Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Nature & Landscapes Talk 
Thread started 23 Nov 2013 (Saturday) 16:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The one lens to rule them all

 
M_Six
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,561 posts
Gallery: 64 photos
Likes: 1390
Joined Dec 2010
Location: East Central IL
     
Nov 23, 2013 23:47 |  #16

Fitness Freak wrote in post #16475625 (external link)
Glad I made sense and possibly helped. :)

I've never had the 24-105 so I can't say from experience, but I do remember reading a thread a couple of years ago about the lens creep not being an uncommon problem with that lens. Again, I can't say personally but I've heard of it being an issue before.

I rarely carry my camera on a neck or shoulder strap, so it doesn't hang lens down very often. Maybe that's why I never experienced the lens creep issue.


Mark J.
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Fitness ­ Freak
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Nov 2011
Location: USA
     
Nov 23, 2013 23:50 |  #17

M_Six wrote in post #16475652 (external link)
I rarely carry my camera on a neck or shoulder strap, so it doesn't hang lens down very often. Maybe that's why I never experienced the lens creep issue.

Just out of curiosity, how DO you carry your camera. I use a Black Rapid personally but I'm curious what you're using-if anything.


FYI: "Fitness Freak" is also known as "Amber" outside of POTN.
http://fineartamerica.​com/profiles/1-amber-kresge.html (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jedi5150
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
363 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Central CA
     
Nov 23, 2013 23:54 |  #18

M_Six wrote in post #16475652 (external link)
I rarely carry my camera on a neck or shoulder strap, so it doesn't hang lens down very often. Maybe that's why I never experienced the lens creep issue.

Like Amber, I'd read about the issue before I purchased mine as well, so I know I'm not the only one, but mine may do it more than others. I can't take two steps with the camera on my neck strap and have the lens not creep out. In fact, I don't even have to be moving.

I took this shot yesterday, and even though I used the tripod and 2 second delay timer so I wouldn't jiggle it using the shutter release, I defeated my own purpose because I had to hold the zoom ring steady with my hand to keep it at the focal length I wanted. I debated bringing duct tape the next time I took a shot like this. And this shot wasn't even straight down, the lens just really likes to creep:

IMAGE: http://maligator.smugmug.com/Weapons/Weapon/i-GJZ4SMP/0/XL/Sempach-XL.jpg



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fitness ­ Freak
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Nov 2011
Location: USA
     
Nov 24, 2013 00:00 |  #19

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16475657 (external link)
QUOTED IMAGE

Ohhh!!!! Pine needles and pine cones!!! I'm sorry, it takes very little scenery-wise to excite me these days. Basically, if there's any type of vegetation and color other than sun-bleached white, I'm giddy over all that color.


FYI: "Fitness Freak" is also known as "Amber" outside of POTN.
http://fineartamerica.​com/profiles/1-amber-kresge.html (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jedi5150
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
363 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Central CA
     
Nov 24, 2013 00:08 |  #20

Fitness Freak wrote in post #16475661 (external link)
Ohhh!!!! Pine needles and pine cones!!! I'm sorry, it takes very little scenery-wise to excite me these days. Basically, if there's any type of vegetation and color other than sun-bleached white, I'm giddy over all that color.

Haha, I know how you feel. I live on the former Ft. Ord Army base, which is nothing but sand dunes and scrub brush. In fact, this photo was taken 10 feet from the wall of one of the old dilapidated barracks with an overgrown walkway a couple feet to one side and a basketball stand a few feet to the other. I'm kind of excited at how "woodsy and forested" it came out considering where it was shot. :lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bidkev
Goldmember
Avatar
4,847 posts
Gallery: 2123 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 12837
Joined Jul 2013
Location: From Blackpool UK to Brisbane Australia 20 yrs ago
     
Nov 24, 2013 00:15 |  #21

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16474940 (external link)
Hello all, sorry if this has been done recently. If you could only have one lens, and your primary purpose was landscapes, which would it be and why? For purposes of this discussion, the camera body is a 5DII.

I'll probably leave my 24 -105 at home in future when I go for landscape. I recently bought the rokinon 14mm and canon 40mm pancake.............my sharpest lenses ever, and cheap...........they'l​l be going with me.


See my fishy photography here: https://kevindickinson​fineartphot.smugmug.co​m/Tropical-Fish-2/ (external link)
Olympus PenF | Olympus OM-D E-M5 mkll x 2 gripped | Olympus OM-D E-M10 mkll gripped | Olympus 12-40 2.8 pro | 14 -150 | 17mm 1.8 | 9mm BCL | Panasonic 12-32 | 25mm 1.7 | Panasonic Leica 8-18 | Panasonic Leica 100-400 | Godox TT685O speedlite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bumpintheroad
Self-inflicted bait
Avatar
1,692 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 351
Joined Oct 2013
Location: NJ, USA
     
Nov 24, 2013 03:48 |  #22

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16475657 (external link)
I took this shot yesterday, and even though I used the tripod and 2 second delay timer so I wouldn't jiggle it using the shutter release, I defeated my own purpose because I had to hold the zoom ring steady with my hand to keep it at the focal length I wanted. I debated bringing duct tape the next time I took a shot like this. And this shot wasn't even straight down, the lens just really likes to creep:

A thick rubber band or one of those silicon bracelets people make-up for charity events might help you with lens creep. Slide it halfway over the zoom ring, other half on the lens body to add friction.

Duct tape might or might not always work, particularly in cold/damp conditions. And you run the risk of glue residue. Blue painter's tape would probably be a better idea.


-- Mark | Gear | Flickr (external link) | Picasa (external link) | Youtube (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Image editing is okay

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phrasikleia
Goldmember
Avatar
1,828 posts
Likes: 14
Joined May 2008
Location: Based in California and Slovenia
     
Nov 24, 2013 12:39 as a reply to  @ bumpintheroad's post |  #23

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16475523 (external link)
Phrasikleia, I just checked out your link to your website and I'm humbled. THAT is the kind of landscape photos I want to take. :lol: The one of the Dolomites and the one of the winter lake scene at night are just phenomenal. So I'm guessing I lean more towards the wide angle preference.

I'd love to get a packing list from you for backpacking. Even for a short 3-day trip in summer weather I'm pushing 50 lbs if I take a DSLR, 1 lens, and tripod.

Thanks for your kind words. :) I'll be happy to describe what I bring along when backpacking. Feel free to msg me if you want. My situation may be different from yours, though. I always go backpacking with my husband, so we have two people to do the carrying, which helps a lot (and of course he is the primary pack mule!).

My biggest reason for wanting a single lens, however, is not weight, its simplicity. I found that when I had two lenses (I owned the 70-200 and 24-105 briefly together), I spent more time changing out lenses and trying to decide which to use than I did actually composing and taking the shots.

Well, that problem will go away over time. Once you lock into your own way of 'seeing', you'll spot compositions more easily and will know right away which lens to use.

I've never stitched a photo together (don't even own photoshop, just lightroom). If I could create a "wide angle" shot by stitching several from the 70-200 together, that lens would be my choice in a heartbeat, because I'm already sold on the image quality of it. Then again until my PP skills improve, I might be safer to go with a 17-40...

Using a 70mm focal length to create a wide angle shot is sort of possible, but it's not quite the same as using an actual WA lens. For one thing, your minimum focusing distance will be a lot further away with the telephoto lens. Also, you'll have to do a 2-axis stitch to replicate the effects of a WA shot, so you're introducing a lot of complexity by going that route. I do stitches of all sorts, but typically I do them with the telephoto lens only when I need to add a little extra to one side or else if I want to create a panorama.

Fitness Freak wrote in post #16475557 (external link)
where I live...it's ugly...not just ugly, but absolutely, indescribably, scare-away-small- children-and-make-landscape-photographers-CRY-ugly.

This part cracked me up. I sympathize with you! At the moment I'm temporarily in such a location. Well, maybe not quite that bad, but it feels that way sometimes.

My dream was (and still is, it's just been delayed) to take pictures like Phrasikleia takes (which are phenomenal by the way). However, until then, I'm just biding my time and becoming a better photographer by figuring out a way to work with what precious little I have to work with. ;-)a

That's very nice of you to say. :)

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16475596 (external link)
Now back to the wide angle thing. Like you, I'm not surrounded by beautiful terrain, but sometime I go places, like backpacking in the high Sierras, or motorcycle riding in Zion NP, and in those times, when I want a wide angle, I really WANT a wide angle. After my last motorcycle ride I came back promising myself I would buy a wide angle...and here I am at lens choice time, debating going back to the telephoto...:lol:

EDITED TO ADD: I was typing and missed the last two posts. Knowing how much I loved the 70-200, I'm wondering if I shouldn't just go back to it, learn to stitch photos for those wider shots, and be done with it.

It sounds to me as though you really do need two lenses to achieve what you want.

M_Six wrote in post #16475652 (external link)
I rarely carry my camera on a neck or shoulder strap, so it doesn't hang lens down very often. Maybe that's why I never experienced the lens creep issue.

Same here. No lens creep issues with any of my lenses, including the 24-105 (though I don't use it very often). My camera and lenses stay in my backpack until it's actually time to use them. I don't even use a strap of any sort on my camera anymore. It comes out of the backpack and goes onto the tripod, more or less. I might take it out to check a possible composition through it, but that's only after I've already used my hands to frame the scene. I certainly don't walk around pointing it at things willy-nilly. In general, when the camera comes out, it's time to get down to business. That's why I've always used easy-access backpacks or bags; it's better for the gear to keep it all protected, and it's better for me to have the stuff out of the way while I'm hiking.


Photography by Erin Babnik (external link) | Newsletter (external link) | Photo Cascadia Team Member (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jedi5150
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
363 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Central CA
     
Nov 24, 2013 13:27 as a reply to  @ Phrasikleia's post |  #24

Thanks for the reply, PM sent.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fitness ­ Freak
Senior Member
Avatar
841 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 50
Joined Nov 2011
Location: USA
     
Nov 24, 2013 14:17 |  #25

Phrasikleia wrote in post #16476592 (external link)
My situation may be different from yours, though. I always go backpacking with my husband, so we have two people to do the carrying, which helps a lot (and of course he is the primary pack mule!).

Your pictures are fantastic, so if you ever need an extra pack mule, I'd be happy to tag along. ;)


FYI: "Fitness Freak" is also known as "Amber" outside of POTN.
http://fineartamerica.​com/profiles/1-amber-kresge.html (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MDiCola
Member
Avatar
39 posts
Joined Jul 2011
Location: Northeast US
     
Nov 24, 2013 22:42 |  #26

I've used the 16-35 f/2.8 and its not worth the extra money to get over the 17-40 f/4. I always go for my 17-40 first, mostly because i love the wide view but the 2.8 is not necessary for landscapes. 17-40 is my personal preference, especially on a full frame sensor, but i always carry a 70-200 around for the occasional crop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phrasikleia
Goldmember
Avatar
1,828 posts
Likes: 14
Joined May 2008
Location: Based in California and Slovenia
     
Nov 24, 2013 22:53 |  #27

Fitness Freak wrote in post #16476761 (external link)
Your pictures are fantastic, so if you ever need an extra pack mule, I'd be happy to tag along. ;)

The more pack mules, the merrier! ;)

MDiCola wrote in post #16477788 (external link)
I've used the 16-35 f/2.8 and its not worth the extra money to get over the 17-40 f/4. I always go for my 17-40 first, mostly because i love the wide view but the 2.8 is not necessary for landscapes. 17-40 is my personal preference, especially on a full frame sensor, but i always carry a 70-200 around for the occasional crop.

The 17-40mm is a fine lens, and I used one for many years, but the 16-35 does have its benefits for landscape photography. For one thing, it produces one of the best sunstars of any lens from any brand, whereas the 17-40's sunstar is relatively chunky, stubby, and inelegant. Also, the 16-35 is much better for night photography if you want scenes with crisp stars or the Milky Way in the sky (as opposed to star trails).


Photography by Erin Babnik (external link) | Newsletter (external link) | Photo Cascadia Team Member (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Nov 27, 2013 09:52 |  #28

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16475591 (external link)
I really don't think lenses matter for landscapes that much.

Any zoom at f/8 and be there?

Where to begin with this...

Lenses matter for landscapes as much as they do for pretty much anything else, though the relevant aspects may differ.

The myth that all lenses are equally sharp/good by f8 is just that, a myth.

Different lenses can deliver vastly different performances under difficult conditions. For instance an otherwise excellent lens may deliver awful flare performance when shooting into the sun.

A mediocre lens (such as Canon's 50/1.4) may be quite sharp when stopped down, but it still delivers muddy colors.

The wisdom of f8 and be there is frequently a good way to ensure that much of the image is unsharp. Yes, even with wider angle lenses.

And so on...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Nov 27, 2013 09:57 |  #29

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16474940 (external link)
Hello all, sorry if this has been done recently. If you could only have one lens, and your primary purpose was landscapes, which would it be and why? For purposes of this discussion, the camera body is a 5DII.

The only lens I currently own is a 24-105 F4L. I'll be the first to admit that the zoom range is pretty tough to beat if you've only got one lens to work with. The downside is that the 70-200F4L IS that I used to own really spoiled me on sharpness and IQ. The 24-105 has been really lackluster in the sharpness category, at least for me (a non-professional). I also can't stand the lens "walking out" when I carry it, or worse yet, when I'm taking a shot of something below me. I'm really considering selling it and going back to the 70-200F4l IS as my one and only lens.

If I decided to go with a 2 lens system, the 70-200 and 17-40 would seem to make more sense than the 17-40 and 24-105. Then again, I'm also considering going to a prime, like the 50, or 135.

For me it would probably be the Zeiss 50/2. It is nearly perfect stopped down at or near infinity. The only negative is that it requires f11 or so for the extreme corners to sharpen up properly.

If I were going with a 2 lens kit I would probably add the 24 TSE II.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,979 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 4788
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
Nov 27, 2013 10:09 |  #30

Jedi5150 wrote in post #16475666 (external link)
Haha, I know how you feel. I live on the former Ft. Ord Army base, which is nothing but sand dunes and scrub brush. In fact, this photo was taken 10 feet from the wall of one of the old dilapidated barracks with an overgrown walkway a couple feet to one side and a basketball stand a few feet to the other.

Please start a thread about the old base. Would love to see shots from there.

Back on topic... can one lens rule them all? When I go out with one lens it's usually my 70-200 (but I always have the 50 in my pocket). :D


Getting better at this - Fuji X-t3 x2 - Laowa 9mm - 16 1.4 - 16-80 - 35/50/90 f2 - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,385 views & 0 likes for this thread
The one lens to rule them all
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Nature & Landscapes Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
853 guests, 202 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.