Lens choices for landscape photography

insanoff · 03-09-2010, 09:14 AM

So what is the best cheap lens for landscape photography for Pentax k-x?

JeffJS · 03-09-2010, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by insanoff

So what is the best cheap lens for landscape photography for Pentax k-x?

Without knowing what you mean by Cheap, I would say the Kit 18-55 lens.

rustynail925 · 03-09-2010, 09:40 AM

You should try the Kit lens first before purchasing another lens so you can determine exactly what you need.

RioRico · 03-09-2010, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Without knowing what you mean by Cheap, I would say the Kit 18-55 lens.

Agreed. And what does insanoff mean by landscape photography? Ultrawides push the distance away, shrinking the image to insignificance. Long teles pull in distant peaks etc. Midrange (wide normal) lenses (like around 28-30mm on our dSLRs), maybe with images stitched together into panos, are closest to what we see in landscapes around us. Insanoff, there are MANY books devoted to landscape photography. RTFM -- get yourself to a library or torrent client or whatever, and READ.

insanoff · 03-09-2010, 12:36 PM

I mean "wide angle or normal sharp lens".
For example: Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye

freewheeler · 03-09-2010, 01:13 PM

The m 28/3.5 is cheap, compact and sharp.

Ira · 03-09-2010, 01:21 PM

The 18-55 kit is dead on beautiful at 18, stopped down one or two.

I would just stick with that and crop as needed.

Nesster · 03-09-2010, 01:31 PM

When hiking in the gorges, which focal length is good? My 16-45 did most of the job, though I wish I'd had something longer in several places. And a SMC-A 28 was just about perfect for quite a bit of it, with ND filter, shooting waterfalls. Some of the best landscapes I've taken are with a Bessa I with a 'normal' lens. So what's a good lens depends.

The kit and the 16-45 are good starters. Going with primes, one needs to bring a few to be able to tailor lens to situation.

**Rense** · 03-09-2010, 01:53 PM

Whatever lens I have brought that day. I shoot landscapes with 16,17, 18, 28, 35, 37, 50 (too much of those

), 55, 58, 70, 80, 85, 100, 150, 200, and 400 mm lenses. Most of these cost me between $5 and $80.

insanoff · 03-09-2010, 02:19 PM

I know too!

Originally posted by Rense

Whatever lens I have brought that day. I shoot landscapes with 16,17, 18, 28, 35, 37, 50 (too much of those

), 55, 58, 70, 80, 85, 100, 150, 200, and 400 mm lenses. Most of these cost me between $5 and $80.

The concrete lens is necessary to me.

Danny Delcambre · 03-09-2010, 02:40 PM

Pentax DA 12-24mm f4 are good for Landscape. You need to look PENTAX Photo Gallery. 12-24mm f4 have a lot of landscape pictures. You should look at it. Smile

RioRico · 03-09-2010, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by insanoff

The concrete lens is necessary to me.

I hope you don't mean ferro-cement! The boats don't sink, but the lenses are heavy.

Anyway, the point is that there is no single 'landscape' prime or zoom size. If you look at collections of varied landscape photos, you'd find that most were shot at the equivalent of 18-55mm. Add coverage from 70-200mm for distant scenery, and you've got 99% of landscapes.

I own and use and love the Zenitar 16/2.8, but it is NOT much of a landscape lens. It pulls a close subject forward and pushes the background away. Unless you keep the horizon line centered, you get great distortions of earth and sky. These can be fascinating, but they'd better be less important than the close subject, or they twist your eyes out. Not that I'm totally opposed to eye-twisting, mind you... Of course, I live in a forest, and seeing all those trees falling over in the fisheye just fills me with fear.

insanoff · 03-09-2010, 03:18 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

I hope you don't mean ferro-cement! The boats don't sink, but the lenses are heavy.

Anyway, the point is that there is no single 'landscape' prime or zoom size. If you look at collections of varied landscape photos, you'd find that most were shot at the equivalent of 18-55mm. Add coverage from 70-200mm for distant scenery, and you've got 99% of landscapes.

I own and use and love the Zenitar 16/2.8, but it is NOT much of a landscape lens. It pulls a close subject forward and pushes the background away. Unless you keep the horizon line centered, you get great distortions of earth and sky. These can be fascinating, but they'd better be less important than the close subject, or they twist your eyes out. Not that I'm totally opposed to eye-twisting, mind you... Of course, I live in a forest, and seeing all those trees falling over in the fisheye just fills me with fear.

Thanks! "PENTAX SMC DA 16-45mm f4 ED LENS" is OK?

tybeck · 03-09-2010, 06:05 PM

I started out with the 16-45mm as my first lens and found it to be excellent for landscape. Since then I've picked up the 12-24mm. I can wholeheartedly recommend either lens. Starting with the 16-45mm is best since you can see how much you want to use the wide end and have a more general application zoom all in one.

GeneV · 03-09-2010, 06:14 PM

I'd also suggest a 28mm prime. Granted most of my photography in terms of years is in film, but the vast majority of my landscape shots are with a "normal" lens or moderate wide angle. The 28mm wide side of "normal" would be a sharp, inexpensive choice on APS-C.

03-09-2010, 09:14 AM	#1
insanoff New Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 20	Lens choices for landscape photography So what is the best cheap lens for landscape photography for Pentax k-x?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A guide to using the 10-17mm DA for landscape photography	amcinroy	Pentax Lens Articles	11	11-17-2013 09:42 PM
What is your definition of 'landscape photography'?	Graham67	Photographic Technique	24	10-07-2009 03:01 AM
lens for landscape photography	seymop	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	09-01-2008 07:05 AM
Landscape photography and a N.D. Filter?	roverlr3	Photographic Technique	19	07-13-2008 07:30 PM
Using the 40/2.8 lens for landscape/trekking photography. Tips and tricks needed.	lastdodobird	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	03-03-2008 10:12 AM

03-09-2010, 09:30 AM	#2
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by insanoff So what is the best cheap lens for landscape photography for Pentax k-x? Without knowing what you mean by Cheap, I would say the Kit 18-55 lens.

03-09-2010, 09:40 AM	#3
rustynail925 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,551	You should try the Kit lens first before purchasing another lens so you can determine exactly what you need.

03-09-2010, 09:45 AM	#4
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by JeffJS Without knowing what you mean by Cheap, I would say the Kit 18-55 lens. Agreed. And what does insanoff mean by landscape photography? Ultrawides push the distance away, shrinking the image to insignificance. Long teles pull in distant peaks etc. Midrange (wide normal) lenses (like around 28-30mm on our dSLRs), maybe with images stitched together into panos, are closest to what we see in landscapes around us. Insanoff, there are MANY books devoted to landscape photography. RTFM -- get yourself to a library or torrent client or whatever, and READ.

03-09-2010, 12:36 PM	#5
insanoff New Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 20 Original Poster	I mean "wide angle or normal sharp lens". For example: Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye

03-09-2010, 01:13 PM	#6
freewheeler Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: amsterdam Posts: 130	The m 28/3.5 is cheap, compact and sharp.

03-09-2010, 01:21 PM	#7
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	The 18-55 kit is dead on beautiful at 18, stopped down one or two. I would just stick with that and crop as needed.

03-09-2010, 01:31 PM	#8
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	When hiking in the gorges, which focal length is good? My 16-45 did most of the job, though I wish I'd had something longer in several places. And a SMC-A 28 was just about perfect for quite a bit of it, with ND filter, shooting waterfalls. Some of the best landscapes I've taken are with a Bessa I with a 'normal' lens. So what's a good lens depends. The kit and the 16-45 are good starters. Going with primes, one needs to bring a few to be able to tailor lens to situation.

03-09-2010, 01:53 PM	#9
Rense Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,050	Whatever lens I have brought that day. I shoot landscapes with 16,17, 18, 28, 35, 37, 50 (too much of those ), 55, 58, 70, 80, 85, 100, 150, 200, and 400 mm lenses. Most of these cost me between $5 and $80.

03-09-2010, 02:19 PM	#10
insanoff New Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 20 Original Poster	I know too! Originally posted by Rense Whatever lens I have brought that day. I shoot landscapes with 16,17, 18, 28, 35, 37, 50 (too much of those ), 55, 58, 70, 80, 85, 100, 150, 200, and 400 mm lenses. Most of these cost me between $5 and $80. The concrete lens is necessary to me.

03-09-2010, 02:40 PM	#11
Danny Delcambre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 550	Pentax DA 12-24mm f4 are good for Landscape. You need to look PENTAX Photo Gallery. 12-24mm f4 have a lot of landscape pictures. You should look at it. Smile

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-09-2010, 02:46 PM	#12
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by insanoff The concrete lens is necessary to me. I hope you don't mean ferro-cement! The boats don't sink, but the lenses are heavy. Anyway, the point is that there is no single 'landscape' prime or zoom size. If you look at collections of varied landscape photos, you'd find that most were shot at the equivalent of 18-55mm. Add coverage from 70-200mm for distant scenery, and you've got 99% of landscapes. I own and use and love the Zenitar 16/2.8, but it is NOT much of a landscape lens. It pulls a close subject forward and pushes the background away. Unless you keep the horizon line centered, you get great distortions of earth and sky. These can be fascinating, but they'd better be less important than the close subject, or they twist your eyes out. Not that I'm totally opposed to eye-twisting, mind you... Of course, I live in a forest, and seeing all those trees falling over in the fisheye just fills me with fear.

03-09-2010, 03:18 PM	#13
insanoff New Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Stuttgart Posts: 20 Original Poster	Originally posted by RioRico I hope you don't mean ferro-cement! The boats don't sink, but the lenses are heavy. Anyway, the point is that there is no single 'landscape' prime or zoom size. If you look at collections of varied landscape photos, you'd find that most were shot at the equivalent of 18-55mm. Add coverage from 70-200mm for distant scenery, and you've got 99% of landscapes. I own and use and love the Zenitar 16/2.8, but it is NOT much of a landscape lens. It pulls a close subject forward and pushes the background away. Unless you keep the horizon line centered, you get great distortions of earth and sky. These can be fascinating, but they'd better be less important than the close subject, or they twist your eyes out. Not that I'm totally opposed to eye-twisting, mind you... Of course, I live in a forest, and seeing all those trees falling over in the fisheye just fills me with fear. Thanks! "PENTAX SMC DA 16-45mm f4 ED LENS" is OK?

03-09-2010, 06:05 PM	#14
tybeck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 452	I started out with the 16-45mm as my first lens and found it to be excellent for landscape. Since then I've picked up the 12-24mm. I can wholeheartedly recommend either lens. Starting with the 16-45mm is best since you can see how much you want to use the wide end and have a more general application zoom all in one.

03-09-2010, 06:14 PM	#15
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	I'd also suggest a 28mm prime. Granted most of my photography in terms of years is in film, but the vast majority of my landscape shots are with a "normal" lens or moderate wide angle. The 28mm wide side of "normal" would be a sharp, inexpensive choice on APS-C.