Since my questions is specific to landscape photography, I am posting my questions here, as I can get a more informed answer :
During my travels , I carry RF 24-105 f/4, and RF 100-500, and for the third lens, to shoot wide landscapes, I am debating between RF 10-20mm vs RF 14-35mm .
The obvious points: If i go with 10-20mm, I will miss out on 21mm to 23mm essentially, but 10-20 would give me a unique perspective at its wide end. If i take the 14-35mm, I will miss the ultrawide 10mm to 13mm, but 14-35 covers a larger range for landscape photos.
I love landscape photography in general, and i understand so many great landscape photographers here in FM and outside, have shot many keepers before ultra-wides like 10-20mm and 11-24mm were even available. So my question to you all is , how much value does a landscape photographer see in 10mm to 13mm. Has anyone shot landscape pictures in this ultrawide range , and mind sharing them here ? Or have you come across some great photos shot between 10mm and 13mm, that you can share here ?
Will really appreciate your thoughts and help.
PS: I posted this in Canon forum, but since my question is specific to landscape photography needs, I am posting it here. hope its not a breach of FM rule. If so, Admins, please delete my post.
Jun 26, 2025 at 12:10 AM
Previous versions of Sankar Salvady's message #16840259 « 10-20mm vs 14-35 for landscape photography »
