Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Best Landscape Lens for Canon EOS 6D?
#1
Would love some advice for a good landscape lens.

 

    I bought the Canon EOS 6D.. Now looking to buy the lens. Looking for a good low light landscape lens. Thoughts as of now are the


~‘Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM.. or Zeiss Canon Distagon T* 2,8/21 mm ZE



 

My question is there any other lens in this ballpark I should be thinking about? I am new to photography so not in love with the fact the Zeiss doesn’t have auto focus, but the reviews look great. I also don’t like the fact it’s not water resistant.. How much of a factor is this?  Would it not be able to get wet what so ever?..I will be shooting around waterfalls in conditions such as Iceland..



Or do you guys think the Cannon 24mm would be a better bet.. would that be wide enough?



 

Thanks you,.  anything thing helps! 



#2
What about Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS - not as fast but thanks to the image stabilizer, it should be equiv. to at least "f/2", maybe even "f/1.4" - and it provides more DoF in those situations than those prime lenses. This assumes that the resulting slower shutter speed is Ok for you though (thus an emphasised bridalveil effect on waterfalls) .

The Sigma 20mm f/1.4 ART may be also worth a look.

 

Waterfalls can be a bit tough in terms of spray ... depends on how close you wonna get.

 

I'm slightly wondering about the "low light" requirement. Iceland may have some bad weather but it's not as if there's no good one. The weather is frequently changing actually. Or are you deliberately intending to shoot at dusk/dawn or during winter time? 

#3
Well landscape in my book, isn't the kingdom of ultrawides but rather standard range.

If you one and only one prime, any 28 or 35mm will do.

However it's more practical to carry a zoom lens, and here you have a myriad of offerings, you   won't go wrong with anu of them

24-70f2.8 (both will do), 24-70f4IS, 24-105f4IS (here you have to correct distortions at 24mm) or even in the non L world you have plenty of decent performers.

however all depends on what you mean by landscape, for what you are describing you don't need fast lenses, be sure you get a sturdy tripod and a decent polarizer though.

Stepped down almost all lenses will perform decently so whatever you get you won't be disappointed.

A medium tele lens in the 50-100mm range is often quite useful for waterfalls, I never  shot waterfalls with an ultrawide.

 

Just a tip, invest more in your location as well your gear, give great attention to lighting even if it means rising as early as 4 AM or waiting hours for the best lighting. even if you are using digital it is wise to bracket focus and exposure 
#4
Landscapes can be photographed with a whole range of focal lengths. If you decided on a very wide FOV24 to 20mm is fine.

The Zeiss is very expensive. It will be fine with waterfall spay, as will other lenses, just don't take a shower with them. Your camera won't like that.

 

The Canon EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM will be fine too, just less wide, less heavy and less expensive. With DPP you can get better results with the Canon than with the Zeiss due to DPP's DLO part.

 

Landscape photos usually are taken with closed down apertures, so big aperture primes are not thaaaat important. So you can also look at the EF 16-35mm f4 L IS USM. It will give you a range of focal lengths.

 

A very small travel option would be the Voigtlander 20mm f3.5 SL II N. And the old Canon EF 20mm f2.8 USM still does a pretty good job for closed down landscape stuff.

#5
There's no such thing as "the best landscape lens", I'm sorry. Some photogs don't like wide-angle for landscapes, for others like me it can't be wide enough. Although I agree to "for landscapes fast lenses are not needed", I simply don't provide fast and non-fast lenses to go with. My fast lenses have also to do landscapes and so far they managed. Yes, image stabilization is quite good these days, but to play with wide-angle wide open there's only one way... When I'm traveling and taking pictures in a city at night, I don't feel so comfortable with the setup of a tripod.

 

But in your scenario I also tend to the already recommended lenses and would like to add, a wider angle than 24 mm for full frame can very easily lead to diagonal waterfalls if you want to put them out of center in your composition. When you need more field of view, you can do so as well by using a 35 mm in portrait orientation, shoot a panorama and stitch afterwards together. While saying so, I hardly do that, I simply don't want to carry a panorama head, too.

#6
Well I would also recommend Canon 70-200mmf4 L cery sharp and affordable, wonderful on tripod.

Other dirt cheap yet wonderful lenses to consider : Canon 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM dirt cheap but can will gove you a great job stepped down.

#7
I would second the choice of 16-35L f4 for a UWA ... nice sharpness and contrast, also dust/water resistant with filer on. That beeing said your 6D might not welcome intensive  water spray if you come really close to the fall.  If I may suggest,  take your tele lens as well, some of Iceland's landscapes really beg for  a 200-300mm  range,  unless compression of the perspectve is totally not your thing Smile   My choices would be then,  a 16-35L f4 and 70-300L  with a fast 20 to 35mm if you plan to go in autumn/winter for the aurora borealis.

 

And yes, I love Iceland  too Smile

#8
Quote:I would second the choice of 16-35L f4 for a UWA ... nice sharpness and contrast, also dust/water resistant with filer on. That beeing said your 6D might not welcome intensive  water spray if you come really close to the fall.  If I may suggest,  take your tele lens as well, some of Iceland's landscapes really beg for  a 200-300mm  range,  unless compression of the perspectve is totally not your thing Smile   My choices would be then,  a 16-35L f4 and 70-300L  with a fast 20 to 35mm if you plan to go in autumn/winter for the aurora borealis.

 

And yes, I love Iceland  too Smile
Thank you wojtt,


   yes I am definitely planning on the northern lights. that is why I was looking for something fast such as the 24mm f/1.4L<b>...  </b>but I do like the idea of having more of a range with the 16-35L f4.. would this lens be ok for shooting the northern lights?... if not, if you had to choose one lens (excluding the tele). What do you think you would take as a overall landscape, but also with the thought of shooting at night for northern lights?.
#9
Quote: the 16-35L f4.. would this lens be ok for shooting the northern lights?
http://www.lofotenbilder.no/EN/northern-...raphy.html
#10
I like this site for information on shooting astro: http://www.lonelyspeck.com/ 

 

the samyang 24 1.4 should also be on your list for shooting at night.

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)