Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

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

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    6,667

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

    Roman Laranc relies heavily on a 210mm for his superb landscapes. Just sayin'
    I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    732

    Again, to every responder

    Great responses and much good information, in such a short period of time. I will continue to check in on this.

    However, from what I have seen so far, I will work with what I have. If anything, and if I decide to add to the lens list, I will likely go to a longer focal length. But, it seems I am set for a while.

    Thanks a lot. Every post has been interesting to me.

    As far as types of landscape... to the East of me is high desert country, rolling hills, ridges and sagebrush plus canyon country such as Snake River and Steens mountains. To the West I have pine forested mountains, rivers and the huge deciduous forested Willamette Valley, not to mention the Oregon Coastline. To the North, Mount Hood, Portland OR, the Columbia River basin, and to the South, more Mountains, Lakes and Streams. To the North East, the Strawberry mountains, what we refer to as the American Alps.

    I said travel, but not even sure I'll make it out of the state with all that's available nearby.

  3. #23
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,347

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

    I really think your question and postulated assumptions are ass–backwards aesthetics wise. Why not shoot first and ask questions later, unless as Kasaian suggests, you want to ape a specific photographer. Many people think to shoot landscape because it seems easy enough based on other talented photographers' work. It is in no way easy to create compelling landscape/nature compositions and print them, without a true appreciation, knowledge, and love of the subject itself – something which truly applies to any subject.

    Wide angles are useful for establishing near–far relationships. Longer focal lengths compress space and can deaden important (to you) elements of the landscape, rendering distant compositions emotionless, which to be sure may be overcome by color relationships, or by the talented printing Kasaian refers to. Cropping, particularly in natural situations with LF gear, may also be an important tool (for more, see Cropping a Negative).

    Not that it matters, but my most frequently used lens for 5X7 LF lanscape is 180mm (somewhat less than "normal" for that format) followed closely by 300mm (a short to medium tele). The 110mm Super Symar XL rarely comes out. This is not the case with medium and small formats.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    270

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

    I think a 90mm would cover most wide-angle situations, but certainly not all.

    IMHO shooting wider than 90mm can get frustrating because you have to deal with light falloff from the lens and a dim groundglass, which means more $ for a center filter and a brighter groundglass. You also have to be sure that your camera's standards are accurately zeroed. Any unintended swing or tilt will show. This means carefully checking the focus in the corners.

    For what it is worth, my most used landscape lens is the 100mm Ektar, though I did recently pick up a 58mm for those rare situations.
    Peter Y.

  5. #25

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Kuzano View Post

    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.
    For a shot that calls for a 90mm you'd see the best results. What lens to use is completely dependent on the photograph you're trying to create. Doesn't matter if it's landscape, portraiture or action sports.

    I like to have at least one wide angle and one telephoto lens at all times, and preferably something in between. I probably use my long lens (250) more then the other two because it places my main subject subject evenly within it's environment. This is due to the size ratio between the main subject and it's surrounding objects (ie - the main subject appears even in size or possibly diminished in relation to it's surroundings - giving a feeling of balance to all the objects in the frame).

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    San Joaquin Valley, California
    Posts
    6,667

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ROL View Post
    I really think your question and postulated assumptions are ass–backwards aesthetics wise. Why not shoot first and ask questions later, unless as Kasaian suggests, you want to ape a specific photographer. Many people think to shoot landscape because it seems easy enough based on other talented photographers' work. It is in no way easy to create compelling landscape/nature compositions and print them, without a true appreciation, knowledge, and love of the subject itself – something which truly applies to any subject.

    Wide angles are useful for establishing near–far relationships. Longer focal lengths compress space and can deaden important (to you) elements of the landscape, rendering distant compositions emotionless, which to be sure may be overcome by color relationships, or by the talented printing Kasaian refers to. Cropping, particularly in natural situations with LF gear, may also be an important tool (for more, see Cropping a Negative).

    Not that it matters, but my most frequently used lens for 5X7 LF lanscape is 180mm (somewhat less than "normal" for that format) followed closely by 300mm (a short to medium tele). The 110mm Super Symar XL rarely comes out. This is not the case with medium and small formats.
    I'm not suggesting to ape anyone. 210 is a very common non-WA lens for 4x5 shooters to have. If the OP has one, he can be inspired by the fact that the focal length is used quite successfully by Loranc (and John Sexton, for that matter) and can work with what he may likely already have before needing to chase after that illusive magic bullet
    I steal time at 1/125th of a second, so I don't consider my photography to be Fine Art as much as it is petty larceny.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Milford Pa.
    Posts
    2,912

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

    interesting. i use a "landscape" lenses that are very long.....12, 16 and 18 inches.....for portraits! i have never even shot a landscape with them.....maybe i should.
    My YouTube Channel has many interesting videos on Soft Focus Lenses and Wood Cameras. Check it out.

    My YouTube videos
    oldstyleportraits.com
    photo.net gallery

  8. #28
    Resident Heretic
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    USA, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,940

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

    For the longest time my widest lens for 5x4 was my 110mm SSXL. On the east coast of the USA, there aren't that many "grand vistas" needing a shorter lens for wider coverage. I found that my landscape work split pretty evenly between 110/150/240 mm lenses.

    It wasn't until I started traveling more to the west coast of the USA where there are grand vistas that I bought my 80mm SSXL. Now one of my favorite prints is from that lens.

    I'm just sayin' that your subject often tells you what focal length to use to capture it. If you don't need short lenses, don't buy any.

    Bruce Watson

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    438

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

    It seems that I shoot normal with any format. 50mm was my favourite lens on 35mm, I am limited to 80mm on my Yashicamat, and I am fond of my 150mm G-Claron for 4X5. Ironically, I recently discovered that my favourite photograph of all time (Clearing Winter Storm) was made with a 12" lens (Cooke Convertible) on 8X10.

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
  •