prime landscape lens suggestions

StanW · 05-20-2010, 03:47 PM

I've begun using my 35mm f2

wildboar · 05-21-2010, 02:33 PM

I'd like to re-emphasize what a couple of you have already mentioned... landscape photography does not require an ultrawide-lens. The ultra-wides can often be harder to compose with. My best landscape shots are split between my A28mm and my DA40mm. I also have the DA21, and I recently got the DA15. I'm still 'learning' to use the 15mm. It will be great for close quarters use, but for wide open spaces, I'll still be using the 28 or 40.

Also, I think some people can 'see'/compose photos better at different focal lengths than other people. I'm not as comfortable at 15mm whereas many others would feel constrained with my bestest buddy, the DA40.

Marc Sabatella · 05-21-2010, 02:54 PM

I'd agree but add that this *can* change over time. I still enjoy my 40 for landscape, and my 28 is still the single most generally useful focal length for me - but it didn't take long to get used to the 15. There's a whole lot of shots it's not appropriate for that the 28 is, but I can usually find plenty to shoot if I chosoe to walk around with just the 15, whether in the mountains, the plains, the woods, the beach, or elsewhere.

Ira · 05-21-2010, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by wildboar

Also, I think some people can 'see'/compose photos better at different focal lengths than other people. I'm not as comfortable at 15mm whereas many others would feel constrained with my bestest buddy, the DA40.

I think this is the most insightful post I've ever read here.

My brain doesn't process the wide angle universe like so many others here who do amazing work in this arena.

I'm not a talented artist like so many other members here, and if I had the 10-17, I might be able to come out with shots where people would say, "Cool!" But that would just be luck.

My brain simply doesn't artistically process an ultra wide angle world.

SteveM · 05-21-2010, 04:06 PM

.
I found a site that might be interesting for you to review. I don't know how accurate it is, and it doesn't cover the newer lenses, but it's worth a look if you are thinking a manual lens is OK....

http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_28-30.html

Also, don't forget your Takumars.....like the 35/3.5 SMCT...

Steve

Pentaxor · 05-21-2010, 10:59 PM

not that I'm against the 28mm to 40mm for landscape use, but there are times when I said to myself, damn...I wish I had brought something wider.

JohnBee · 05-21-2010, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

not that I'm against the 28mm to 40mm for landscape use, but there are times when I said to myself, damn...I wish I had brought something wider.

That's why God invented pano's

Pentaxor · 05-21-2010, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

That's why God invented pano's

of course, but then again, you have to bring along an extra luggage with you. and you dont expect to carry that thing around you everytime.

wildboar · 05-21-2010, 11:33 PM

@smc... that is a shot to be proud of. What a great scene.

Too bad you had to use that crappy old slow manual-focus lens ;-)

adwb · 05-22-2010, 12:30 PM

Thanks every one for the input, it has made interesting reading, I think I am going to buy a Tamaron 10-20 as it has had sightly better reviews than the Sigma version re IQ and is a bit cheaper and here in the UK there is a rebate scheme on at the moment.
Alistair

Parallax · 05-22-2010, 12:46 PM

It depends on your definition of "landscape". If you want pictures of particular features, 35-50; if you want the scene pretty much as you see it 20-30; If you have a particular fondness for sky, <20.

05-21-2010, 02:54 PM	#18
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	I'd agree but add that this can change over time. I still enjoy my 40 for landscape, and my 28 is still the single most generally useful focal length for me - but it didn't take long to get used to the 15. There's a whole lot of shots it's not appropriate for that the 28 is, but I can usually find plenty to shoot if I chosoe to walk around with just the 15, whether in the mountains, the plains, the woods, the beach, or elsewhere. Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 05-21-2010 at 05:59 PM.

05-21-2010, 11:33 PM	#24
wildboar Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Columbus Ohio Posts: 158	@smc... that is a shot to be proud of. What a great scene. Too bad you had to use that crappy old slow manual-focus lens ;-) Last edited by wildboar; 05-21-2010 at 11:38 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Recommendation for landscape prime please	holdgaj	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	04-19-2009 10:44 AM
Landscape lens - prime or zoom?	mutedphotos	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	29	02-12-2009 10:40 AM
Landscape photo with Bright Sky Exp Suggestions	mi2nc	Photo Critique	6	11-01-2008 02:16 PM
small prime suggestions...	heatherslightbox	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	03-26-2008 04:42 AM
Prime lens suggestions for a newbie	ankit	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	01-14-2008 06:45 AM

05-20-2010, 03:47 PM	#16
StanW Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51	I've begun using my 35mm f2

05-21-2010, 02:33 PM	#17
wildboar Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Columbus Ohio Posts: 158	I'd like to re-emphasize what a couple of you have already mentioned... landscape photography does not require an ultrawide-lens. The ultra-wides can often be harder to compose with. My best landscape shots are split between my A28mm and my DA40mm. I also have the DA21, and I recently got the DA15. I'm still 'learning' to use the 15mm. It will be great for close quarters use, but for wide open spaces, I'll still be using the 28 or 40. Also, I think some people can 'see'/compose photos better at different focal lengths than other people. I'm not as comfortable at 15mm whereas many others would feel constrained with my bestest buddy, the DA40.

05-21-2010, 03:54 PM	#19
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by wildboar Also, I think some people can 'see'/compose photos better at different focal lengths than other people. I'm not as comfortable at 15mm whereas many others would feel constrained with my bestest buddy, the DA40. I think this is the most insightful post I've ever read here. My brain doesn't process the wide angle universe like so many others here who do amazing work in this arena. I'm not a talented artist like so many other members here, and if I had the 10-17, I might be able to come out with shots where people would say, "Cool!" But that would just be luck. My brain simply doesn't artistically process an ultra wide angle world.

05-21-2010, 04:06 PM	#20
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	. I found a site that might be interesting for you to review. I don't know how accurate it is, and it doesn't cover the newer lenses, but it's worth a look if you are thinking a manual lens is OK.... http://www.takinami.com/yoshihiko/photo/lens_test/pentax_28-30.html Also, don't forget your Takumars.....like the 35/3.5 SMCT... Steve

05-21-2010, 10:59 PM	#21
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	not that I'm against the 28mm to 40mm for landscape use, but there are times when I said to myself, damn...I wish I had brought something wider.

05-21-2010, 11:06 PM	#22
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by Pentaxor not that I'm against the 28mm to 40mm for landscape use, but there are times when I said to myself, damn...I wish I had brought something wider. That's why God invented pano's

05-21-2010, 11:16 PM	#23
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by JohnBee That's why God invented pano's of course, but then again, you have to bring along an extra luggage with you. and you dont expect to carry that thing around you everytime.

05-22-2010, 12:30 PM	#25
adwb Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bristol UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,636 Original Poster	Thanks every one for the input, it has made interesting reading, I think I am going to buy a Tamaron 10-20 as it has had sightly better reviews than the Sigma version re IQ and is a bit cheaper and here in the UK there is a rebate scheme on at the moment. Alistair

05-22-2010, 12:46 PM	#26
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	It depends on your definition of "landscape". If you want pictures of particular features, 35-50; if you want the scene pretty much as you see it 20-30; If you have a particular fondness for sky, <20.