Looking for a Landscape Lens

Landscapes are typically shot with wide-angle lenses, or a wide-angle zoom lens.

You can build up your experience with an EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM.

Enjoy!

Do you have a lens now?

The 18 - 55 lens that probly came with the camera is very good.

Add a tripod and a polarizing filter.

A emote control might be handy, too.

BAK

Any wide angle lens like the 10-18mm will do because you will be shooting at the sweet spot which is usually f8 to f11 on a tripod. Most lenses will have the same sharpness in that range. I would suggest you get a 10-18 for $250-300. But invest in a nice tripod($500). It will last you longer than your lens or camera. Also buy some filters like a circular polarizer. Grad filters are optional if you plan on shooting long exposures. Most of it can be mimicked in post processing software anyways. Learn how to bracket shots and just blend them using software. Stay away from HDR unless you really like that look.

both suggestions are right on.

you can shoot landscape with any focal length. I would say the canon 10-18, and 18-135 stm make a great pair. but if you aleady have the 18-55 stm, thats wonderful too.

the first two, both have a 67mm filter size. right now, the only effect that you cant mimic in post processing is circular polarizer, to reduce reflection. have to be careful using it on ultrawides though.

I would not invest in Grad filters. bracketting is far more useful and powerful.

an ND filter can be mimiced in software, but it would require a lot of shots (for example a 10 stop filter requires 256 shots). if you like long exposure, consider a 6 stop ND filter. I think that is the sweet spot.

and invest in a nice tripod. one that is light and sturdy, and a good ball head.

Really right stuff makes a nice leveling ball head, which is very nice for panoramas. get a nice tripod. Feisol makes good carbon fiber tripods, which are cheaper than gitzo. If weight is not an issue, you can also buy a good aluminum tripod. but if you are spending less than 150-200 bucks on the legs, you are just getting junk. figure another 200 for a good head. look in the used market on fred mirnada if you want.

buy a wired remote/intervalometer. chinese knock of work fine, and can be had on ebay for about 20 bucks. thats about all you need.

i currently have the 18-55 IS II ( Not the STM it seems )
and a 18-200 IS

if they are good enough to start with im more then happy to go with that and spend the money on a good tripod

18mm is ok for landscape, you get an effective focal range of 28mm. I usually shoot at 16mm on my full frame but that's how I shoot. Get your tripod first. If you feel that 18 is not wide enough, then get a wider lens.

Bretto87 said:

i currently have the 18-55 IS II ( Not the STM it seems )
and a 18-200 IS

if they are good enough to start with im more then happy to go with that and spend the money on a good tripod

Click to expand...

You can start doing landscape photography today with whatever you already have.

You can shoot landscapes at any focal length between, say, 18mm and 200mm on your APS-C camera. There are no absolute rules that dictate you must use certain lenses (or sensor formats).

You can shoot hand-held.

You don't need a tripod, nor a set of filters, in order to effectively start today.

What are you dying to express when standing in front of those vistas? That should be your driving force to get out every day and create your own landscape photographs.

Not the gear.

Why put yourself in a gear planning/acquisition phase while you can immediately be in creative mode with what you have now? Do not fall into that trap.

Over time, you will definitely need more support in terms of education and gear. You will know from your experience, from what you can and cannot do after you have tried.

Good luck, and enjoy.

Bretto87 said:

i currently have the 18-55 IS II ( Not the STM it seems )
and a 18-200 IS

if they are good enough to start with im more then happy to go with that and spend the money on a good tripod

Click to expand...

budget 400 or so for a good tipod and head.

here is a small and light head. the seller seems motivated. you may be able to pick them up for 200.


and a pretty good ballhead for 175


as for the lenses, neither of them are particularly sharp or detailed. now, that may or may not matter depending how large you want to print, however, I dont think you get a fair bit better image quality out of 18-55 stm which can be had for 100 and then 10-18 stm which can be had for around 200-220 in used market. get a 67mm plarizer. it wont fit the 18-55, I think its a smaller thread size, but you can buy a step up ring from ebay for 3 bucks. Marumi super DHG, high end Kenko, and hoya pro1 are all good polarizer that wont break the bank, around 50 bucks, or so. and then just a remote off of ebay. you should be all set at below 1K.

Bretto87 said:

i currently have the 18-55 IS II ( Not the STM it seems )
and a 18-200 IS

if they are good enough to start with im more then happy to go with that and spend the money on a good tripod

Click to expand...

I'd use what you have. I shoot professional Landscapes, on a full frame camera I usually am in-between 24-35mm for Landscapes. I don't like the super wide look. If I do want a super wide Landscape I'll do the panorama. 18mm on a crop sensor is enough.

Learn how to bracket and do HDR, that will take your Landscapes to the next level. Some people don't like HDR but I do.

Not in camera HDR, but manually doing it. Your camera might let you do 3 brackets at a time I'm not sure. But just do it manually, take as many raw files as you need, on a tripod. Do 2 second timer or a remote. Start easy with like a 3 bracket one, -3ev 0ev and +3 EV eventually you'll get to where you know how many each scene needs. I use anywhere from 6-9 usually.

Then put those together in Lightroom or photoshop. Or if you have a Mac, Aurora HDR is amazing, also has a lightroom plug in, you can do a 30 day trial.

What will then happen is the sky will be exposed, the foreground will be exposed, and there will be a ton of detail. Where as if you just take one picture, the sky will be blown out, unless you use filters and some people prefer that but I like the HDR look.

That will make a bigger difference than picking up a new lens.

As far as tripods, I don't use super expensive tripods but I use really sturdy tripods because of Landscape.

I use the Manfrotto 190GO, it's not a travel tripod but it's light enough to hike and get Landscapes, that's why it has the Go in the name. I use the aluminum one, nowhere near as expensive as the carbon fiber, it has never been an issue.

I then use the XPRO ball head to go on it by manfrotto. This will hold over 22 pounds on that head, which you're not gonna go anywhere near. It also has a good panorama mode.

It also uses the quick release plates so you can use something like a black rapid strap without having to take the strap out to put it on the tripod and back and forth, unless you like a regular camera strap.

But regardless of gear... I'd look into HDR photography. NOT in camera HDR photography. We'd generally just call it bracketing, in order to distinguish.

If you don't have Lightroom, theres a 30 day trial on it too. If you decide you like it, you get Lightroom and photoshop for 9.99 a month. Very cheap to always have the latest versions of both.

Lightroom has a good new panorama feature too. It's not like the old one.

Cant thank everyone enough on how responsive and how helpful you have all been, its a great feeling being part of a community that is here to help like you all have.
For now i think ill just stay with the lens i have and focus on a nice tripod and mount along with learning more on HDR cause i really do love the look of it, and if i so happen to find a cheap used better lens ill think about going for it..

Again thanks you

Brett.

The Canon 10-22 USM has been very good to me while paired on a 40D and 7D. Sharp and nice colors. Even though I don't shoot with the crop bodies much anymore, that lens isn't going anywhere fast.

Nick5 said:

Brett.

The Canon 10-22 USM has been very good to me while paired on a 40D and 7D. Sharp and nice colors. Even though I don't shoot with the crop bodies much anymore, that lens isn't going anywhere fast.

Click to expand...

Yes, the 10-22 has been a hard worker for me. Thank you for confirming. I'm a novice and appreciate backing to my thoughts!