gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
bradf35 wrote:
If you were starting over today, what landscape gear would you buy? I've been shooting with an original 5D and old Tamron lens for way too long now, and I've decided to upgrade. I've been saving money for 5 years with the idea of upgrading, but have never pulled the trigger. What landscape gear do you have that you can't live without, or what would you buy today? I've saved up a rather large budget, so I'm thinking about new gear plus a trip somewhere.
Also, I'll be donating my old 5d to someone that needs a camera. I've asked at my local camera club and no one has any ideas. It has some issues, but as long as the shutter speed is below about 4 seconds it works great. I'd love to give it to a kid looking to get into FF or something. If anyone knows someone in need, shoot me a pm. I'll pay shipping and everything....Show more →
First of all, there are some personal aspects to this that might make the setup very different for various photographers. For example, I rarely use an ultra-wide lens for landscape while others consider such a lens to be their primary tool. My most likely landscape lens is perhaps a medium telephoto, and some folks think that is not a landscape lens at all. So begin by thinking very carefully about how you photograph landscape subjects.
Also consider what you'll do with the photographs. If you will make very large, high quality, fine art prints you will need different sorts of equipment than if you rarely print and mostly share smaller jpg images online. If the former, expect to carry a bit of tonnage. If the latter... part of me envies you! ;-) You'll also have to be honest with yourself about how agreeable you are to using a tripod, and so forth.
For my personal needs and my approach to landscape photography I'm completely happy with the gear that I typically use these days, and I have no desire to replace or augment any of it, with only one or two minor exceptions. Here's my list:
Canon 5DsR plenty of resolution and other aspects of image quality to produce the large, high quality prints that are my target output.
Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS I rarely shoot ultra-wide, but when I do this lens provides excellent image quality. (A less expensive alternative is the venerable 17-40mm f/4L, though these days I think the only good reason to prefer it is to save money. The 16-35mm f/2.8L II is also fine, though in optical terms the f/4 lens is generally going to be a better bet for landscape.)
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II A very solid mid-range telephoto lens which can be my primary lens for many subjects. Alternatives include the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS, which I've used to make many excellent photographs. While the 24-70 can produce somewhat better image quality, the 24-105 is no slouch and it is a more versatile and flexible lens. There is also a 24-70mm f/4 lens about which I've heard good things.
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II This is a really fine lens, and perhaps my most-used landscape photography lens. Frankly, however, any of the Canon 70-200mm zooms will produce excellent results, and I substitute the IS f/4 version of the lens when weight is a critical factor, including for backpacking.
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-f/6L IS I used the original model of this lens for a long time and it was a good performer, but the new version is an improvement in every way, especially when it comes to resolution across the focal length range.
A very solid tripod and head. I actually have two. One is an older, large Induro C313 (?) no longer made and, frankly, less solidly constructed than I would like. (This is one piece of gear that I am likely to replace.) It is fitted with the RRS BH-55 head. For lighter need again, backpacking I use a somewhat lighter Gitzo tripod with the Acratech Ultimate Bullhead.
Various odds and ends. I'm not a big filter user I typically carry a circular polarizer or two plus a ND filter or two. I obviously use a remote release. I carry extra batteries, sensor cleaning tools, and a few other odds and ends.
Would you want what I want? Not necessarily. You might like a different model or brand of camera, and my set of lenses could well not be right for you at all. (I went through a stage of believing that I had to shoot primes in order to produce great landscape images. I've now joined the many, many photographers who realize that this simply is not the case.)
alundeb wrote:
I would avoid the 5D II, it has poor dynamic range for landscapes.
... a 6D is fine.
The 5DII is not the current "state of the art," and there are fine arguments for choosing the very excellent 6D. However, I disagree that the 5DII makes a poor landscape camera, and I have a half a decade of work that says otherwise. Here is an example of something that hardly seems like poor dynamic range. :-)
Good luck!
Dan
Edited on Oct 06, 2015 at 02:06 PM · View previous versions
|
