RobE17
newbie
Reged: 15/07/2008
Posts: 2
|
|
I'm off to Iceland in November and obviously want to take some great shots of the landscape. I own a K10D and the only wide angle lens I have is the 18-55mm kit lens.
Can anyone suggest any other Pentax lenses that I could use for landscapes? Thought about the 17-70mm as I could use that at other times of the year.
I also am looking at buying a prime lens for my airshow photography - any suggestions?
|
john_g
Pooh-bah Hoo-ha
Reged: 09/05/2007
Posts: 2540
Loc: Surrey
|
|
The difference between 17mm and 18mm is negligible. If I were in your position I'd be looking at either the Pentax 12-24mm (if I had plenty of cash!) or, more affordably and arguably as good, the Sigma 10-20mm. The latter has the advantage of going even wider and, at this wide an angle, the 2mm does make a difference. If you don't have a telephoto, I have the Samsung equivalents of the 18-55mm and the 50-200mm lenses that come with the twin-lens camera kit and find these both work well for me.
--------------------
John
Who could suppose that angels move the stars, or be so superstitious as to suppose that because one cannot see one's soul at the end of a microscope, it does not exist?
R.D.Laing The Politics Of Experience
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_gass
|
Roger_Provins
Made-it Man
Reged: 22/10/2005
Posts: 3222
Loc: Gloucester, UK
|
|
Landscape photography doesn't equal wide-angle. Any focal length can be used from the widest to extreme telephoto.
If it's wide you really want the 17-70mm, whilst a better lens, is not going to gain you anything worthwhile at the wide end. To make a difference you'll need to consider something like the 10-20mm Sigma.
John just posted whilst I was typing - ah well 
--------------------
Rog
Edited by Roger_Provins (17/07/2008 06:57)
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9541
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
I agree with the others. For increased field of view you are looking at lenses in the 10-20mm range. There a several models available (I have the Sigma 10-20) but beware that the Tokina & Pentax 10-17mm zooms are fisheyes and will give the curved linear distortions typical of a fisheye lens.
I would also recommend getting a longer lens as landscape isn't just about wide vistas - which can be very disappointing if all you end up with is a vast boring foreground - but also about detail and recession. Something in the 70-200/300mm range is worth considering.
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is more fun than one in the cupboard........
|
Per
old hand
Reged: 28/11/2005
Posts: 720
Loc: UK Berkshire
|
|
Iceland is an amazing place and a real challenge for landscape photography - have fun!
Personally, I found that most of my best results were taken with a 70-200 and I didn't get many vistas that worked. [See the April 5th AP for some examples]
I even took one image with a 400mm+1.4 extender (i.e. 540mm full frame) - not something that I do very often!
--------------------
There are two things to aim at in life: first, to get what you want; and after
that, to enjoy it. Only the wisest of mankind achieve the second.
Logan Pearsall Smith (1865-1946)
|
willie45
old hand
Reged: 08/05/2006
Posts: 761
|
|
If you want a wide angle lens here's my tuppence worth. I own the Sigma 10-20mm and it is a really great lens. A real wide angle for digital and great fun to use. Focus is very fast and reliable and build quality is great. You even get a good quality bag to carry it around in supplied.
I use mine a lot and I love it
Of course focal length is a matter of choice and you need to decide which type of lens, wide, tele, or other you want.
Willie
Edited by willie45 (17/07/2008 22:21)
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3724
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
and there's always the Sigma 12-24 HSM.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2463
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
It all depends on your style of landcsape. Generally what matters for landscape is sharp from front to rear. This is not demanding on the lens since it will be stopped down. What matters is that you carry and are prepared to use a tripod and remote release. Unless you know that your existing lens is too narrow or two wide then you have no need to buy another lens. Impeccable attention to detail and a firm camera platform are more important than fancy glass.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3724
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
But you can not create the wide angle effect with a kit lens and tripod.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
jeallen01
Reged: 16/07/2002
Posts: 71
|
|
Quote:
I also am looking at buying a prime lens for my airshow photography - any suggestions?
Suggest from experience, and from looking around at other photographers, that a prime lens at airshows is far too limiting - either the image is too small, or the aircraft is too big, to get a well-framed shot on fast moving targets!
You need a pretty fast lens to allow high shutter speeds. I used to use a superzoom (28-200 Sigma, F3.5-5.6), and an 80-320 (Pentax F4-F5.6], but you often have to use these wide open and then they lack "bite".
Have now bought a 70-200 F2.8 Sigma (s/h @ £400) and that really does have some "bite" - and it is fast enough to be used with a 1.4x telextender (I have a basic Kenko, but I might buy a matched Sigma 1.4x) and even with that the images are still sharp when stopped down 1 stop to give an actual F5.6. Much better than the other two lenses used at the same actual aperture in similar circumstances.
Some people use 50-500, 120-400 or 170-400 Sigmas (or Canon/Nikon equivalent if they are really rich!) but these look very heavy and cumbersome in comparison with the 70-200 Sigma & converter!
And I agree about the 10-20mm Sigma - it was the first extra lens I bought for my GX10, and it is sharp and easy to use. Also VERY useful when shooting inside buildings on holiday. You only have to look at the images in many of the current magazines and a disproportionately large number have been taken using this lens!
John
Edited by Benchista (22/07/2008 10:58)
|
Hotblack
Dead Horse Flogger
Reged: 07/03/2006
Posts: 7463
Loc: Upstairs in the spare room.
|
|
Quote:
But you can not create the wide angle effect with a kit lens and tripod.
True...but not all landscape photography has to be wide angle. I've regularly shot landscapes with a 300mm lens for compressed perspective.
To quote El Sid (Nigel) above
Quote:
I would also recommend getting a longer lens as landscape isn't just about wide vistas - which can be very disappointing if all you end up with is a vast boring foreground - but also about detail and recession.
--------------------
Cheers
David
David J White Photography
Edited by Hotblack (22/07/2008 09:17)
|
Benchista
Wich Tyler
Reged: 11/08/2000
Posts: 38306
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere, baby
|
|
Indeed so. Over the weekend, I was shooting landscapes with lenses from 15mm fisheye to 300mm (on full frame) - all have a place. Wideangles are a LOT harder to use well in landscape photography than telephotos, too, IMVHO.
--------------------
Nick
www.nbrphoto.com
Light and Shade II - the new blog
|
Gordon_McGeachie
Joke Historian
Reged: 19/01/2007
Posts: 4248
Loc: East Yorkshire,
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I also am looking at buying a prime lens for my airshow photography - any suggestions?
Suggest from experience, and from looking around at other photographers, that a prime lens at airshows is far too limiting - either the image is too small, or the aircraft is too big, to get a well-framed shot on fast moving targets!
You need a pretty fast lens to allow high shutter speeds. I used to use a superzoom (28-200 Sigma, F3.5-5.6), and an 80-320 (Pentax F4-F5.6], but you often have to use these wide open and then they lack "bite".
Have now bought a 70-200 F2.8 Sigma (s/h @ £400) and that really does have some "bite" - and it is fast enough to be used with a 1.4x telextender (I have a basic Kenko, but I might buy a matched Sigma 1.4x) and even with that the images are still sharp when stopped down 1 stop to give an actual F5.6. Much better than the other two lenses used at the same actual aperture in similar circumstances.
Some people use 50-500, 120-400 or 170-400 Sigmas (or Canon/Nikon equivalent if they are really rich!) but these look very heavy and cumbersome in comparison with the 70-200 Sigma & converter!
And I agree about the 10-20mm Sigma - it was the first extra lens I bought for my GX10, and it is sharp and easy to use. Also VERY useful when shooting inside buildings on holiday. You only have to look at the images in many of the current magazines and a disproportionately large number have been taken using this lens!
John
When I go to an airshow I take along both my Dynax 7d with the Sigma 28-300 attached, and the Sony A700 with the Sigma 400 attached,I find that this covers all my needs.
I am looking at getting something along the lines of the Sigma 170-500 or the 50-500, or save and get the Sony 300f2.8
--------------------
She (Avro Vulcan XH558) Took To The Sky Like A Lovesick Angel.
|
Learning
Ethelred the Ill-Named
Reged: 26/09/2006
Posts: 2463
Loc: Nottingham
|
|
Quote:
But you can not create the wide angle effect with a kit lens and tripod.
But does the 'wide angle effect' look right to your audiance? If you really need wide angle do you want lots of sky and forground? If not get quality and stich two or more frames together for a panorama.
|
jeallen01
Reged: 16/07/2002
Posts: 71
|
|
Quote:
When I go to an airshow I take along both my Dynax 7d with the Sigma 28-300 attached, and the Sony A700 with the Sigma 400 attached,I find that this covers all my needs.
I am looking at getting something along the lines of the Sigma 170-500 or the 50-500, or save and get the Sony 300f2.8
My, what big muscles you have - or you will soon develop! (and sweat off pounds in the process!)
Personally, carting a lot of stuff for miles around somewhere like Waddington and Duxford in the rain, wind and sun (like I did very recently - but with just the GX10 and 70-200, and couple of other small lenses, in a small backpack) can take the gloss off the day - and your eye off the aircraft picture opportunities. You can spend too much time swapping cameras and lenses, and missing the shots (and I have done that too) - so my current philosophy for these events is now the KISS principle!
John
MN: Quote Fixed
Edited by Fen (22/07/2008 17:46)
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
