Super-wide angles - what they purposed for?

[Jimbo]

I like the 20mm and 15mm. I bought the voigtlander 12mm, and have had issues with foreground. I mounted it onto a 6 x 7 back, just to boast the world's widest lens. Here's a shot of a local vineyard. Fuji Velvia ASA 50, Voigtlander Bessa I SMT. This shot is with the 15mm Voigtlander Heliar.

 

[teo]

Roland, that photo of the Great Wall (I think) is beautiful.

It's San Marino, in Italy.
And it's beautiful, aready added to my favorites when seen in the gallery.
Bravo!

 

[dll927]

The comments about foreground space are interesting.

Henri Cartier-Bresson, when asked about the 90mm (Leica) lens, replied, "oh, that's the lens that shortens the foreground". I suppose that's one way to put it.

I would tend to agree that wide-angles aren't much use for "people" shots. They are more at home with landscapes and wide-open space.

 

[wlewisiii]

I've had my eyes on a used 19-35mm zoom for Canon EF, but was wondering if I'd really get that much benefit over 28mm or 24mm. Looking at these makes me think I need to go back and see if that lens is still available... 😉

William

 

[Sparrow]

And of course a 21 just won’t cut it inside a mini 😀

 

[shadowfox]

It really comes down to knowing how to use one... I can go out all day with just a 21mm, a 15mm is a little more specialised...

The 90 degree FOV of 21mm in 135 but in MF

This is Borobudur in Central Java, Indonesia, yes?

 

[shadowfox]

I've used 15 and 21, but given up on them and only use 28 and up today.
The problem with the super wides is that you normally have to include a lot of
foreground to make good pictures other than lens tests. 28 and up is
easier and part of learning photography for me has been to learn how
to crop right. Here are some of my 15mm shots:

Roland.

Woooow!!!
Is this hanging on a wall somewhere? 😀

 

[Dektol Dan]

It's far more costly to make a good wide without a bunch of distortion. Learning how to shoot one is really quite fun, it's like balancing with one foot while standing on a rubber ball or flying a helicopter. Most folks who come to photography with the traditional 'fill the frame' approach to composition will often fail miserably with wides although that approach usually leads to the big nosed dog, human or leaning back street shots that they are known for.

Wides excel in the hands of one who has mastered edge composition or quilt composition.

Here's a traditional 'big nose' shot and a quilt/edge composition shot. Done right any distortion makes for very little distraction in the composition.

Both were shot with a 21mm Zuiko on an OM4. Kodak Porta (of course!!!)

 

[dannynono]

William, are you thinking of the 16-35mm zoom for EF. I'd do it. A 17-40 zoom lives on my 20D. Now if I can find a good wide for my RF.

 

[craygc]

This is Borobudur in Central Java, Indonesia, yes?

Absolutely... 😀

 

[Jimbo]

20mm Russar

20mm Russar

Here's a shot from the 1999 Portland Rose Festival. 20mm Russar. Scanned with Nikon LS2000. The very flat, symettrical, Russar, on a Canon 7, had incredible depth of field. Can't recall how I framed this one, as the Canon 7 has no accessory shoe for a viewfinder.

Russar, a Russian design from the 1930's, was a predecessor to the super angulon.

Jim

 

[Jimbo]

Most Photographed Place in US

Most Photographed Place in US

Here's a shot at Rockport, Massachusetts. Lens, 21mm Rokkor on Minolta SLR. Never shoulda sold the lens, a gem. Color negative film, LS 2000 scan.

The wide angle give this picture a true depth effect. Near-Far composition is why Ansel loved his 90mm so much. (23mm equivalent)

 

[wlewisiii]

William, are you thinking of the 16-35mm zoom for EF. I'd do it. A 17-40 zoom lives on my 20D. Now if I can find a good wide for my RF.

No, the one I'm looking at is a ( _cheap_ ) 19-35 from Promaster (Sigma made IIUC) as I can't afford the Canon glass at this point. My thought is to get it and see if I like using wider than 28 & then getting the better Canon lens if I do.

William

 

[Jimbo]

Russar details

Russar details

Always wanted to try that one out, Jim. How do you like the contrast it
generates ? Also, is the LTM version coupled ? What is the min. focus ?

Thanks,

Roland.


It focuses to 0.5 meter, 20 Inches. The DOF lets you get a lot more. There's no rangefiner cam, but these are rarely worth the $$'s for the shorter focal lengths. The contrast is very good, likely better than a retro focus design, because of fewer elements. However, the two bulbous outside elements on the outside are NOT coated. But the front one is well recessed inside, and this prevents the typical ghosting prevalent in the retros.

PS: I was told that you should shoot this one at f/11 or smaller diameter. THere's some coma that goes away then.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

William, I had one of those: it was a Tokina AF 193 (19-35 f3.5-4.5). I sold it because I didn't use it enough... and it's probably the only lens I regret having sold at one time.

They're relatively inexpensive, and come badged as Tokina, Promaster, Sigma and the like. I think you'll like them in your Rebel, but it takes a bit to get used to them.

Just remember never to use this lens with flash at its widest end: awful light falloff...

Have fun shopping! 🙂

 

[dazedgonebye]

Certainly ultrawide has a "narrow" range of uses when it comes to people shots, but I think it can work.

16mm equivalent on a DSLR (forgive me).

15mm Heliar on Bessa R3A

 

[Igor.Burshteyn]

widest I use is 18mm OM lens, absolutly love it. When I travel I think it's 70% time on my camera.

 

[Leighgion]

I really like super wides myself, though all I've got is a Nikkor 24mm. I think I want something wider. Properly used, you can get that really grandiose sense of scale from landscapes to the insides of rooms.

Every focal length range is good for different things, and I don't see the super wide is being any less comprehendible than the next.

 

[williams473]

Gee, you think Stewart is getting at the fact that there are many, many uses for wide angle lenses? Good point Stewart! I personally think image of the girls on the porch is a very creative use of the lens and format by the way.

I usually stay away from shooting with anything wider than a 28 when shooting 35mm, because you can fall into the trap of seeing every potential composition as;

"LOOK AT THIS OBJECT IN THE FOREGROUND, ALL ISOLATED AND ALONE AND SHARP. Now admire all the other sharp stuff in the background that's all distorted and cool lookin', compositionally supporting this one, dominant object." 🙂 It's a tried and true formula you see ad nauseum in magazines and online - especially in travel journals.

 

[williams473]

Also forgot to mention a quick story that relates to this - I was having an older friend with a good eye critique some work I had done a while back - I was photographing a guy sitting on a bench in Washington, DC. The subject was sitting with his legs crossed, and for a time I shot from in front of him, from a low angle, and I didn't really notice how much the guy's boot was dominating the foreground of the composition. My friend looked at the print for all of 2 seconds, put it down and kept moving, simply saying "nice boot!" with a smirk. I got it. You gotta be real aware of your proximity to everything when using those wide angle lenses.