Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    756

    Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    I've talked with other LF photographers about this subject. So I want to pose a question. Whenever one sees a discussion on forums like this, it appears that a common perception that landscape photos necessitate wide angle lenses with the assumption that the wider the better.

    Yet, I have been told that is not necessarily true. I don't do a lot of landscape, but plan to start traveling more (thanks to semi retirement).

    So, should I spend a lot of time searching, buying and using the super wide lenses for 4X5 like 45-60 mm?

    Would I see the best landscape results, with a 90mm?

    Or are 120 to 150 suitable for landscape?

    I'm not necessarily new to LF, but this is a new direction for me. I tend to use, and have, 90, 120, 150 and 210.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,176
    You have very nice selection of focal lengths. Do you ever feel like your 90mm is too long to do the kind of shots you like? If not, you don't need anything wider. Although I have tried them, I tend to stay away from very wide now as it doesn't fit my aesthetic. It is all just a personal choice.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,697

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    It depends on how you see. I seldom used a wide angle lens for landscapes with 4x5. 150mm and 210mm were my favorite lengths. The widest 4x5 lens I ever owned was 80mm but I used it more for architecture than I did for landscapes. What's suitable for landscape and what you "should" do depends on how you see and how you want to photograph what you see, not on what others do.
    Brian Ellis
    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
    a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

  4. #4
    Octogenarian
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Frisco, Texas
    Posts
    3,532

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    I tend to use a 135, 150, or 180 for landscapes and a 90 or 120 for structures or architecture.

    Wider lenses (75 or 65) are good for interior shots where space is limited.

    The 210 and 300 focal lengths are reserved for distant subjects.

  5. #5
    Luc Benac lbenac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Burnaby BC Canada
    Posts
    898

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    I was thinking the same when i started and got a 75mm. Truth is after using LF for some time, I have found that 90mm is really the wider than I would ever need for landscape and when in the mountains 120mm is probably as wide as I ever need.
    125, 200 or 120, 180, 240 is a good combo or 90,135,200,300 depending how many lenses you want to backpack.
    You would be surprised how much 150 or 210 gets used for landscape.

    Cheers,

    Luc
    Field # ShenHao XPO45 - Monorail # Sinar P, F2
    [CENTER]6x6 # Minolta 1965 Autocord, 6x9 # Kodak 1946 Medalist II

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    288

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    I think you have a great set of focal lengths to work with.

    I own way too many wide angle lenses, from 38mm on up. For landscapes I would not but a “Super Wide” lens, I rarely go wider than 90mm (on a 4x5 format). If you do decide to go wider try something close to 75mm (which is very wide on 4x5) before you go too wide. All of this is subjective; you have to be the judge of your own work. You might try some longer focal lengths than your 210mm; you might be surprised with how far off landscape looks on a 360mm or 480mm lens.

    Maybe you could borrow or rent some different focal lengths to help you make up your mind?

    -Joshua

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    756

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    Great... thanks for all the responses.

    Looks as if I would only need to buy wider if I were going to do interior shots. I have been happy with the selection of lenses I have, although I have often thought a 180 would be nice. However while I sometimes think 120 is a bit close to 150, I also think 180 might be too close to 210.

    I particularly am interested in the comment about exploring landscapes on much longer focal lengths.

    I look forward to other comments, but it looks as if the posts so far confirm what I have been told about landscape focal lengths.

    Regarding the question, "do I ever think my 90 is too long"????

    Actually, to answer that question, when I have used my 90 for landscapes, I tend to think I am getting too much information in the picture, and it begins to get a bit busy. Hard to find the "prime subject"

    Thanks again everyone.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Posts
    3,064

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    One of my favorite landscape photos that I ever took I did about 25 years ago with a 35mm camera and zoom lens. We have a Japanese garden section in our Botanical Gardens here in St. Louis. I wanted to take a photo of a wooden bridge over a small lake. In that lake there is a big hunk of white limestone sticking up out of the lake which I wanted to include in the photo. To do this with the composition that I had in mind, I had to compress everything using a longer focal length. I used my zoom set at 135mm or a litttle less.

    When shooting landscapes sometimes a longer focal length can be better than a shorter one.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Portland, OR USA
    Posts
    747

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    I have the same lens selection as you, plus a 305 G-Claron that comes in handy on occasion, and I can't imagine needing a different setup for landscapes. My 150 and 210 are my most-used lenses. If you need wide, the 90 will do the job. My 120 is my least-used focal length, but it has its moments.

    Peter Gomena

  10. #10
    God loves a tryer Scotty230358's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Lancashire UK
    Posts
    185

    Re: Confused... WA lens is a must for landscape?

    For about 95% of my landscape work I have never gone wider than 120mm with the majority of shots taken with my 180mm lens and even then this focal length seems to have a wide view (don't ask me to explain this because I can't) I recently bought a 450mm lens and find it surprisingly useful for landscape work (if only it wasn't so damn heavy)

Similar Threads

  1. Single lens optics & aperture placement
    By monkeymon in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-Jun-2010, 10:11
  2. Lens design & glass types
    By IanG in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 31-Mar-2009, 17:20
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 19-Mar-2009, 22:39
  4. My stupid lens question.
    By e. a. smith in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 20-Mar-2007, 15:54

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •