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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 09 Sep 2014 (Tuesday) 23:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

FF Landscape lens decision

 
nickram
Junior Member
29 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2008
     
Sep 09, 2014 23:28 |  #1

Hi all

I have the 5D MKIII and I am wanting to get more into landscape photography. I bought the Rokinon 14 2.8 lens a while ago which has given nice results but I would like to start using filters to do long exposure. I will keep this lens for astrophotography but want a good lens for everything else that fits a filter system easily.

I am a little confused as to what lens to get... Prime, Zoom, TSE etc. I like the look of stitched Panoramas with the TSE but I guess this won't work with long exposure?

I have a trip coming up to Maui for a week and planning to get the lens and probably the lee filter system with big stopper.

Shortlist so far:

17-40L
16-35 4L
16-35 II 2.8
24L II 1.4 (is 24 wide enough?)
TSE 24 3.5 (can use the shift for wide but maybe not good for long exposure?)

Can someone help point me in the right direction, feel like I am going round in circles.

Current lenses:

Rokinon 14 2.8
Sigma 30 1.4 (legacy from 40D, need to replace this now I have the 5D MKIII)
85L 1.2
100L 2.8
70-200L IS

Thanks!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
hiketheplanet
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 14
Joined May 2013
     
Sep 09, 2014 23:30 |  #2

16-35/4 IS. Hands down.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jeetsukumaran
Senior Member
316 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 19
Joined Apr 2007
     
Sep 09, 2014 23:41 |  #3

If you want uncompromising corner-to-corner image quality, the TS-E 24 f/3.5 II (or the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8). Absolutely no doubt about this: these lenses exist on a plane unto themselves, nothing --- absolutely nothing --- can come close to them in a Canon mount (except the other wide-angle TS-E maybe or the Zeiss 15mm) in terms of image quality: the images almost pop, crackle and snap in resolution, color and almost any other aspect or criteria, subjective or objective, you would care to name wrt to optical characteristics rendered on the final image.

However, composition is such an important aspect of landscapes that the flexibility of the zoom is not just a convenience: there are times where you just cannot "zoom with your feet", no matter how often this cliched adage is repeated, and the zoom allows you to frame a better image, which might (depending on the composition) trump outright optical image quality. No doubt about that.

I personally have gone the pure prime route for the wide-angles. Do not regret it for instant. Having said that, my 70-200L is not only my general-purpose travel workhorse lens, but I use it almost as much the TS-E 24 for landscapes.


Gallery: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jeetsukumaran/ (external link) Website: http://jeetworks.org/ (external link) Canon 6D, Zeiss Distagon T* 2.8/21, EF 24-70 f/2.8L II USM, EF 40mm f/2.8 STM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jkokbaker
Senior Member
554 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 39
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Bend, OR
     
Sep 10, 2014 00:06 |  #4

I love my Zeiss 18mm, works with the lee system. It costs $5-600 less than the Zeiss 21mm, but if money was no factor I would get the Zeiss 21mm, the 18mm is almost a stop slower but for landscape use it doesn't really matter. I can use the 18mm with 2 different lee filters before I get vignetting.


5D IV, Rokinon 14mm, Zeiss 21mm, Rokinon 24mm 1.4, Canon 24-105L, Speedlight 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,867 posts
Gallery: 98 photos
Likes: 1126
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Sep 10, 2014 00:19 as a reply to  @ jkokbaker's post |  #5

The 16-35 f4L is about as sharp as the 17mm TSE. The 24 is supposed to be sharper, but honestly looking at my 20-30" prints I think I could do with more pixels over even more sharpness (I never thought I'd say that and honestly I think 22-26MP is enough for me, but anyway....most people don't look at 30" prints from 12" away)

So I say get the 16-35 f4L unless you know you need shift, in which case you wouldn't be asking the question. Having the zoom and then one or more of the TSE's is not a waste IMO. I don't often take both out together, but I do use both about equally - but I guess that depends on you.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,863 posts
Gallery: 2026 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 12289
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Sep 10, 2014 02:22 |  #6

Heya,

Landscape is a very broad genre in terms of focal length. For some reason a lot of people think it's just wide and ultrawide. But a lot of landscape is done at normal to telephoto focal lengths.

Since you already have a 70-200, you have the telephoto landscape range covered. But I notice you have nothing really shorter than 85mm before hitting 14mm.

So that says "what's the budget?" to me.

If no real cap on budget, the new 16-35 F4L IS is a wonderful lens.
If no real cap on budget, also consider a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC or Canon 24-70 F4L.
If looking for middle of the road, the staple 17-40 F4L is great.
If you just want to spend a dime and get great optics, Tamron 17-35 is as good optically as Canon's.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ursyn
Goldmember
Avatar
1,426 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1519
Joined Oct 2009
     
Sep 10, 2014 05:24 |  #7

If I were you, I'd buy 17-40/4 or 16-35/4. 16-35/4 has IS which sometimes maybe useful. On the other hand IS is not as important in wide lenses as in tele lenses. 17-40/4 is much cheaper though. 16-35/2.8 is in my opinion too expensive. It's brighter than both lenses mentioned above, but 2.8 for landscapes is not required. If you are going to shoot also inside buildings with poor light conditions it would be a perfect choice. All the 24 lenses are not wide enough for me.

I didn't shoot landscapes too much, but since I started, having 24-70 as the widest lens, I quickly realized that I'm lacking something in my equipment. I bought Samyang 14/2.8 and I think that my money were spent very well.

If you want to go really wide think about Sigma 12-24, but it has curved external lens. It means problems with filters. If thay are must, you can cross out that lens.
http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …_24mm_F4_5_5_6_​EX_DG.html (external link)

I hope it helps.


Adrian | flickr (external link) & Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
farmer1957
Senior Member
Avatar
901 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 60
Joined Jul 2012
Location: nevada
     
Sep 10, 2014 07:36 |  #8

nickram wrote in post #17145401 (external link)
Hi all

I have the 5D MKIII and I am wanting to get more into landscape photography. I bought the Rokinon 14 2.8 lens a while ago which has given nice results but I would like to start using filters to do long exposure. I will keep this lens for astrophotography but want a good lens for everything else that fits a filter system easily.

I am a little confused as to what lens to get... Prime, Zoom, TSE etc. I like the look of stitched Panoramas with the TSE but I guess this won't work with long exposure?

I have a trip coming up to Maui for a week and planning to get the lens and probably the lee filter system with big stopper.

Shortlist so far:

17-40L
16-35 4L
16-35 II 2.8
24L II 1.4 (is 24 wide enough?)
TSE 24 3.5 (can use the shift for wide but maybe not good for long exposure?)

Can someone help point me in the right direction, feel like I am going round in circles.

Current lenses:

Rokinon 14 2.8
Sigma 30 1.4 (legacy from 40D, need to replace this now I have the 5D MKIII)
85L 1.2
100L 2.8
70-200L IS

Thanks!

I use the TSE 17mm and my TSE 24mm for landscapes and product photography.
The TSE 17mm you can use a TC 1.4 on it. My TSE 24MM mk I, you cannot use a TC 1.4.
If that info means anything to you.
I do not own any of the other lenses you listed above but It would be depressing to do landscape photography without having either the TSE 17mm or the TSE 24mm .

Farmer




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Sep 10, 2014 07:53 |  #9

hiketheplanet wrote in post #17145407 (external link)
16-35/4 IS. Hands down.

Just sold my 16-35 as I simply never used it. I consider myself a landscape tog but I think in terms of longer lenses rather than wide angle.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,266 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 363
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Sep 10, 2014 07:55 |  #10

MalVeauX wrote in post #17145547 (external link)
Heya,

Landscape is a very broad genre in terms of focal length. For some reason a lot of people think it's just wide and ultrawide. But a lot of landscape is done at normal to telephoto focal lengths.

I agree. My most used lens for landscape is the 24-105L, and I do own the new 16-35L f/4 IS. At times, I need to bring out a telephoto, as 105mm isn't long enough.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kevindar
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,050 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2007
Location: california
     
Sep 10, 2014 10:38 |  #11

the three best and most bang for the buck set up, is trio of canon f4 lenses (16-35 f4 IS< 24-70 f4 IS, 70-200 f4, or f4 is, or 70-300L)
More specifically, on the wide end, I have used and owned the samyang 14, canon fe 15, nikon 14-24, canon 16-35 2.8, both versions, as well as now the f4 version, 17-40, canon 24 tse2, canon 24 1.4II, and canon 24-70 2.8II.
As such, I feel fairly qualified on this topic.

The short of it, get the 16-35 f4 IS lens, hands down. only exception is if you are interested in using tilt shift function, then both 17 and 24 tse lenses are very good options.

If you are not using tilt shift, the TSE's do not make sense based on IQ. my 24 tse is matched by my 24-70II in terms of sharpness they are both sharper than 16-35 f4 at 24, which is the weakest spot for that lens, but at f8 and beyond, its very difficult to tell them apart.

the 24tse has amazing close corner rendering, with the edge going to the 24-70II in the far corner so if someone is shooting test charts at 15 feet, the TSE would look better, but if looking at infinity, or even 60 yards, the 24-70 2.8 has better corners

there are threads out there comparing the 16-35 to zeiss. some say zeiss "draws" or "renders" better, or has better microcontrast. May be true. it has a mustache disortion (the zoom is just about distortion free at 21), Most of what I have seen does not show a difference in the corner sharpness at least at f5.6 and on.

good luck.


My Flickr (external link)
Gear List
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1205576

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,966 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 9209
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Lanett, Alabama
     
Sep 10, 2014 14:13 |  #12

kevindar wrote in post #17146101 (external link)
If you are not using tilt shift, the TSE's do not make sense based on IQ. my 24 tse is matched by my 24-70II in terms of sharpness they are both sharper than 16-35 f4 at 24, which is the weakest spot for that lens, but at f8 and beyond, its very difficult to tell them apart.

Is that right? 24mm is the weakest spot for the 16-35mm f/4L IS? I thought 35mm was the weakest spot - that it performs best at the widest and progressively gets less sharp narrowed down. I don't own it, so I have no experience, but it's what I recall reading in this forum and other review sites.

Whatever the case, I too like the 16-35mm f/4L as a great travel landscape-oriented lens. Primes, like the wonderful TS-E lenses are fantastic, but the fixed focal length may not offer enough framing options for a traveler with limited time to fully exploit a scene's framing potential.

But, I also really like the 24-70 II as a great travel landscape lens as well. The wider the lens the more challenging it is to frame an interesting composition.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,583 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6539
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 10, 2014 14:22 |  #13

Lowner wrote in post #17145801 (external link)
Just sold my 16-35 as I simply never used it. I consider myself a landscape tog but I think in terms of longer lenses rather than wide angle.

this may seem odd to some folks, but I go through this on occasion as well. A 24-70 may not be known as a landscape lens, but damn I use it an awful lot. I also use the 14 a lot, and I do love the 16-35F4IS.

I think the solution for me is to simply own them all :lol:

I'm just waiting for the sony FE 16-35 to decide which 16-35 to commit to. It'll most likely be the canon because it's damn good, and I'm already familiar with it, but who knows, maybe I'll be surprised.


Sony A7siii/A7iii/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic G9 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kevindar
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,050 posts
Likes: 38
Joined May 2007
Location: california
     
Sep 10, 2014 15:32 |  #14

David, I have tested the lens as 16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, vs 16-35II, tse 24, canon 24-70II, canon 24-70F4, as well as 24 1.4II
may be its weakest at 24 in comparison, b/c 24-70 is strongest at 24. at 28, and 35, I would consider it very similar to 24-35II. so thats where I base my assertion.


My Flickr (external link)
Gear List
https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1205576

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,966 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 9209
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Lanett, Alabama
     
Sep 10, 2014 16:04 |  #15

kevindar wrote in post #17146553 (external link)
David, I have tested the lens as 16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, vs 16-35II, tse 24, canon 24-70II, canon 24-70F4, as well as 24 1.4II
may be its weakest at 24 in comparison, b/c 24-70 is strongest at 24. at 28, and 35, I would consider it very similar to 24-35II. so thats where I base my assertion.

Good to know. Thanks!


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sigma 35mm F/1.2, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

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

5,359 views & 0 likes for this thread
FF Landscape lens decision
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 Mannyromano123
683 guests, 199 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.