Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-22-2014, 09:05 PM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4
best lens for tree photos...

i just bought a pentax k50...would like to know the best lens in terms of quality below $600 to take full photos of large trees...someone has suggested the 35mm f/2.0...do i need to go to a 28 or a 21...any help would be most appreciated...also does anyone think the k5ii is significantly better than the k50 lens being equal...thanks...reggie

12-22-2014, 09:25 PM - 1 Like   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,430
What kind (size) of trees are we talking here? Christmas trees or redwood trees?
12-22-2014, 09:42 PM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
kiwi_jono's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,093
QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
What kind (size) of trees are we talking here? Christmas trees or redwood trees?
+1 , and how close can you get to the trees?

Certainly FA35 f2 is a lovely lens with great IQ but if they are small trees you might want a fast 50 to get some nice bokeh behind the tree or if its a big tree and shooting in a forest you might want a UWA (10 - 20mm).
12-22-2014, 10:01 PM - 1 Like   #4
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,084
Depends how far away you are too.

Around here we have mountain ash, a species of eucalypt, which is the tallest flowering plant in the world (up to 100m+). Very close to the tree you need a wide angle. I use my DA 12-24 (and if necessary use DxO ViewPoint to reduce the distortion).

From a distance a normal-moderate telephoto (not showing the whole tree) works well, adding a sense of drama - somewhere in the 35-85mm range, depending how far away you are. Any good prime in this range can work well in the right conditions - e.g. DA 35 f2.4, DA 40, FA 43, DA 50 f1.8, M or A 50 f1.7, DA*55, FA 77. A good zoom like the Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-70, or Pentax 18-135 will give more versatility at the price of a little IQ.

Some examples taken with the 12-24.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-30  Photo 
12-22-2014, 10:14 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,572
I'd rate the K50 and K-5II about the same, sensor essentially equal and AA filter in both. Extra controls are nice on the K-5 series but one can adapt & get the same shot from either one.

If you're up close then definitely wide is good; I add extra drama with the SMC 17mm Fish-Eye though perhaps distortion isn't part of your plan? I would get closer and go wider than 35mm if I wanted a tree to be isolated (i.e. just a tree not a forest).
12-22-2014, 11:39 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,300
Trees are notorious for producing chromatic aberration with even high quality lenses. I would pick something that controls it well. The exact focal length doesn't matter too much if you can use your legs to alter the distance. That may not be possible in dense forest though.

The DA 21 strikes me as a good choice if you really can't back up far enough for a 35 or 50. I don't have it, but by reputation it has all the necessary qualities and is in your price range.
12-22-2014, 11:55 PM   #7
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,084
We should have asked first: what lenses do you have already? And what sort of tree shots are you after?
12-22-2014, 11:57 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Newcastle
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,571
$600 will buy you a FA20/2.8

I can highly recommend this lens. Relatively sharp from 2.8 but definitely sharp from there on.

Perhaps the 21mm is another good one to get, but, the extra stop in sped will help out in a dark forest.

The FA20/2.8 is also FF so you are 'potentially' future proofing your photography

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 06:13 PM ----------

Re: K50 - a good camera. No capacity for a grip, which a K5ii does. Also, the K5ii has 80 ISO and better dynamic range (14 bit RAW).

If you can pick up a cheap K5iis somewhere (now discontinued) then you get a better camera again - no AA filter - sharper images. That is the amera I would recommend unless you opt for a K3.

12-23-2014, 01:17 AM   #9
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
What kind (size) of trees are we talking here? Christmas trees or redwood trees?
large hardwoods...especially oaks...rb

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 03:21 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
Depends how far away you are too.

Around here we have mountain ash, a species of eucalypt, which is the tallest flowering plant in the world (up to 100m+). Very close to the tree you need a wide angle. I use my DA 12-24 (and if necessary use DxO ViewPoint to reduce the distortion).

From a distance a normal-moderate telephoto (not showing the whole tree) works well, adding a sense of drama - somewhere in the 35-85mm range, depending how far away you are. Any good prime in this range can work well in the right conditions - e.g. DA 35 f2.4, DA 40, FA 43, DA 50 f1.8, M or A 50 f1.7, DA*55, FA 77. A good zoom like the Tamron 17-50, Sigma 17-70, or Pentax 18-135 will give more versatility at the price of a little IQ.

Some examples taken with the 12-24.
thanks for the picks...am thinking of large stunning trees away from others...rb

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 03:22 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
Trees are notorious for producing chromatic aberration with even high quality lenses. I would pick something that controls it well. The exact focal length doesn't matter too much if you can use your legs to alter the distance. That may not be possible in dense forest though.

The DA 21 strikes me as a good choice if you really can't back up far enough for a 35 or 50. I don't have it, but by reputation it has all the necessary qualities and is in your price range.
thanks...reggie

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 03:23 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jimr-pdx Quote
I'd rate the K50 and K-5II about the same, sensor essentially equal and AA filter in both. Extra controls are nice on the K-5 series but one can adapt & get the same shot from either one.

If you're up close then definitely wide is good; I add extra drama with the SMC 17mm Fish-Eye though perhaps distortion isn't part of your plan? I would get closer and go wider than 35mm if I wanted a tree to be isolated (i.e. just a tree not a forest).
thanks...reggie

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 03:24 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
We should have asked first: what lenses do you have already? And what sort of tree shots are you after?
i have the 14-42 kit lens...thanks...reggie

---------- Post added 12-23-14 at 04:06 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
What kind (size) of trees are we talking here? Christmas trees or redwood trees?
Large hardwoods...especially oaks...the larger the better...thanks...reggie
12-23-2014, 04:34 AM - 1 Like   #10
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wangaratta, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,553
Hi Des,
I gave you a like for your tree images.
As an old Gippslander I still love those great trees.
Up here on the North East plains the gums are thicker and shorter and spread a lot.
12-23-2014, 05:46 AM - 1 Like   #11
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,300
Sometimes you just have to get up close and personal. (DA 18-135 @ 18)



But be careful. You may not be able to see the forest for the trees. (DA 18-135 @ 53)

Last edited by Paul the Sunman; 12-23-2014 at 05:55 AM.
12-23-2014, 06:09 AM   #12
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,084
QuoteOriginally posted by rod_grant Quote
Hi Des,
I gave you a like for your tree images.
As an old Gippslander I still love those great trees.
Up here on the North East plains the gums are thicker and shorter and spread a lot.
Hard to pick a favourite between mountain ash, snow gums and red gums Rod. Thanks for sharing.

---------- Post added 12-24-14 at 12:13 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
Sometimes you just have to get up close and personal. (DA 18-135 @ 18)



But be careful. You may not be able to see the forest for the trees. (DA 18-135 @ 53)
Fine shots Paul. We should start a themed thread.

QuoteOriginally posted by reggiebarbee Quote
i have the 14-42 kit lens...thanks...reggie
I assume you mean the 18-55?

The message is you can take good tree shots with many different lenses, but note the emphasis on wide angle.

I'd say before spending money on a new lens, use the kit lens for a while and see which focal lengths suit you best for this use. If you find 18mm is not wide enough, then consider an ultrawide lens, whether prime (DA 15 is highly regarded) or zoom - https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/187730-ultimate-ultra-wide-zoom-comparison.html

Last edited by Des; 12-23-2014 at 02:04 PM.
12-23-2014, 06:46 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,248
I'm certainly no expert, but tree photos are an aspiration of mine--one thing I've noticed is that some of the best are actually "vertoramas" using a longer FL. I'll definitely look forward to responses to this thread, and hopefully samples from you once you get a system that works.
12-23-2014, 07:08 AM - 2 Likes   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Elida, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,685
QuoteOriginally posted by reggiebarbee Quote
i just bought a pentax k50...would like to know the best lens in terms of quality below $600 to take full photos of large trees...someone has suggested the 35mm f/2.0...do i need to go to a 28 or a 21...any help would be most appreciated...also does anyone think the k5ii is significantly better than the k50 lens being equal...thanks...reggie
The K-50 will be fine, both cameras have advantages over each other, both use the same sensor. There is no one lens for shooting trees. It all depends on how distance and composition. Different focal lengths can really let you change your composition. Examples, going from shorter to longer lengths:

I a wooded area, I wanted emphasize the tree's roots, 10mm, Tamron 10-24


24mm, Tamron 10-24


Using the group of leaf barren trees to showcase the sky behind them, 48mm, DA18-135


Using the tree as a focal point to show snow, blowing winds and convey cold, 60mm DA18-135.


Another using the trees to put interest into a sundown sky, 70mm, Tamron 70-200


This is a little busier photo, I used a longer focal length here to bring the elements "closer". The tree is out in the middle of a field, several hundred yards from the farm buildings, This also makes the full moon look larger. 170mm, Tamron 70-200.

This one also uses a longer focal length to catch and compress a scene that was not too close. The deer were probably 200 yards away and the tree line more than that past the deer. The longer length let me get the deer in the pic and really enlarged the setting sun. 300mm, DA55-300.
12-23-2014, 07:43 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 879
QuoteOriginally posted by reggiebarbee Quote
i just bought a pentax k50...would like to know the best lens in terms of quality below $600 to take full photos of large trees...someone has suggested the 35mm f/2.0...do i need to go to a 28 or a 21...any help would be most appreciated...also does anyone think the k5ii is significantly better than the k50 lens being equal...thanks...reggie
I do nature and landscape shots these days. Since budget was tight, I opted for the Sigma 10-20 F3.5-5.6. The lens is reasonably sharp wide open and it is much better when stopped down to f10 to f13. A friend of mine has the Tamron 10-24 and is very happy with it. I wanted to go with the Tamron but I tried it at one of the photo shows and it was terrible. Perhaps they had a bad copy at the show (Tamron, why would you bring a bad copy of a lens to a major photographers trade show) .

The samples I saw of the Tamron 10-24 a few posts down on this thread are beyond words. I am not sure how much PP was applied but they look sharp and contrasty. My other wide lens is the Pentax 16-45 which oddly enough is sharper than the Sigma 10-20 but it has lots of CA issues whereas the Sigma 10-20 has almost non.

My guess is that for tall trees an ultra wide is a must. Sigma and Tamron are reasonable solutions costing less than $600. My other lenses are the three amigos and they belong to another universe as far as image quality goes. If I stay with Pentax, I plan to get either the DA12-24 or the DA15 Limited.

I would be curious to know which way you decide to go and how you like the results. Good luck my friend.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
amigos, camera, controls, da, distance, drama, fa, fa20/2.8, flare, forest, gums, k5ii, lens, lens for tree, lenses, pentax help, photography, post, price, range, shots, tamron, tree, trees, troubleshooting
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best media player for viewing photos on TV? Edgar_in_Indy General Photography 16 10-26-2014 12:22 AM
Best way to resize photos for a photo contest frogoutofwater Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 14 04-10-2014 09:58 PM
An impossible ask? Best lens/lens combo for new K-30 user JPE Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 26 09-23-2013 05:57 PM
Best Categories For My Photos Xarcell Photographic Technique 6 07-02-2011 10:01 AM
Best Lens for Ringside Professional Wrestling Photos Adhesion Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 06-25-2008 12:45 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top