Landscape lens

Belo

Senior Member
I cant seem to make up my mind and would appreciate input from the forum members.

I was leaning towards a 16-35mm f4 for general landscape and wide angle :D but perhaps would require something for low light as I enjoy taking night shots. Should I be looking at a single focal lens rather?
 

§am

Senior Member
At 4x the price of the f/2, it really depends on your budget I'd say :)

I (with my little experience) would say how about the AF-S 28mm f/1.8 G?
 

Belo

Senior Member
I was concerned that it wouldn't be "wide" enough and wouldn't get everything. I haven't tried this lens will definitely give it a shot or two.
 

Shoots808

Senior Member
If it's for landscape stuff do you really need anything faster than f4? I mean most landscape stuff is shot more around the f8 - f16 area isn't it? I can recommend the Tokina 12-24 f4. great lens.
 
The AF-S 28mm f/1.8 G is About $700 new.

The 35mm f/1.8 is a DX lens and isn't optimal on a D600.

And the Nikon 35mm f/1.4G AF-S FX SWM Nikkor Lens is $1619.00 about 5 X as much,

as the Nikon 35mm f/2D AF FX lens that I originaly suggested.;)
 

Rick M

Senior Member
I just got the 28mm 1.8G it's great on the D600. I would not go any narrower than that. Check out the thread I started in the prime section to see some shots. Ultimately I will get something wider like the 16-35 or a new prime 20mm or below (if nikon cooperates). It would be nice to see a new 1.8G prime come out at 20mm or lower.
 

Belo

Senior Member
Ok so looking at the two, the 24mm gives you 84 degree angle and the 28mm a 75 degree angle the big difference the aperture at 1.4 and 1.8 respectively. I am simply blown away by my 50mm 1.4....

Why oh why is this so hard and will I miss the range the 16-35mm has to offer but sacrificing the aperture?
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
The 16-35 is quite a nice lens. It does have some distortion but that can be taken care off with post processing. But it's a great "one lens" solution for landscape. For night shots, it has VR and there's always the mono-tripod solution.

Your only other solution would be older lenses 20+28+35 lenses. Most of these are 2.8 but if you put them side by side with the newest 16-35, I "think" (tongue in cheek) the 16-35 has better IQ.
 

Belo

Senior Member
It seems as if the D600 distortion correction is pretty nifty and worked a charm with the 16-35mm I tried in the shop the other day.

This ain't helping as I am back to square one.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
I've found in my future lens planning, as far as primes, there isn't anything "great" under 24mm. That (to me) makes the 16-35 the choice (currently) for me. Primes generally trump zooms at IQ, although I hear the 16-35 is great so it is on my list.
 

Mestre

Senior Member
For landscape photos I always shoot between f/8 and f/13, so I don't really understand why the reason for big apartures :)

In FF I believe 24mm is the minimum but the 35mm will limit landscape photos a lot.
 

Dave_W

The Dude
Keep in mind that a significant percentage of landscape photography is really a panorama of several images so it's entirely plausible that you've already enough lens for great landscape photos. That said, if I were in the market for a wide angle lens it would be either the 14-24mm f/2.8G or 14mm f/1.4D
 

Belo

Senior Member
For landscape photos I always shoot between f/8 and f/13, so I don't really understand why the reason for big apartures :)

In FF I believe 24mm is the minimum but the 35mm will limit landscape photos a lot.

For day time landscape I agree but night time city shots are different hence my reason for a low light lens.
 

Belo

Senior Member
Keep in mind that a significant percentage of landscape photography is really a panorama of several images so it's entirely plausible that you've already enough lens for great landscape photos. That said, if I were in the market for a wide angle lens it would be either the 14-24mm f/2.8G or 14mm f/1.4D

I was initially heading towards the 14-24mm but the weight and curved lens put me off, no doubt its a great lens. I am traveling a bit over the next few days so will look out for a 14mm.
 
Last edited:

Belo

Senior Member
I was initially heading towards the 14-24mm but the weight and curved lens put me off, no doubt its a great lens. I am traveling a bit over the next few days so will look out for a 14mm f/1.4.

14mm f/1.4 or 14mm f/2.8
 

Belo

Senior Member
When I compare all of the reviews on the 16-35mm f/4 it makes sense to go with this glass as it also would give me the flexibility of a zoom range as well. I might have to stick with my 50mm f/1.4 for low light shots or add the 35mm to my kit as well.
 
Top