Canon 80D - Is it a capable camera for Landscape Photography?

[Tasbir]

I google for good APSC landscape cameras and I get the Fuji XT-3/4, Nikon D7200 or even the Nikon D5600, but I have never seen the Canon 80D? Is the 80D that bad for landscape?

I am using the 80D for landscape photography. I have the Canon 18-55mm, 50-250mm, 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8 lenses for it. I have never used 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8 for landscape. Some of my most "liked" landscape photos have come from 50-250mm lens. Even the 24mm gets a very little use.

I shoot wildlife more (I have a different setup for it), but when I am out for wildlife, I would like to take good landscape photos too, so looking for a good (and affordable) camera body and one or two lenses. Thank you!

 

[mfinley]

I have created landscape photographs with my cell phone. Unless you have specific lens requirements or specific large format printing final destinations for your images, almost anything that creates a digital file is a capable landscape camera.

 

[rick decker]

Why would your Sony cameras not be good for landscape. In general the most important part of a system is the lens. Especialy true for landscape. And, for landscape pixel qualty is important. That's why in pre-digital days, many of the landscape pros shot medium and large format. The question I would ask about your 50-250 is how does it hold up at 100%. I regularly see images that look good when downsized and don't hold up at 100% - even in the center.

 

[Lan]

Can you do Landscape photography with an EOS 80D? Of course! I did landscape photography with an EOS 10D for years; as did many people here. Any modernish dSLR/mirrorless camera is capable of doing landscape photography with ease.

Is it the absolute best camera for landscape photography? No. In the 24MP APS-C arena I'd choose your Sony A6100 over it. Why? The Canon has a stronger AA filter which removes some of the finest detail. On the upside, less moiré; on the downside, less detail.

The best value landscape camera at the moment is the A7R2. 42MP, full frame, and no AA filter. Drawbacks include being hatefully slow, and being more expensive than your target price

 

[TheWillRogers]

So long as you don't have to rely on autofocus, video, or require light weight, I've been recommending used Pentax K-70 kits with the 18-135mm lens. If you're patient you can pick them up for under $600 on ebay. Great weather sealing, IBIS, Nice 24MP sensor without AA filter and has pixel-shift. Only one person has picked it up at my recommendation so far and he really likes it. Apparently it's not great for people with small hands though.


But you have an A6100 which is great so i'd just look for glass for that instead.

 

[KENTGA]

I've used Canon dslr's since 2005 and have spent much, much more on photographic equipment than I have on automobiles. Why??? I can't answer that. It's just an "thing" with me I guess. Your 80D should be fine. If you use the mm range I would suggest an EF-S 17-55. That and the 24-105 on a FF is what I use most.

Kent

 

[jkjond]

Capable - it has plenty of pixels and a water resistant body. Those two features should make it capable for most needs. Stops of DR, I'll guess it has plenty.

Whether it has enough pixels for your taste or waterproof enough for how you treat it, or enough DR for what you shoot? Your call.

So I'm guessing it is a capable camera for landscapes, but is it the best?

That depends on priorities and the type of images you like to take. I'm guessing the answer is no. My go to camera for landscapes right now is my Olly OM5D, but that's because I value portability above image quality. For days I feel image quality needs to shine I'll take one of my full frame Nikons. If I had one I'd take my 850D. That would likely stay at home if I had that hugely expensive Phase One. But for most trips out and for holidays my Olly shines :-D

If you aren't happy with the canon, then it may be the camera, how you're using it, a bit of both, your processing or your expectation of a scene. We're all different.

Here's a shot I like from a trip to Scotland last year, one of my faves from the holiday. It ticks all my boxes though many will not like it one bit - the camera used is almost irrelevant (dof would be a potential problem for most cameras for this shot, it would look different had it been taken with your canon, but may still tick all my boxes).





--
Wedding and fine art photographer https://johnleechstudio.smugmug.com
You are welcome to reprocess and repost my pics on DPR.

 

[Vikingod]

I certainly wouldn't trash my camera because it didn't come up on a google search under "best landscape cameras"...

In the right hands, any camera can take great photos. The 80D is a wonderful camera and it's a plenty capable tool for landscape photography. For social media purposes, those lenses aren't a bad deal either (though I'm sure pixel peepers will disagree. I don't do that except for my own work).

If you have some money to burn and want to better your photography skills. Sign up for a course, or buy a book, or buy a set of videos to help your post-processing skills. That is going to pay way more dividends that replacing an already great camera.

 

[NeatPhotoStuff]

Yes, the 80D is a good landscape camera. There is no question of that at all. Period. End of discussion.

In fact, as someone who shoots both Canon and Sony, the 80D is better than the Sony a6xxx models in many ways for landscapes. First, it's more robust. Secondly, it has a flippy screen that can be used in portrait orientation. And third, it can be set on a tripod with the sun in the frame, with the mirror down (not in live view) and the sensor won't melt or cook. With a Sony, you could easily cook the sensor since there is no mirror protect it. Forth, it has an excellent battery and can last much longer on the energy it uses because it does not require the sensor to be reading every moment it is on. And the Canon bodies are vastly more energy efficient than the Sony a6xxx cameras by a huge margin. Lastly, the 80D can capture 14bit files in most, if not all, shooting modes without dropping to 12 bit, and it has lossless compression, which Sony does not, except for the newest big $$$ model.

If you need more MP from the 80D, then try stitching panoramas.

You would gain nothing in the camera bodies by going to Fuji or Nikon. You would be better off spending money on trips to take photos or if anything, get a new lens or two for your 80D. If you insist on a new camera brand, stay away from the Nikon models you listed. They have good sensors, but their operation in live view can be very frustrating at times and their lens selection is a hair less stout than what Canon has.

tl;dr The Canon 80D is an awesome landscape camera!

 

[BlueRay2]

I google for good APSC landscape cameras and I get the Fuji XT-3/4, Nikon D7200 or even the Nikon D5600, but I have never seen the Canon 80D? Is the 80D that bad for landscape?

I am using the 80D for landscape photography. I have the Canon 18-55mm, 50-250mm, 50mm 1.8 and 24mm 2.8 lenses for it. I have never used 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8 for landscape. Some of my most "liked" landscape photos have come from 50-250mm lens. Even the 24mm gets a very little use.

I shoot wildlife more (I have a different setup for it), but when I am out for wildlife, I would like to take good landscape photos too, so looking for a good (and affordable) camera body and one or two lenses. Thank you!

let me say this right off the top: it is not the camera or format you are using, it is the dam "LENZ" that you use and counts...80-85% of your photo IQ depends on the lens quality you are using, in my experience!!!!! i have taken my most memorable shots, here and overseas, with my canon 40D (an aps-c format) and i still love using that camera after all these years. so, i'd clearly say that canon 80D is a great crop camera based on reviews and owners testimonies! i believe you can get one at a decent price now a days!!!

good luck.

 

[Lan]

In fact, as someone who shoots both Canon and Sony, the 80D is better than the Sony a6xxx models in many ways for landscapes. First, it's more robust. Secondly, it has a flippy screen that can be used in portrait orientation. And third, it can be set on a tripod with the sun in the frame, with the mirror down (not in live view) and the sensor won't melt or cook. With a Sony, you could easily cook the sensor since there is no mirror protect it. Forth, it has an excellent battery and can last much longer on the energy it uses because it does not require the sensor to be reading every moment it is on. And the Canon bodies are vastly more energy efficient than the Sony a6xxx cameras by a huge margin. Lastly, the 80D can capture 14bit files in most, if not all, shooting modes without dropping to 12 bit, and it has lossless compression, which Sony does not, except for the newest big $$$ model.

I have yet to break either a Sony mirrorless camera, or a Canon dSLR camera. For most uses all mainstream cameras are robust enough. If you want to hammer nails into something, use the Canon - personally I prefer the smaller size and reduced weight of a mirrorless setup, and I would use a hammer in that scenario

Yes, you can potentially cook the sensor if you use a telephoto lens and point it at the sun; however you can also burn various parts of a dSLR like the mirrorbox, and various other parts of a dSLR; you can also burn the aperture of the lens:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/09/rental-camera-gear-destroyed-by-the-solar-eclipse-of-2017/

The one big advantage of mirrorless in that situation is that looking through the EVF on a mirrorless camera won't damage your eyes - as you're not looking at the sun, merely an image of it. Looking through an OVF in that situation could potentially cause permanent damage to your eyes...

FWIW I've never seen this happen with the sun in frame with any wideangle lens; this is only likely to be a problem with telephoto lenses pointed at the sun. If you're shooting the sun with a telephoto lens, use a solar filter - that's what they're there for

Battery life was a problem with the older Sony cameras, but it's not a problem with the newer bodies; make sure you buy something that uses the NP-Z100 battery, like the A6600. I use fewer batteries with my A7R4 than I did with my EOS 5D2.

I agree the lack of lossless raw compression is annoying. About the only thing that mitigates that is the fact that storage is cheap these days. FWIW only time I've experienced issues with lossy compression is around lights (i.e. lantern festivals) when you boost the exposure in your raw converter. It's a non-issue for most landscape use cases.

If you need more MP from the 80D, then try stitching panoramas.

+1

You would be better off spending money on trips to take photos or if anything, get a new lens or two for your 80D.

Agreed; for most of us shooting landscape, going somewhere where there are good landscapes is useful Or at least it would be if we could go anywhere...

 

[KENTGA]

The 80D is the lasest APS-C body I own and I've had it for several years. Here's a shot I made at Yellowstone in 2016 of a grizzly with 80D + Canon 100-400L ver. 1.

Try it, you'll like it.

Kent

 

[Tasbir]

I have created landscape photographs with my cell phone. Unless you have specific lens requirements or specific large format printing final destinations for your images, almost anything that creates a digital file is a capable landscape camera.

Thank you for your time! I also use a cell phone camera a lot and when I buy a new cell phone, a great camera is my #1 feature to look for. I have taken some decent landscape photos with my Note 8 (in the past) and Pixe 4a5G (current). Some of my friends even have asked for my cell phone photos so they can print them large and hang them on their walls. I had to tell them that they cannot do that since it was taken from a 12mp cell phone. Outside that, nobody has shown interest in buying my photos and I am also not actively trying to sell them. But when the opportunity comes, I would love to sell my photos or at least be able to print them big and hang them on my living room walls. That is the reason, I am looking for a decent landscape camera.

 

[Tasbir]

Why would your Sony cameras not be good for landscape. In general the most important part of a system is the lens. Especialy true for landscape. And, for landscape pixel qualty is important. That's why in pre-digital days, many of the landscape pros shot medium and large format. The question I would ask about your 50-250 is how does it hold up at 100%. I regularly see images that look good when downsized and don't hold up at 100% - even in the center.

Thank you Rick!

Long story short, I bought the 80D to pair with my Sigma 150-600mm for wildlife photography. I get decent shots with this combo, but when I pair the Sigma lens with the Sony a6100 via MC-11, I get much better/sharper shots, so now the a6100 has become my wildlife camera. The goal when I bought the a6100 was to use it for landscape, travel, family, etc.

So, Sony a6100 + MC-11 + Sigma 150-600mm C is my current wildlife setup.

Canon 80D + 50-250mm is my current landscape setup. I also use 24mm2.8 when I need a wide-angle.

I also have the Sony a6000. I have not used it for over a year now. I have the Sony 16-50mm, 55-210mm, 50mm1.8, and Sigma 16mm1.4 lenses to go with it. The plan was to sell the a6000 and some of the lenses (kit lenses). Then Covid started and did not think about it. Maybe I can use my a6000 for landscape and add a decent zoom lens for it.

I will post a couple of photos I have taken using the 80D + 50-250mm later.

 

[Tasbir]

Can you do Landscape photography with an EOS 80D? Of course! I did landscape photography with an EOS 10D for years; as did many people here. Any modernish dSLR/mirrorless camera is capable of doing landscape photography with ease.

Is it the absolute best camera for landscape photography? No. In the 24MP APS-C arena I'd choose your Sony A6100 over it. Why? The Canon has a stronger AA filter which removes some of the finest detail. On the upside, less moiré; on the downside, less detail.

The best value landscape camera at the moment is the A7R2. 42MP, full frame, and no AA filter. Drawbacks include being hatefully slow, and being more expensive than your target price

Thank you! The Sony a6100 has become my wildlife camera since I get sharper images from it with the Sigma 150-600mm. That's how the Canon 80D became my landscape camera. Otherwise, the goal was to use the Sony a6100 as the landscape/everyday camera.

I have been eyeing the A7R2, but it is a little more than I would like to pay. I also found out that the full-frame lenses are much more expensive than the APSC lenses. So, as much as I would like to get sharper and larger landscape images, I think I will have to stay with the APSC world for now.

Or if I can sell most of my not used lenses and two APSC bodies (80D and a6000), then I may be able to afford a full-frame camera and one/two lenses. But I am not good at selling stuff. I hate eBay scammers too.

 

[Tasbir]

So long as you don't have to rely on autofocus, video, or require light weight, I've been recommending used Pentax K-70 kits with the 18-135mm lens. If you're patient you can pick them up for under $600 on ebay. Great weather sealing, IBIS, Nice 24MP sensor without AA filter and has pixel-shift. Only one person has picked it up at my recommendation so far and he really likes it. Apparently it's not great for people with small hands though.

But you have an A6100 which is great so i'd just look for glass for that instead.

Thank you!

I will read about the Pentax K-70. Thanks for the recommendation!

The a6100 is being used as a wildlife camera and it is attached to my Sigma 150-600mm all the time. I hate switching lenses. So, trying to make two setups for wildlife and landscape.

 

[Tasbir]

I've used Canon dslr's since 2005 and have spent much, much more on photographic equipment than I have on automobiles. Why??? I can't answer that. It's just an "thing" with me I guess. Your 80D should be fine. If you use the mm range I would suggest an EF-S 17-55. That and the 24-105 on a FF is what I use most.

Kent

I think I do have GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) too .

I was thinking about getting either the Sigma 17-50mm 2.8 Or Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4.0 for the 80D, but before I invest in a new lens, I wanted to make sure I have a decent camera first.

 

[Tasbir]

Capable - it has plenty of pixels and a water resistant body. Those two features should make it capable for most needs. Stops of DR, I'll guess it has plenty.

Whether it has enough pixels for your taste or waterproof enough for how you treat it, or enough DR for what you shoot? Your call.

So I'm guessing it is a capable camera for landscapes, but is it the best?

That depends on priorities and the type of images you like to take. I'm guessing the answer is no. My go to camera for landscapes right now is my Olly OM5D, but that's because I value portability above image quality. For days I feel image quality needs to shine I'll take one of my full frame Nikons. If I had one I'd take my 850D. That would likely stay at home if I had that hugely expensive Phase One. But for most trips out and for holidays my Olly shines :-D

If you aren't happy with the canon, then it may be the camera, how you're using it, a bit of both, your processing or your expectation of a scene. We're all different.

Here's a shot I like from a trip to Scotland last year, one of my faves from the holiday. It ticks all my boxes though many will not like it one bit - the camera used is almost irrelevant (dof would be a potential problem for most cameras for this shot, it would look different had it been taken with your canon, but may still tick all my boxes).

Thank you and beautiful shot!

There are no demands for my landscape photos at the moment, but if an opportunity comes, I would like to be able to sell my photos, so I wanted to start with a good camera, so I do not have to keep upgrading or learning about new camera menu, etc.

My main requirement at the moment is to be able to print large (even for my own wall). I have a Grand Canyon image hanging on my living room wall that I got from Ikea. I would like to replace it with my own image one day. I think that image is 55 inches by 40 inches with the frame and the frame is about half-inch wide.

 

[Tasbir]

I certainly wouldn't trash my camera because it didn't come up on a google search under "best landscape cameras"...

In the right hands, any camera can take great photos. The 80D is a wonderful camera and it's a plenty capable tool for landscape photography. For social media purposes, those lenses aren't a bad deal either (though I'm sure pixel peepers will disagree. I don't do that except for my own work).

If you have some money to burn and want to better your photography skills. Sign up for a course, or buy a book, or buy a set of videos to help your post-processing skills. That is going to pay way more dividends that replacing an already great camera.

Thank you!

I definitely need to learn to be a better photographer first and a good post processer second. I have seen people making a mediocre image a great image after a process processing. I even don't know how to use Photoshop/Lightroom and I do not own it. I use a free software called PhotoScape for my photo editing. I also use GIMP here and there.

 

[Tasbir]

Yes, the 80D is a good landscape camera. There is no question of that at all. Period. End of discussion.

In fact, as someone who shoots both Canon and Sony, the 80D is better than the Sony a6xxx models in many ways for landscapes. First, it's more robust. Secondly, it has a flippy screen that can be used in portrait orientation. And third, it can be set on a tripod with the sun in the frame, with the mirror down (not in live view) and the sensor won't melt or cook. With a Sony, you could easily cook the sensor since there is no mirror protect it. Forth, it has an excellent battery and can last much longer on the energy it uses because it does not require the sensor to be reading every moment it is on. And the Canon bodies are vastly more energy efficient than the Sony a6xxx cameras by a huge margin. Lastly, the 80D can capture 14bit files in most, if not all, shooting modes without dropping to 12 bit, and it has lossless compression, which Sony does not, except for the newest big $$$ model.

If you need more MP from the 80D, then try stitching panoramas.

You would gain nothing in the camera bodies by going to Fuji or Nikon. You would be better off spending money on trips to take photos or if anything, get a new lens or two for your 80D. If you insist on a new camera brand, stay away from the Nikon models you listed. They have good sensors, but their operation in live view can be very frustrating at times and their lens selection is a hair less stout than what Canon has.

tl;dr The Canon 80D is an awesome landscape camera!

Thank you!

I love the battery on the 80D. I do not have to think about it for a couple of weeks (I don't go out and shoot every day). When it comes to the Sony a6100, I have two additional batteries other than the original battery it came with. I have to keep an eye on the battery line all the time and sometimes, I use all three in one outing for wildlife photography. I have even turned off the monitor to save the battery.

I have shot sunrise and sunset using both the Canon 80D and Sony a6100/6000. I did not know the danger that can create. Don't know if I damage them. As far as I can tell, they seem to be ok, but who knows.

Thanks again for the confirmation that the 80D is a great landscape camera!