Favorite landscape lens on a FF - Full Frame

My 24-105 gets most of my work. The 17-40 gets used some for very wide , but the 24-105 just looks great, to me.

This is an excellent thread. There's been some great discussion!

I was a crop-shooter until a few months ago when I switched over to the 5D Mark III, so take my comments with a somewhat limited approach as I'm relatively new to the full-frame scene.

When I shot with a Canon 7D, the 10-22 was my default landscape lens and I liked it very much. I occasionally used my 24-105L, but I felt like the focal length was a little long for most applications. When using the 24-105L on my 7D, I was satisfied with the results, but the lens seemed to be little lacking in color and contrast. However, that has completely changed now that I'm using a 5D MIII. I absolutely love my 24-105L and I feel like it's been transformed into a completely different lens. The focal length is highly versatile on a full-frame camera, and I've been blown away by the contrast and clarity that I am pulling out of the lens. I find it to be an excellent landscape lens on a full-frame camera and it has become my new workhorse out in the field.

I also own the 16-35L II and have been using it in the field as well. I honestly have not garnered enough experience with this lens to voice an opinion, but it's been working great for me so far. I choose the 16-35L over the 17-40L because I am not exclusive to landscapes and I need the wider aperture in other disciplines. If I was on a limited budget and did not need the extra stop of light, I would give great consideration to the 17-40L.

I recently invested in a bunch of primes: 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L...and I have fallen in love with them for portraits. I like the way they make me think and move, and the IQ is absolutely stunning. I haven't taken them out for landscape work yet, but I'm mentioning all of this because I'm quickly learning that primes are king for IQ, and I definitely see myself going with a 17 or 24 TS-E down the road when I can dedicate more of my time to landscape work (and that day is rapidly approaching). However, as Phrasikleia and SinaiTSi have eloquently pointed out, there can sometimes be compositional challenges when using primes for landscape work. I guess my current stance is that I want to have both primes and zooms for landscape work as each has its own time and place. They are simply different tools in the ol' tool bag.

Great discussion in this thread -- I hope it continues!

Bryan

bps wrote in post #15354519
This is an excellent thread. There's been some great discussion!

I was a crop-shooter until a few months ago when I switched over to the 5D Mark III, so take my comments with a somewhat limited approach as I'm relatively new to the full-frame scene.

When I shot with a Canon 7D, the 10-22 was my default landscape lens and I liked it very much. I occasionally used my 24-105L, but I felt like the focal length was a little long for most applications. When using the 24-105L on my 7D, I was satisfied with the results, but the lens seemed to be little lacking in color and contrast. However, that has completely changed now that I'm using a 5D MIII. I absolutely love my 24-105L and I feel like it's been transformed into a completely different lens. The focal length is highly versatile on a full-frame camera, and I've been blown away by the contrast and clarity that I am pulling out of the lens. I find it to be an excellent landscape lens on a full-frame camera and it has become my new workhorse out in the field.

I also own the 16-35L II and have been using it in the field as well. I honestly have not garnered enough experience with this lens to voice an opinion, but it's been working great for me so far. I choose the 16-35L over the 17-40L because I am not exclusive to landscapes and I need the wider aperture in other disciplines. If I was on a limited budget and did not need the extra stop of light, I would give great consideration to the 17-40L.

I recently invested in a bunch of primes: 35L, 50L, 85L, and 135L...and I have fallen in love with them for portraits. I like the way they make me think and move, and the IQ is absolutely stunning. I haven't taken them out for landscape work yet, but I'm mentioning all of this because I'm quickly learning that primes are king for IQ, and I definitely see myself going with a 17 or 24 TS-E down the road when I can dedicate more of my time to landscape work (and that day is rapidly approaching). However, as Phrasikleia and SinaiTSi have eloquently pointed out, there can sometimes be compositional challenges when using primes for landscape work. I guess my current stance is that I want to have both primes and zooms for landscape work as each has its own time and place. They are simply different tools in the ol' tool bag.

Great discussion in this thread -- I hope it continues!

Bryan

The biggest problem I would have using primes for landscape is that sometimes its just not possible to get to where the framing would be right to fill the shot. Another consideration is, it would mean carrying a lot of extra lenses. I do have a nifty-fifty f1.4 which is great for portrait.

SinaiTSi wrote in post #15295386
Primary lens:
Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II
I would consider this the "ultimate landscape lens" for any landscape photographer and there are too many reasons to list why. If you get on the lens sample photo thread and start taking a look at some photos that people do with this lens, they are quite amazing.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Secondary lenses:
Canon 17-40L f/4
Simply, a great UW zoom for the price. If I'm walking around, this is my go to lens. It's sharp and light. The corners aren't amazing, but only if I'm pixel peeping.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Rokinon 14mm f/2.8
For the price, this is easily the best bang for your buck. I'm blown away at how much sharper is lens was compared to my 16-35L II (which I've sold) especially in the corners. This might be the lens that is the most fun to shoot with, just because it's so wide.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

spot on selection, i use the same setup and it fits my needs perfectly, except for the fact that i use samyang 14mm exclusively as a nightscapes lens

airdima wrote in post #15390750
spot on selection, i use the same setup and it fits my needs perfectly, except for the fact that i use samyang 14mm exclusively as a nightscapes lens

I do like the set-up. I looked at some of your photos, I love them.

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15281109
What is your favorite landscape lens on a Full Frame?
There are a lot of options!

We currently own crop bodies and her go to is the 24-105 f/4 while mine is the EF-S 10-22.

The wife and I decided to pass on the 5D3 since Canon's MAP pricing has moved the prices back up. Instead we will be buying matching 5D2's for just a little more than the price of 1 5D3.

The Zeiss 21 Distagon, Canon 24 TSE mark in that order although the Zeiss 15 may move to the front of the line based on some of the first shots I've made with it, it's pretty unique compared to the other two.

Landscape does not automatically mean wide angle. So I carry my 17-40, 24-105, & 100-400. 100-400 is very good for panos.

MCAsan wrote in post #15396340
Landscape does not automatically mean wide angle. So I carry my 17-40, 24-105, & 100-400. 100-400 is very good for panos.

Absolutely true!

I shot this a couple weeks back with my 70-200 @ 200mm:

17-40mm

I also agree with some of the responses for 24mm ts-E II as primary and 17-40 secondary. The 24 almost never leaves my camera except for when i throw the 90mm ts-e on there

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15396780
Absolutely true!

I shot this a couple weeks back with my 70-200 @ 200mm:

I picked up the 17-40. As much as I love the wider range focal length of the 24-105, I absolutely hate this lens when using LEE filters

I'm just wondering why you have a problem with Lee filters with this lens?

NinetyEight wrote in post #15402394
I'm just wondering why you have a problem with Lee filters with this lens?

+1....77mm adapter and you should be set....

NinetyEight wrote in post #15402394
I'm just wondering why you have a problem with Lee filters with this lens?

MNUplander wrote in post #15402520
+1....77mm adapter and you should be set....

The lens backs the focal length up way to easy when applying the big stopper. Of course at 24mm this is not a problem. The barrel is way to loose and fully extends if hanging downward while walking around. I've never handled any other 24-105 so it could be this lens.

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15403236
The lens backs the focal length up way to easy when applying the big stopper. Of course at 24mm this is not a problem. The barrel is way to loose and fully extends if hanging downward while walking around. I've never handled any other 24-105 so it could be this lens.

Ahh, I see how that could be frustrating. I've had two and never had zoom creep on either but have heard it is a relatively common thing.

JJD.Photography wrote in post #15403236
The lens backs the focal length up way to easy when applying the big stopper. Of course at 24mm this is not a problem. The barrel is way to loose and fully extends if hanging downward while walking around. I've never handled any other 24-105 so it could be this lens.

I've never experienced lens creep with this lens personally, although I do hear some people have - Maybe I don't use mine enough