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 10 Dec 2015 (Thursday) 11:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

50mm prime for landscapes?

 
nfoerster
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
115 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 51
Joined Nov 2015
Location: Dallas, USA
     
Dec 11, 2015 11:14 |  #16

don1163 wrote in post #17815123 (external link)
If you decide on the 16-35, why not consider the f4 version... Normally you will be stopping down for landscapes anyway, it is cheaper and it is a nice sharp lens.. I have one and it is a fantastic lens..

Yeah, that was definitely a consideration too. I am just thinking along the lines of having something for the long run, even if I decide to switch to a new niche. Seem like the 24-70 II is a pretty popular lens here; awesome IQ and no vignette when zoomed in like the 24-105. The larger aperture will definitely help in lower light HH shots vs. an f/4.

Going to the camera store after work to give them a try. So many considerations.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
don1163
Goldmember
Avatar
1,000 posts
Gallery: 27 photos
Likes: 1798
Joined May 2015
Location: Washford, Somerset/ UK
     
Dec 11, 2015 11:23 as a reply to  @ nfoerster's post |  #17

The 24-70 II is definitely the better lens , unless you plan on doing ultra wide stuff it would be the better choice....


1DX, 500L f4, 70-200L f2.8II, 100L f2.8 macro ,16-35 f4, 1.4xIII, Metz 64-AF1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
Avatar
1,445 posts
Likes: 1068
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Dec 11, 2015 13:07 |  #18

Worth saying I was impressed with some landscapes on here the other day, looked up the flickr account, and saw lots of other great landscapes, all taken on the 27-70.


EOS R 5D III, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
Post edited over 3 years ago by Frodge.
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:06 as a reply to  @ post 17814215 |  #19

Why would you want f/1.2 for landscape?


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,491 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 578
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:11 as a reply to  @ Frodge's post |  #20

These lenses have variable apertures.

And the OP will also be using the lens for portraits.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 309
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
Post edited over 3 years ago by mcluckie.
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:17 |  #21

If you're going for landscape with a 50mm, I highly recommend the classic 50mm Zeiss 1.4. I don't understand the desire for a 50L for landscape— it's best is close and nearly-wide open. Of course its good stopped down for landscapes at long focus, but so are many other lenses. The Zeiss (classic) 50 1.4 sucks wide open and close up, but is an amazing distance lens stopped down. They're a deal now with the Milvus redesign. The Zeiss is ⅓ the price of the L. I think for portraits with controlled backgrounds, the Zeiss would excel also. Bokeh can be jittery if environmental.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nfoerster
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
115 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 51
Joined Nov 2015
Location: Dallas, USA
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:24 |  #22

don1163 wrote in post #17815123 (external link)
If you decide on the 16-35, why not consider the f4 version... Normally you will be stopping down for landscapes anyway, it is cheaper and it is a nice sharp lens.. I have one and it is a fantastic lens..

As much as I loved the 24-70 II as many of you have mentioned, I actually decided to go with the 16-35 f/4L. I was at the store looking at both side by side and, after some demo shots, I was overall happier with this one. And I saved $700! That being said, I am going to start saving again and probably end up getting an longer prime for portrait work and (eventually) replace my 24-105 with the 24-70 for a walkaround lens.

Here it is in all it's glory:

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/697/23057349794_19c524c5da_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/B8uW​MG  (external link) Canon 16-35 F/4L (external link) by Nicholas Foerster (external link), on Flickr

Stoked to take it out on some fields tomorrow; weather is supposed to be top notch!

Thanks for the suggestions!



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 309
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
Post edited over 3 years ago by mcluckie.
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:27 |  #23

nfoerster wrote in post #17815655 (external link)
As much as I loved the 24-70 II as many of you have mentioned, I actually decided to go with the 16-35 f/4L. I was at the store looking at both side by side and, after some demo shots, I was overall happier with this one. And I saved $700! That being said, I am going to start saving again and probably end up getting an longer prime for portrait work and (eventually) replace my 24-105 with the 24-70 for a walkaround lens.

Here it is in all it's glory:

QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/B8uW​MG  (external link) Canon 16-35 F/4L (external link) by Nicholas Foerster (external link), on Flickr

Stoked to take it out on some fields tomorrow; weather is supposed to be top notch!

Thanks for the suggestions!

Better put a 010 filter on there if you're planning on weather-sealing. I've got one of those lenses also. So much lighter and crappier feeling than the II 2.8, but optically better at f4.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nfoerster
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
115 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 51
Joined Nov 2015
Location: Dallas, USA
     
Dec 11, 2015 18:34 |  #24

mcluckie wrote in post #17815659 (external link)
Better put a 010 filter on there if you're planning on weather-sealing. I've got one of those lenses also. So much lighter and crappier feeling than the II 2.8, but better at f4.

Feels almost exactly the same as my 24-105 as far as weight and size. Only thing that kinda bugs me about it is the plastic filter threading.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 217
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
Post edited over 3 years ago by InfiniteDivide. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 12, 2015 04:02 |  #25

I just purchased the 16-35 f4 myself and have spent the day shooting local urban streets.
It is great for shooting urban street but I am a little surprise that 16mm only appear a bit wider than 24mm
I will use to more tomorrow and then batch photos in Lightroom and see what FL I used most.

If you do want to do landscape I would recommend a 100mm lens, such as your 24-105 at 105mm and f8.0+

Here is one with my 100L


And here is another with the 24L


While totally different images they illustrate a point.
Do you see the castle in the second photo? No? "It's tiny"

Wider may no be better for a landscape.

As far as the original topic goes, my 50L is my most used lens and on my camera 90% of the time.
Whether I choose to frame a scene of a subject and not swap lenses for a casual photo is up to me.

James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mcluckie
I play with fire, run with scissors and skate on thin ice all at once!
Avatar
2,065 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Likes: 309
Joined Jul 2009
Location: Chicago, Hong Kong
Post edited over 3 years ago by mcluckie. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 12, 2015 05:46 as a reply to  @ InfiniteDivide's post |  #26

I think people prefer wides on landscapes for composition, not distant detail. Imao, neither of these are engaging; I am not "led" into the images. Even just a lower-positioned shot would get the foreground surface in my face and I'd take it to the end. Tracks and fences not required. A wide affords greater depth of field while allowing the image to contain foreground information and framing elements to use the edges of the frame to the photographers compositional advantage.


multidisciplinary visual guy | traveler on the 8-fold path | seeker of the spark | walker of the dog
all dingus | dslr canon 5D4, 70-200LII zeiss distagon 15, 21, 25, 28, 50ƒ1.4 milvus; vario-sonnar N 24-85; makro planar 50, 100 mirrorless leica Q2 fujifilm XT-2, XT-20, 16, 18, 56, 16-55, 50-140; zeiss distagon 12, planar 32 film canon 1n hasselblad 501cm, 50, 80
<<all zooms for sale—zeiss, canon & fuji>>

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 12, 2015 06:52 as a reply to  @ InfiniteDivide's post |  #27

Love the shot with the flowers!


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Frodge
Goldmember
Avatar
3,075 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 145
Joined Nov 2012
     
Dec 12, 2015 06:52 |  #28

I use a 12-24 for landscaoes stopped down.


_______________
“It's kind of fun to do the impossible.” - Walt Disney.
Equipment: Tokina 12-24mm, Canon 40mm 2.8, Tamron 17-50 2.8 XR Di, Canon 18-55mm, Canon 50mm 1.8, Tamron 70-300VC / T3I and 60D

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Dec 12, 2015 14:50 |  #29

welshwizard1971 wrote in post #17814087 (external link)
I use a 50mm Prime for landscape work, a 50mm ART, and it does buy me something a zoom doesn't buy me, image quality corner to corner.

What aperture are you using for a landscape shot to get the foreground and background in focus to be sharp corner to corner? I'm guessing not f4 on FF. F11, F16? Pretty sure the IQ difference at F11-16 wouldn't be that significant if that is the aperture you're shooting at.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,747 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5771
Joined Sep 2007
     
Dec 12, 2015 19:39 |  #30

FEChariot wrote in post #17816586 (external link)
What aperture are you using for a landscape shot to get the foreground and background in focus to be sharp corner to corner? I'm guessing not f4 on FF. F11, F16? Pretty sure the IQ difference at F11-16 wouldn't be that significant if that is the aperture you're shooting at.

it is somewhat true that the superzooms will match the primes or at least IQ becomes a minor issue, but it is an issue.

for instance, I do shoot primes for landscapes, and they tend to stay stronger way till F11, when you want lots of DOF.

Take a look at the 70-200ii vs 100 f2: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=6 (external link)

sharpness a wash pretty much, contrast much better on the 100. The 100 is much smaller, gives up zoom functionality, but does f2 for great portraits, and I'm 99% more likely to lug it around than the 70-200ii. When I need 200mm for landscapes, I do have a very small 200mm that I carry around. Great IQ for sure, but only when I'm on a landscape mission.

you'll see that even the 24-70ii compared to the 50mm stm, has that same issue: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=6 (external link)

I kind of stopped shooting landscapes with zooms for this reason. Even the best zooms are just average compared to cheapo primes. The advantage of primes is that they're usually fast and can double as portrait/low light stuff.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

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

10,862 views & 11 likes for this thread
50mm prime for landscapes?
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 Fizah1410
1036 guests, 321 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.