Jump to content
Jim Olson

lens for landscape

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have recently shot some landscape photos with my 55 Sony lens and have been hooked on them and want to start doing

a lot of landscapes . The 55 is the only lens I currently own and I have not had much experience with wide angle lenses.

I am considering a 35 mm Loxia and a 21 mm 3.5 Voigtlander lens. I prefer small primes and will not consider a zoom. I also enjoy manual focus lenses.

My concerns are will the 35 mm be to close to the 55 and will I be able to adapt to the 21mm . Also does anyone know when the Loxia's might go on sale again.

Thanks
Jim Olson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2019 at 5:36 AM, crysmeth said:

You might want to consider the Laowa 15mm f2. IMO, one of the sharpest uwa. Light weight, but very solid construction. 

This^

I absolutely love my Laowa 15mm. I have the Sigma Art 20mm as well. They’re both unbelievable lens’s but if I had to choose between the two it’d definitely be the Laowa. There’s just an intangible in the 15 vs the 20 (apart from the focal difference) that makes for a really stellar landscape lens. 

I will say it tends to tighten up significantly at f8 and above where the Sigma performs better at wider apertures. The Laowa also excepts a wider range of filter systems where the Sigma 20 requires some external filter framing which initially can be a fairly costly point of entry. Also as someone mentioned the 15mm is compact and light especially compared to the 20mm. I dunno what the minimum focus difference is between the two but the Laowa is uncanny in its ability to get uber close. I certainly have managed some “almost” macro shots with the 15. Can’t do that with the Sigma. 

Overall I think the Sigma is a tad sharper (as I find all the Art series seem to be, my 35mm Sigma is crazy sharp) and obviously you have more focus options. 

Still.......for landscape.....Laowa :)

 

Edited by Donald Mackie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I use the 16-35 f4 almost exclusively, I can understand not wanting zoom. I have almost fully replaced (sold, not available as backup) my 24-70 with primes, including the 55mm but lacking the 24mm replacement at this time with the edge given to the Sony 24 1.4. At the ultra-wide angle level, the Laowa 15 is tempting if I replaced the 16-35...but the Loxia 21 would be stellar, however I would probably look at the 18 if I had the 24. While I do a combination of Realestate and landscape I find if not using the 16 (typically realestate) I am around 20 (landscape and walkaround). If I am at 35, it typically is not enough lens and switch to the 55.

Either the Laowa or Loxia would be great choices depending on need. The primary reason for this post is to suggest how to 'tame' the UWA as you expressed concern over usage. It is not like slapping  on a telephoto which almost seems natural, as I find an UWA one of the harder lens to use as you have to think differently or of things you took for granted with other lens. First - camera level - bubble level on tripod or grids in viewfinder for handheld! While horizons level apply to virtually every genre of photography with any lens, it is the verticals that become more of an issue with an UWA. As an experiment, put an UWA on the camera and tilt the camera up and down a few degrees and watch those verticals distort in the viewfinder. Second - Control edge distortion. Easiest to explain with realestate, but applies to landscape. With known objects on the edge (refrigerator, sofa, etc) don't include 100%, but cut it. People in their mind know the extension of what was left out, but if you put 100% of the object in the frame, distortion will stretch to unnatural proportions. Again, as an experiment, you can view effect in viewfinder by swinging back and forth.

Edited by tizeye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 

I also have a great interest in landscape photography.

 I currently use mf Nikkors which were familiar to me in my mispent youth!

 I would recommend the 24 F2.8, the 50 F2  and the 105 F2.5, all from the 1970s.

 I understand what you say about zooms, but why not try the 80-200 F4 or F4:5. Nikon’s professional zoom back then which was largely responsible for changing attitudes to zoom lenses by virtue of it’s superb performance 

i prefer manual focus lenses on my A7iii and find them often sharper than my Sony 28-70, although I would really like the Sony 24-105, but I need to save up for that!

The vintage Nikkors are such high quality, and cheaper than most of today’s plastic marvels 

 

.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new Voigtlanders are hot right now. They're made by Cosina and IQ is similar to the Zeiss ZE/ZF lines. There is a lot of information and samples over on Fred Miranda's site. The brand new Voigtlander 21/1.4 seems to have a lot of potential.  I have the 40/1.2 and am very happy with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sony 24mm f1.4 has some really good ratings.  However, it is a bit expensive and in short supply.  I have ordered one from Adorama but it is not expected to be in stock until mid-August.  Some will say 24 is not wide enough.  But you can always turn the camera to the portrait mode and take several shots and "stitch" them in software.  And with a wide aperture of f1.4 you can get nice bokeh in portraits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the Sony 16-35 2.8 GM, and love it. Though, you have a lot of options to pick from now.

I can recommend the new Tamron 17-28 f/2.8, or if you like a prime the Loawa 15mm f/2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 35 Loxia is a fabulous lens, I use it for much of my landscape work.

My usual choice for landscape work is the Loxia 21mm, 35mm and 85mm lenses, I rarely find the need for anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I am shooting landscape and portraits, previously with the A7RII and since a few months with the A7RIV. 

First, I did use the 55mm for landscapes during years and it is definitely a good lens. I also used the 24 70 GM but it was too bulky and heavy and the IQ was very good  but not outstanding. On top of that zoom lenses are quite convenient but they make you somewhat lazy since you can frame your picture without moving.

Now I have the Sony 24 GM which is definitely a gem and the Sony 35 f1.8 which is quite good. Those two lenses are light, rather small, and very convenient to use. If you want the very best 35mm, take the Sigma 35 F1.2 but you have to  accept its size and weight.

I tried the Zeiss Loxia series but was not convinced, specifically by the 35mm which is not very sharp and probably not adapted for very high megapixels sensors. In terms of IQ, the Loxia 21mm is much better. The Loxia 50mm is also good, but for landscape I would shoose the new Voigtlander 50mm F2 which is supposed to be as good as the 65mm and 110mm macro: those Apo Lanthar Voigtlander series are absolutely top class in terms of IQ.

Having said that, I like to go out of the logic box, drop the wide angle primes, and often shoot landscapes with my 100-400 GM, which proves to be excellent for some distant shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...