SheffieldPhotos
newbie
Reged: 29/12/2007
Posts: 47
|
|
I have a Nikon D80 with a kit 18-135mm lens. I recently did a course where the instructor said I should upgrade the lens (for landscape photography) to a 10-20mm one for better picture quality. Probably a Sigma.
Do people agree? What benefit will I see in my pictures? Nikon or Sigma?
She also didn't seem keen on Nikon for some reason and said the camera 'to have' was a Canon EOS-5D. Is it worth buying upgraded lenses for mine or saving up for a new camera instead?
|
sjaszczak
A Real Gentleman
Reged: 08/06/2005
Posts: 899
Loc: York
|
|
Quote:
the instructor said I should upgrade the lens (for landscape photography) to a 10-20mm one for better picture quality. Probably a Sigma.
Do people agree? What benefit will I see in my pictures? Nikon or Sigma?
Firstly, you don't necessarily need a 10-20mm for landscapes. My 17-50mm suits me just fine. Think about the range you really believe you need then do some reading up on them.
Secondly, you'll be able to get much better than your kit lens...but it's what you do with it that counts and I wouldn't necessarily believe that a Nikon would give much of a benefit over a good third party lens...cos there are some very good ones out there these days.
Quote:
She also didn't seem keen on Nikon for some reason and said the camera 'to have' was a Canon EOS-5D. Is it worth buying upgraded lenses for mine or saving up for a new camera instead?
A touch of snobbery from the instructor perhaps? I take it she owns a 5D herself then?
In all seriousness though, I doubt there's much difference between Canon and Nikon. I bought into Canon because I liked the feel of the 40D, because I had read some good reviews and because of the cashback promotion!
If I were you, I certainly wouldn't jump ship because some instructor likes to pimp Canon kit. I'd find a camera you're happy using (if that's the D80, then great!) then save up for some good glass and not worry about what someone else thinks.
--------------------
Steve
My Flickr
|
Dom_Rivers
addict
Reged: 03/04/2007
Posts: 417
|
|
Nonsense, the 18-135 is quite sharp enough especially from F4 onwards at 18mm (27mm equiv) to use for landscape work, what little distortion is evident (and it will be on all wide zooms to some extent, including the Sigma)is easily fixed in most basic image editing packages. Sure if you really wish to start specialising in ultra wide landscapes look for a wider lens, but the 18-135 is anything but rubbish.
|
beejaybee
Marvin
Reged: 18/07/2007
Posts: 4200
Loc: Really Here In Name Only
|
|
Quote:
If I were you, I certainly wouldn't jump ship because some instructor likes to pimp Canon kit. I'd find a camera you're happy using (if that's the D80, then great!) then save up for some good glass and not worry about what someone else thinks.
As a Canon 5D user .... I definitely agree.
If you need a zoom lens that goes out to 10mm then there really isn't much else to choose from than the Sigma. Not that there's much wrong with it (though it will vignette awfully on a 5D!). It's certainly true that it's much easier to get a choice of high quality prime & zoom wide angle lenses for a full frame camera but there is plenty of high quality glass that will go out to 28mm equivalent for the D80 - like e.g. the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
I have a Nikon D80 with a kit 18-135mm lens. I recently did a course where the instructor said I should upgrade the lens (for landscape photography) to a 10-20mm one for better picture quality.
Utter twaddle!!! She clearly needs to learn something about landscape photography before she teaches it......  You only have to read AP fairly regularly to realise that just as many fine landscape pictures are taken with medium and even long telephoto lenses.
Any ultra-zoom is a bit of an optical compromise but most of the modern ones are far better than they were even a few years ago, especially stopped down. The 10-20 may only be a 2x zoom but ultra wide angle zooms are very tricky things to design and use. IMO a 10-20mm lens is more likely to frustrate an inexperienced user than inspire them. It's all too easy to get vast acres of utterly dull foreground or sky while the meat of the picture is reduced to a minuscule dot in the background........
Quote:
What benefit will I see in my pictures?
None to begin with... I have had my 10-20mm Sigma for over a year now and am only just getting to grips with what it can do, what it can't do and how to control, or use creatively, the distortions and convergence/divergence of verticals that are inherent in this kind of lens. It's not a lens I'd honestly recommend to a beginner.
Quote:
Nikon or Sigma?
Quality wise the Sigma is probably about the best you get in the price bracket though I imagine Tamrons 11-18 is pretty similar as is the Tokina 12-24 (though that's a little more expensive). The Nikkor lenses may well be a bit better but they are considerably more expensive......
Quote:
She also didn't seem keen on Nikon for some reason and said the camera 'to have' was a Canon EOS-5D. Is it worth buying upgraded lenses for mine or saving up for a new camera instead?
This woman is clearly not fit to be teaching photography. She is meant to be teaching technique not peddling her own prejudices nor persuading herself that she's bought the 'right' camera by convincing others to do the same... BTW that's not to be inferred as any kind of anti-Canon comment as I have and use Canon digital cameras.
The camera 'to have' is the one you are comfortable using not the latest trendy model. Indeed the camera 'to have' amongst many of the real top landscape pro's is not digital at all but still uses that funny chemical stuff called film that comes in 5x4 inch sheets....... but I bet you don't fancy rushing out to buy one of those....... 
If you want to improve image quality then by all means save for better lenses - and even today primes still have the edge though there are few that are really wide enough for APS format digitals - and buy yourself a good sturdy tripod, that will probably do more for your image quality than anything.
Personally I would write a letter to the institute that ran/runs the course suggesting that their instructors would do better to concentrate on basics and technique rather than trying to sell cameras and lenses...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Nod
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 08/04/2006
Posts: 4042
Loc: Devon, UK.
|
|
IMO, the course instructor who was "pimping" Canon over Nikon is talking cobblers. Either system will give great results with the right user and appropriate glass.
Telling you you should have a wider lens strikes me as a bit odd too - I would have said that a decent tutor would have given you pointers as to how to get the best results from the kit you have - maybe using panorama stitching software or a similar technique.
--------------------
MATWSIJ.....
To avoid being offended, please insert apropriate smiley.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3387
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
I don't think you necessarily get "better picture quality" from a wind angle lens, but you do get a wider angle. I agree that it's possible to get a huge expanse of foreground or sky but it's also possible that that is what you are aiming for. You can also get some distortion, but you can also correct it or avoid it to an extent. These are not faults, they're effects.
I took my Sigma 12-24 out at the weekend and I got some shots that I'm happy with at zoom lengths from 12 to 24mm. I think that it would be worthwhile looking at a lens in the 10-20 range but I don't think that I myself would be happy to use the phrase "better picture quality." But you may get a shot that may not be possible with a less wide lens.
If you get a Sigma 12-24 you will be able to use it on a 5D in the future too.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9100
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
Quote:
If you get a Sigma 12-24 you will be able to use it on a 5D in the future too.
Or on a D3 when he finally upgrades from his D80........ 
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3387
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
ah, the mention of a 5D threw me! 
There are of course other FF cameras available, and there'll probably be more in the future too. That may just phase a few lecturers 
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
SheffieldPhotos
newbie
Reged: 29/12/2007
Posts: 47
|
|
Wow! What a great response. Thanks for all your comments I am greatly encouraged by the feedback.
Maybe I should defend the instructor to some extent as I gained some good advice along the way. I'll stick to the kit lens until I feel it is a real restriction, which until now I have rarely felt, certainly on wide-angle.
I agree, the first mistake of landscape photography is to try and take in too much and end-up with acres of nothing!
I'll save-up my pennies for some Lee ND grads which I think I need much more.
|
john_g
Pooh-bah Hoo-ha
Reged: 09/05/2007
Posts: 2156
Loc: Surrey
|
|
If I had the money to spare I guess I'd like to get an extreme wide-angle lens but I havent so... I have managed to get some great results using my standard zoom, taking a mosaic of shots and stitching them together to produce a panorama. It's got its limitations, mainly due to trying to stitch together images that can have distorted perspective but, provided you work quickly so that the light doesn't change, you can get some great results for subjects that don't move, like landscapes.
--------------------
John
The best things in life are not things.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_gass
|
NorthernMonkey
enthusiast
Reged: 01/05/2007
Posts: 269
|
|
Nearly all lenses are sharp at f8 and f11, and you can stitch multiple pictures together if you want to go wider.
If landscapes are your thing, then what you need much more than a 5D, or a wide lens, is a totally bomb proof tripod.
Use the money on a Manfrotto 055, or similarly solid tripod, and you wont regret it.
While I find personally I dont get on with nikons as much as Canon's, I really don't think going from a d80 to 5d would make much difference at all. Certainly not as much as making sure your pictures are sharp by using ISO 100, f11, and having a solid tripod to attach your camera to
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
