Landscape photography with M5 plus 22mm f2 + 32mm f1.4

georgios_fakinos

Well-known member
Messages
149
Reaction score
240
Hello everybody, I am a beginner in photography and in the forum. I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography a lot. I believe I have two of the best Canon's Ef-M lenses, however do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm and the 50-200mm for landscape photography? Below are some examples of photos I have shot.

Thank you all!

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100

32mm f11 ISO100
32mm f11 ISO100

22mm f11 ISO100
22mm f11 ISO100

22mm f8 ISO100
22mm f8 ISO100

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100
 
nice

Hello everybody, I am a beginner in photography and in the forum. I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography a lot. I believe I have two of the best Canon's Ef-M lenses, however do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm and the 50-200mm for landscape photography? Below are some examples of photos I have shot.

Thank you all!

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100

32mm f11 ISO100
32mm f11 ISO100

22mm f11 ISO100
22mm f11 ISO100

22mm f8 ISO100
22mm f8 ISO100

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100

32mm f5.6 ISO100
32mm f5.6 ISO100


--
----------------------------
regards,
sue anne
 
Hello everybody, I am a beginner in photography and in the forum. I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography...do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm and the 50-200mm for landscape photography?
No, it is not mandatory, but it may broaden the range of images that you take. OTOH, you seem to be doing pretty well already. Have fun.
 
Thank you very much!
 
Thank you, yes the 32mm is an excellent lens (as far as I can tell since I have not tried many lenses :P). I will upload some night pics I have shoot with this lens in the thread EF-M 32mm f/1.4 STM - Post your PHOTOS!
 
Very nice photos :) Well composed. I prefer the second and fourth. Congratulations!

I use only 2 lenses with my M50: 22mm and 55-200. Yes, 55-200 is very useful. I'm sure you'll be satisfied. Quality of the telephoto lens is a little bit worse than 22mm, but this is not a problem. I took a few very important pictures with this lens, what would be impossible for 22mm. I do not have 11-22, so cannot say anything. I suggest you buy 55-200 first, and then 11-22. Even if you use a telephoto for 5-10% of your pictures, it's really good to have it.

Sample photo taken with a 55-200mm (edited in Canon DPP). This is not an important just an example:

9762cbf8d3e94c29b6beec73407f1bd5.jpg

-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/svenek/
 
Last edited:
Hello everybody, I am a beginner in photography and in the forum. I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography a lot. I believe I have two of the best Canon's Ef-M lenses, however do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm and the 50-200mm for landscape photography? Below are some examples of photos I have shot.

Thank you all!
Nice pictures!

The combination of 22mm and 32mm is wonderful. They are invaluable to EOS M system. Particularly, their fast aperture and compactness give us a big pleasure in the area of a street/life photography. I believe, however, the reason why a combination of a wide zoom and a telephoto zoom is recommended for landscape photography is that the focal length versatility wins over the fast aperture. Moreover, the fact that EFM 11-22 and 55-200 are still small and light makes a travel photography easier and more enjoyable.
 
After reading a thread or two here in February I left on March 1 on a 10 week RV excursion committed to greater use of my 18-150 M. At the end I had taken 916 photos (after deleting some duplicates). After deleting some redundant photos and merging some panoramas (mostly taken with the 18-150 set at 18mm) I had about 450 photos that went on-line.

Here's how my usage broke down (after removing duplicates):

M11-22mm ........ 44 photos
M22mm ........... 79 photos
M22m ............ 23 photos
M18-150 ......... 771 photos

I carried only one lens at a time, sticking with the 18-150 on most hikes. I took only the 22 or 28 when weight was an issue. Had I carried more lenses, I surely would have used the 18-150 less.

Of the 18-150mm photos,

166 were taken at 18mm
171 were taken from 19m to 40mm
487 were taken from 41mm to 150mm
144 were taken at 150mm

Virtually all of the photos taken at 18mm would have been wider had I had the 11-22mm along since about half of them were merged into a 2 or 3 or 4 shot panorama that would have been better taken with the 11-22mm.

Still, I was surprised at how many of my photos were taken above 41mm where the 18-150 is at home. I used to shoot mostly the 28mm and crop to get closer to my subject (you would do this with the 32mm). The 28mm photos are probably sharper than those from the 18-150 with modest cropping, but beyond maybe 50mm the 18-150 probably provides a better photo.

Had I had a 55-200mm, some of the 144 photos taken at 150mm would have been taken between 150 and 200mm.

For sure I spent a lot less time cropping on this trip ... though I did spend more time merging to panorama when I was using the 18-150mm.

My shooting habits probably don't apply well to you, but you might judge that by going to my website and looking at the 2019 summary album or the 2019 individual albums. Those are the photos noted in the above statistics. If this is your kind of landscape photograpahy, then the above stats might tell you something.

If you are not in a rush, use the 32mm for a while and see how much cropping you do to get the framing you want. Your photo of the two animals on the ridge comes to mind. A 150 or 200mm would have been nice to have for that shot.

For sure a 55-200 or 18-150 would be of value only if you carry it. If you wouldn't use it often, then maybe cropped photos from the 32mm will do.
 
After reading a thread or two here in February I left on March 1 on a 10 week RV excursion committed to greater use of my 18-150 M. At the end I had taken 916 photos (after deleting some duplicates). After deleting some redundant photos and merging some panoramas (mostly taken with the 18-150 set at 18mm) I had about 450 photos that went on-line.
With all due respect, but why do you put 450 photos online? Who will watch it? Before sending this message I looked at your website and I need to write there are nice pictures. Congratulations! But in your website are only 100 photos from the period of 3-4 years. And now suddenly 430 within 10 weeks. Is not it the junk production? I know it's only 6.5 pictures a day and it's not so much. But for God, there are millions of pictures on the internet, who will see it all?
 
After reading a thread or two here in February I left on March 1 on a 10 week RV excursion committed to greater use of my 18-150 M. At the end I had taken 916 photos (after deleting some duplicates). After deleting some redundant photos and merging some panoramas (mostly taken with the 18-150 set at 18mm) I had about 450 photos that went on-line.
With all due respect, but why do you put 450 photos online? Who will watch it? Before sending this message I looked at your website and I need to write there are nice pictures. Congratulations! But in your website are only 100 photos from the period of 3-4 years. And now suddenly 430 within 10 weeks. Is not it the junk production? I know it's only 6.5 pictures a day and it's not so much. But for God, there are millions of pictures on the internet, who will see it all?
A very good question. I have about 60 friends (mostly from many years past ... I'm 77 now) that follow my photos. I do a bulk emailing after each posting. Many of these folks are approaching retirement and planning their own trips in the Western US. They seem to appreciate the photos from the responses I get. Some are older now and cannot travel so re-live their visits to interesting places via my photos or just enjoy seeing things they were unable to see when they were younger (one fellow is in late 90's and is always the first to express appreciation).

Also, I recommend only the first album to these friends. It contains 90 photos with several covering each stop on the 10 week excursion. I'd say most of my friends stop with just that album. I suggest they go to one of the 30 odd specific albums only if their interested is piqued by the corresponding photos in the overview album.

Also, I don't leave all photos on slickpic.com. When I have time I'll thin them further for whatever benefit others may find. Many will be moved to other existing albums and replace existing photos if they are an improvement from my earlier days. Some places we visit often such as the California coast or Yosemite or Death Valley and I often get better shots now than 5 or 10 years ago. Some of the 30 or so albums will disappear unless they are noteworthy and all will be reduced in size, some to 5 or 10 photos.

I'm not sure how you determined the count, but there are 2250 photos posted with 450 new ones this year. The albums go back about 15 years with most from the last 10 years. So roughly 1800 photos from 15 years or about 120 per year on average. Probably 1900 total after I thin down the recent postings.

Then there's the problem of tossing perfectly good photos. That's hard to do. About once per year I go through my collection in Lightroom (about 4000 photos currently) and delete some to keep the number under control. Often I am deleting one that is posted (LR tells me this when I try to delete) so some end their time that way. If a photo is not posted I'm very likely to delete it.

I have hundreds of thousands of page views and hundreds of likes and a good number of followers. So there must be some interest.

Some amateur photographers use sites like Slickpic.com to backup their photos. I only post not very large jpegs so I'm not backing up, just putting them out there for others to enjoy or download or explore possible destinations. Just as I use other's on-line photos to choose destinations for my RV trips. I also learn about good vantage points from photos I find on-line.

I've made a number of friends from the comments I've received and converse often with one fellow that has interest in destinations much like mine. He has guided me on a number of excursions into Wyoming, Montana, Utah, etc.

As for who will see the many photos on the web. I know I won't. I spend more time shooting than perusing. But, as noted above, I do spend some time studying possible destinations, and though I surely see less than 1 in 1000 photos photos for each one, what I do find is helpful. Heck, I've learned a lot by looking at other's photos and tried take my own versions of quality ones.

PS: I just noticed that there are about 300 photos from 2018. Clearly I am behind in my thinning. I'll thin 2018 soon.

PS: Also, as you likely observed, Slickpic presents an album 2 or 3 images across. Large thumbnails if you will. It's easy for a viewer to skim down through dozens of images every couple of seconds and click on none or click on just a few to see full screen.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all for your advice. I will probably go for the 50-200mm first, which is also cheaper and if I use it a lot I will then get the 11-22mm
 
A very good question. I have about 60 friends (mostly from many years past ... I'm 77 now) that follow my photos. I do a bulk emailing after each posting. Many of these folks are approaching retirement and planning their own trips in the Western US. They seem to appreciate the photos from the responses I get. Some are older now and cannot travel so re-live their visits to interesting places via my photos or just enjoy seeing things they were unable to see when they were younger (one fellow is in late 90's and is always the first to express appreciation).

Also, I recommend only the first album to these friends. It contains 90 photos with several covering each stop on the 10 week excursion. I'd say most of my friends stop with just that album. I suggest they go to one of the 30 odd specific albums only if their interested is piqued by the corresponding photos in the overview album.

Also, I don't leave all photos on slickpic.com. When I have time I'll thin them further for whatever benefit others may find. Many will be moved to other existing albums and replace existing photos if they are an improvement from my earlier days. Some places we visit often such as the California coast or Yosemite or Death Valley and I often get better shots now than 5 or 10 years ago. Some of the 30 or so albums will disappear unless they are noteworthy and all will be reduced in size, some to 5 or 10 photos.
Fine. If you publish your photos to your 60 friends (friends not just followers) and they want to watch it (to watch not just click likes), then I understand it. If not, I think you're producing garbage. But do not worry. Millions of people do exactly the same as you (probably most in this forum) and all are happy. So really do not worry about my opinion. It's just an opinion and you have the right to publish even 500 photos a day online if you want and if it possible. Its not my business. Secondly, you are 77 years old, I'm 44 only. I would be stupid or ill-mannered if I argued and wanted to convince you to my reasons. So peace. If you feel offended, I'm sorry. Everyone does what they think is right. And it is great.
I'm not sure how you determined the count, but there are 2250 photos posted with 450 new ones this year. The albums go back about 15 years with most from the last 10 years. So roughly 1800 photos from 15 years or about 120 per year on average. Probably 1900 total after I thin down the recent postings.
In your website (https://hclarkx.slickpic.com/personal/):

'Welcome. To see about 100 of my favorite photos, click on Portfolio, above right. If you are interested in the places we have visited, look for them among the albums. '
Then there's the problem of tossing perfectly good photos. That's hard to do. About once per year I go through my collection in Lightroom (about 4000 photos currently) and delete some to keep the number under control. Often I am deleting one that is posted (LR tells me this when I try to delete) so some end their time that way. If a photo is not posted I'm very likely to delete it.

I have hundreds of thousands of page views and hundreds of likes and a good number of followers. So there must be some interest.

Some amateur photographers use sites like Slickpic.com to backup their photos. I only post not very large jpegs so I'm not backing up, just putting them out there for others to enjoy or download or explore possible destinations. Just as I use other's on-line photos to choose destinations for my RV trips. I also learn about good vantage points from photos I find on-line.

I've made a number of friends from the comments I've received and converse often with one fellow that has interest in destinations much like mine. He has guided me on a number of excursions into Wyoming, Montana, Utah, etc.

As for who will see the many photos on the web. I know I won't. I spend more time shooting than perusing. But, as noted above, I do spend some time studying possible destinations, and though I surely see less than 1 in 1000 photos photos for each one, what I do find is helpful. Heck, I've learned a lot by looking at other's photos and tried take my own versions of quality ones.

PS: I just noticed that there are about 300 photos from 2018. Clearly I am behind in my thinning. I'll thin 2018 soon.

PS: Also, as you likely observed, Slickpic presents an album 2 or 3 images across. Large thumbnails if you will. It's easy for a viewer to skim down through dozens of images every couple of seconds and click on none or click on just a few to see full screen.
 
Thank you all for your advice. I will probably go for the 50-200mm first, which is also cheaper and if I use it a lot I will then get the 11-22mm
The EF-M 11-22mm is also a good choice if you want to shoot video. It can be an all-in-one type of lens if your style focuses more on wide angle photography. Whisper quite when focusing, sharpness on par with the EF-M primes, it delivers for what it was designed for.
 
Last edited:
I am a beginner in photography and in the forum FileZilla UC Browser Rufus . I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography a lot. I believe I have two of the best Canon's Ef-M lenses, however do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm
 
I am a beginner in photography and in the forum FileZilla UC Browser Rufus . I like to shoot everyday life/street but I also like landscape photography a lot. I believe I have two of the best Canon's Ef-M lenses, however do you think it is mandatory to buy the 11-22mm
Nothing is mandatory and nothing will prevent you from taking great photos with those two lenses. They are particularly well-suited for street photography, imo. If you get frustrated that your view is not wide enough then there is the 11-22mm.
 
Last edited:
Some nice pics over there. I have the 32 mm lens and the kit one , but with the M 50. I am struggling to find the best style of setting to my tasting. What style you shoot in, neutral? Did you dos some pp and with what. If you did, did you apply sharpening?
 
Some nice pics over there. I have the 32 mm lens and the kit one , but with the M 50. I am struggling to find the best style of setting to my tasting. What style you shoot in, neutral? Did you dos some pp and with what. If you did, did you apply sharpening?
Glad you enjoy the photos. I use neutral style and very little pp, if any, other than cropping. My approach has been to find a lens that produces images that I like and leave it at that. If anything is done in pp it is to to repair some error I made in the exposure. None of the images uploaded to DPR were sharpened. To each their own.
 
BTW, you are shooting with primes so your images have very little distortion. Having little distortion makes stitching multiple photos together (horizontally or vertically or both) to create a larger image (panorama) is very effective if you have pp software that will do this (I use LR and PS).

When I want to travel lite (mostly hiking) the 11-22 is the first lens I leave home. I take multiple overlapping shots with the same exposure and "stitch" them later, sometimes going beyond an equivalent of 11mm. I usually turn the camera 90 deg and overlap about 30%. Not letting the shutter button up beyond the focus detent holds the same exposure for the next image. Sometimes I expose for the center of the view and then sweep left and take the 3 or 4 shots from left to right with that exposure.

Often I hike with only the 22, stitching when I need wider and cropping when I need longer. This works great with the 22 but should work even better with your 32mm since it's supposedly a bit sharper than the 22 and my have even less distortion.

Bottom line is, if you won't take a lot of wide shots, you don't necessarily need the 11-22. If you do take a lot of wide shots, you'll want the 11-22 because the stitching process, though automated in most pp software, can become a nuisance.
 
Thank you again sir, that is a very nice advice. I will try the stitching method first and see how it works. It is definitely easier to take one shot with the 11-22mm rather than 4,5 or 6 shots with the 22mm and stitch them together, however for the time being I only have the 22mm :-P and I do not like the distortion of the 11-22mm so much.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top