louisb
Well-known
I was wondering what lenses R-D1'ers recommend for landscape photography.
I currently own a 28/2.8 Elmarit, 15 CV and a 50 cron. I find that increasingly I am leaving the cron on for everything, including landscapes.
I was wondering if the 21/24/35 asph lenses are worth the money when it comes to landscape photography?
LouisB
I currently own a 28/2.8 Elmarit, 15 CV and a 50 cron. I find that increasingly I am leaving the cron on for everything, including landscapes.
I was wondering if the 21/24/35 asph lenses are worth the money when it comes to landscape photography?
LouisB
peter_n
Veteran
I assume that for landscapes one attruibute you look for is edge to edge sharpness (I'm not a landscape photog). I have the 24mm & 35mm ASPH lenses and they are certainly sharp. But the 50mm/f2.8 Elmar-M is also very sharp edge to edge at smaller apertures.
FrankS
Registered User
You can do landscapes with any lens from wide angle to telephoto and those in between. You need to find what works for you, not necessarily what works for others.
oscroft
Veteran
What Frank says.
Personally, I prefer a longer lens for landscapes (I don't have an R-D1, but my thoughts are general), because I like a more compressed perspective and I like to pick out interesting features and shapes. Other people prefer (and some are brilliant with) wide angle lenses, though I find it hard to use a w/a for landscapes (and I've seen so many very poor "look, there's the sky and there's the ground and there's a distant wavy line in between" attempts at landscapes).
So no, I don't think there can sensibly be any "recommended" lens for landscapes - you simply have to develop your own style and the lens choice will follow.
Personally, I prefer a longer lens for landscapes (I don't have an R-D1, but my thoughts are general), because I like a more compressed perspective and I like to pick out interesting features and shapes. Other people prefer (and some are brilliant with) wide angle lenses, though I find it hard to use a w/a for landscapes (and I've seen so many very poor "look, there's the sky and there's the ground and there's a distant wavy line in between" attempts at landscapes).
So no, I don't think there can sensibly be any "recommended" lens for landscapes - you simply have to develop your own style and the lens choice will follow.
FrankS
Registered User
It kind of depends on the particular landscape you are picturing as well - what you have to work with.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I should think that most decent lenses would work well for you.
FL, of course is a matter of style.
Given the 1.5 crop you are dealing with, edge to edge sharpness shouldn't be a problem on any decent quality lens. Add to that the fact that most landscapes are shot stopped down and the demands on a lens for should be pretty easy to meet.
FL, of course is a matter of style.
Given the 1.5 crop you are dealing with, edge to edge sharpness shouldn't be a problem on any decent quality lens. Add to that the fact that most landscapes are shot stopped down and the demands on a lens for should be pretty easy to meet.
iml
Well-known
I use 50mm for most of my photography, including landscapes (that means a 35mm on the R-D1, given the crop factor), but I like the CV 21/4.0 too, even though it vignettes a lot on the Epson (an effect I often leave in, or minimise by a bit of cropping). It seems to give a FOV around 28mm on the R-D1.
On a film camera I rarely go wider than 35mm, and the full 21mm FOV of the CV 21/4.0 usually feels too wide to me. But it's all down to personal style, as Frank says. For me, an R-D1 with 35mm lens is good for 90% of my digital photography, the 21mm covers the other 10%. I very occasionally use a 50mm on the R-D1, giving a FOV around 75mm, but it never feels quite right to me. Others swear by a mid-telephoto for landscapes, but I've never got comfortable with it.
Ian
On a film camera I rarely go wider than 35mm, and the full 21mm FOV of the CV 21/4.0 usually feels too wide to me. But it's all down to personal style, as Frank says. For me, an R-D1 with 35mm lens is good for 90% of my digital photography, the 21mm covers the other 10%. I very occasionally use a 50mm on the R-D1, giving a FOV around 75mm, but it never feels quite right to me. Others swear by a mid-telephoto for landscapes, but I've never got comfortable with it.
Ian
Terao
Kiloran
I've used the 12 and the 21 CVs *a lot*
The more I use them the more I gravitate to tighter lenses though, think I used the 12 about 2% of the time in Portugal recently, shot the 21 a fair bit, and ended up walking around with the 50mm f/1.2 slapped on it most of the time. Looking forward to using the 35mm f/1.2 Nokton that arrived today from Ffordes...
The more I use them the more I gravitate to tighter lenses though, think I used the 12 about 2% of the time in Portugal recently, shot the 21 a fair bit, and ended up walking around with the 50mm f/1.2 slapped on it most of the time. Looking forward to using the 35mm f/1.2 Nokton that arrived today from Ffordes...
Gid
Well-known
Its a personal thing - what you like. I mainly use a 35 on the R-D1, followed by a 50, for just about everything. Sometimes I'll stick the 21 on - gives a sense of openness or scale that is not apparent with longer lenses and can be useful when the main subject is isolated within a large expanse of landscape.
louisb
Well-known
Thanks for the input
Thanks for the input
Thanks for all the responses. I just wanted to compare experiences. So far, I've found that my 50 cron, which is really a 75 cron on the R-D1 gives me the best results for landscape shots (actually the best results for most shots).
(Bignor Hill, West Sussex)
R-D1 Summcron 50/2
Thanks for the input
Thanks for all the responses. I just wanted to compare experiences. So far, I've found that my 50 cron, which is really a 75 cron on the R-D1 gives me the best results for landscape shots (actually the best results for most shots).
(Bignor Hill, West Sussex)
R-D1 Summcron 50/2