D
I only have the kit lens which came with my 350D and my trusty Sigma 70-300 APO and am thinking that the kit lens just won't do the job after reading a lot of posts. What lens(es) would you recommend ? Are the 10-22mm wide zooms better quality than the kit lens or should I be looking elsewhere ?
Cheers
 
What lens(es) would you recommend ? Are the 10-22mm wide zooms better quality than the kit lens or should I be looking elsewhere ?

In my experience, yes they are. Far better.

I'd also take a look at the Tokina 12-24 as well as the offerings from Canon and Sigma.

Whilst I am still getting to grips with my Tokina, there are a few others members who have it and I'm sure they will be able to show you what it can do!
 
I have Canon EF-S 10-22 f3.5-4.5 USM, wonderful for landscapes and architectural shots. This lens will blow the kit lens out of the water, it's very sharp and very quick compared to the kit lens.

If the Canon is out of your budget margin then you may want to look towards the Tamron Lens AF SP 11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di-II LD which has had some very good reviews.

The price differnece between the two lenses is about £200 (the Canon 10-22 is about £500 and the Tamron 11-18 is £300)

Don't let the price put you off, the Tamron is very good for the money.

Also don't forget the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM..

Best bet is to go to a camera shop and test out all 3 lenses, you can then make up your own mind.
 
Are the 10-22mm wide zooms better quality than the kit lens or should I be looking elsewhere ?

The kit lens is at its best at around the f/8 mark so combine this with an 18mm wide end and the kit would seem perfect for landscapes, however, the more expensive glass such as the Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20 and the Tokina/Tamron offerings at similar focal lengths will all out perform the kit quality wise AFAIK.

Personally, I fint the 10mm end of my Sigma a little too wide for landscapes and prefer to shoot at around the 20mm mark, saving the 10mm end for strange angled stuff and abstracts.
 
I suppose I owe it to the kit lens to give it a go and see what the results are like to be honest :thumbsup:
 
I suppose I owe it to the kit lens to give it a go and see what the results are like to be honest :thumbsup:

I think you do

The ultra wide angle do have their uses though as they tend not have barrel distortion at the wide end until you go very wide ( not good for landscapes as you get a bit more foreground than you might wish

I use the Tokina 12-24 ( very nice) but tend to use it more between 17-24

I could post comparison images of a "landscape" ( a park more like) at 17mm in From my neck of thw woods if you like
 
I could post comparison images of a "landscape" ( a park more like) at 17mm in From my neck of thw woods if you like

Yes that would be good cheers.
 
Another vote for the Tokina 12-24mm. I toyed with the Sigma 10-20, but in the end thought that the 24mm would get more use than 10mm if I was using it as a walkaround landscape lens. You also get constant f4.

According to Ken Rockwell though, the Canon 10-22 blows all the ultrawide zooms out of the water, so if you can afford it, that would probably be the way to go.
 
This may be a dumb question !
Who is Ken Rockwell ?
 
Here's a Windmill shot taken at 10mm with the canon 10-22mm, I was much closer to the Windmill than you think.

452365496_e8794bb81d_o.jpg


Ignore the barren sky though ;)
 
I'd quite like to do a few "strange looking" shots like that to be honest :) Nice shot :thumbsup:
 
This may be a dumb question !
Who is Ken Rockwell ?

Oh dear, what have I done :eek:

Ken is a rather opinionated photographer, who has a notorious photography website. Some of the material on his site is excellent, some is pure Rockwell opinon, and some is pure fantasy.

The usual drill is that newbies find his site and think he's wonderful (because Ken certainly thinks he is). Some of the advise is sound, however people tend to come to the conclusion that Ken is full of it. He is a huge hate figure over on www.dpreview.com, and any "I've just found this guy Ken Rockwell's site" thread turns into a flame war in seconds.

Here are a couple of articles though...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/1022.htm
 
I recently found the current (May 2007) issue of Digital Photo magazine contains a lot of Landscape related articles:

Landscape masterclass
-what to shoot
-depth of field
-process and blend RAWs
-enlarging and importing foregrounds

Test of 10 wide-angle zooms

10 video lessons on the CD - 3 related to landscapes and Photoshop

All for a fiver :)
 
Those comparison shots as promised. taken 20 min ago. No cropping or editing apart from conversion from RAW ( there are more )

Kit lens at 18mm
479979944_4d47e5d049.jpg


Tokina at 12mm
479993821_611c302dd9.jpg


Tokina at 24mm
479993155_185324a39a.jpg


Another tokina set Taken from Same viewpint

At 12mm
479979608_a923b54c79.jpg


At 18mm

479979724_1397e93fdf.jpg


and at 24mm
479993625_abbcbd698d.jpg


Not very scientific but you get the idea: as I said there are a few more if you want a specific one

This from yesterday was at 33mm from the 17- 85 ( similar range to kit lens)
480003744_85d19ad139_o.jpg
 
Excellent cheers :thumbsup:
You really have to be sure of your foreground interest with one of these ultra wide lenses don't you :D
 
Excellent cheers :thumbsup:
You really have to be sure of your foreground interest with one of these ultra wide lenses don't you :D

You certainly do!!

This was taken at 10mm with the Sigma



Note the two people bottom right, they were a damn sight closer than they look in this photo :eek:

And this was also taken at 10mm, nearly got my feet in :laugh:

 
Again nice one Steve. I do like the ultra wide perspective and might have to stop myself from doing too many shots at the wide end ;)
 
Excellent cheers
You really have to be sure of your foreground interest with one of these ultra wide lenses don't you


Indeed , otherwise you have to get closer ( which in some way defeats the purpose)
But they tend to have distortions only at the very wide end and make for more pleasing images used with care

Another 12 mm:devil:!! and I wasn't miles away from the trees

480041768_e69000e29d_o.jpg
 
I can thoroughly recommend the Tokina 12-24 as well. Has really worked well for me as a landscape lens. :smashin:
 
I bought a Tokina 12-24 about a month ago. Very solidly built and nice IQ. Worth noting that it can be had for £249.99 delivered from Onestop-Digital (where I bought mine).
 
A difficult decision coming up for me soon then :)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom