Canon Community Canon Community
 


Reply
Highlighted
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎06-27-2018

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

My next lens will probably be the 16-35mm because it would make the most sense for me in terms of wide angle shooting and completing the ranges that I am
Most interested in.

Last night I just dusted off my 60D and EF-S 10-22 and took some shots outside. I realize I do miss the wide angle some and that is the reason for the consideration of the 16-35mm lens.
Highlighted
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎06-27-2018

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

Thank you for the heads up on that lens. Not overly familiar with the Tonika lenses.

I will read up on it and perhaps try it out. Thank you.
Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 13,066
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

Go for it...................................

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,555
Registered: ‎06-25-2014

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?


@khanh970 wrote:
Ebiggs - nice shot. I always love that kind of wide angle shot. Just don’t ever do them often.

I will probably rent a wide angle to shoot some landscapes that I have been meaning to shoot.

Not a fish eye kind of guy personally. I have the Tamron equivalent 150-600 lens and haven’t really gotten out to practice on that one.

Still learning and reading up about landscape shots and timing of those shots. I am trying to break away from my familiarity and shoot more landscapes and other scenes.

Lots of people say that wide-angle lenses are ideal for landscapes, so I tried that approach a few times. What I found was that I usually preferred a standard walkaround lens (24-105 mm on FF) instead.

 

But a WA lens can be a necessity for photographing buildings, particularly in a congested downtown area where the usual workaround (moving back a bit) isn't feasible. My moment of truth came the first time I was asked to photograph our City Hall at work. I'm standing on the roof of the building across the street (the only feasible vantage point), and I simply can't get it all in the picture! I had to climb down, confess my failure, and try to improve my equipment inventory. To complicate matters, the lens I wanted was out of stock at the usual New York stores. I finally found it locally (after a couple of months) and went back up to finish the job. It was an embarrassing experience, but it taught me the value of a WA lens!  Smiley Frustrated

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 13,066
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

"Lots of people say that wide-angle lenses are ideal for landscapes,..."

 

OK how about using a 70mm for UWA shots?

 

2014 band.jpg

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Highlighted
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎06-27-2018

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?


@RobertTheFat wrote:

@khanh970 wrote:
Ebiggs - nice shot. I always love that kind of wide angle shot. Just don’t ever do them often.

I will probably rent a wide angle to shoot some landscapes that I have been meaning to shoot.

Not a fish eye kind of guy personally. I have the Tamron equivalent 150-600 lens and haven’t really gotten out to practice on that one.

Still learning and reading up about landscape shots and timing of those shots. I am trying to break away from my familiarity and shoot more landscapes and other scenes.

Lots of people say that wide-angle lenses are ideal for landscapes, so I tried that approach a few times. What I found was that I usually preferred a standard walkaround lens (24-105 mm on FF) instead.

 

But a WA lens can be a necessity for photographing buildings, particularly in a congested downtown area where the usual workaround (moving back a bit) isn't feasible. My moment of truth came the first time I was asked to photograph our City Hall at work. I'm standing on the roof of the building across the street (the only feasible vantage point), and I simply can't get it all in the picture! I had to climb down, confess my failure, and try to improve my equipment inventory. To complicate matters, the lens I wanted was out of stock at the usual New York stores. I finally found it locally (after a couple of months) and went back up to finish the job. It was an embarrassing experience, but it taught me the value of a WA lens!  Smiley Frustrated




"It was an embarrassing experience, but it taught me the value of a WA lens!  Smiley Frustrated" at least you had the opportunity to finish the job. 

 

Luckily for me right now its more of a hobby than a career. I did read a lot of great review of the Tonika lens. I will admit I am a Canon branded fan but I will always take suggestions especially then they are the 3rd of the price of the Canon 16-35mm. I usually don't mind to spend the money on a Canon L series lens. The value they hold over time is nothing short of amazing. 

 

Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 13,066
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

"... they are the 3rd of the price of the Canon ..."

 

I see only two reasons to not buy real deal Canon brand lenses.  One and first off is Canon doesn't make one like it and you need it. Two, you can't afford the Canon.  It doesn't make a hill of beans if Canon makes the best lens in the world, if none of us can afford to buy it.

If I were a younger man perhaps I would consider the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Lens for example.  But I would have to figure hard and long if it could make me back eleven grand.  At this point in my life there is no way I can put that kind of money in a single lens. 

 

There is no question the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM Lens is a better lens than the Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Lens.  But is it that much better?  To some it is and more power to'em.  However, in normal use you will have to look carefully to see the difference.  Do you need the extremely better build of Canon L, you will want to buy the Canon. Or, is the lens going to rest comfortably in the bottom of your cushy camera bag most of its life?  To me in my profession the Canon makes sense. To the vast majority of hobbyists, the Tok just might fill the bill nicely.

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Highlighted
Occasional Contributor
Posts: 13
Registered: ‎06-27-2018

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

Ebiggs - I have come to understand the buy it once buy it right idea. Spend the money wisely once rather than buy until you get what you want.

Lessons learned on furniture and vacuum cleaners. Haha years ago.

I will still try out the Tok I think and try out the 16-35 from canon.

I have done the same for the 50mm 1.4 from Sigma Art. I tried the canon 1.2mm after my canon 1.4mm went to lens heaven. I was suggested to try out the 50mm Sigma Art. The bulk deterred me initially but it proved to be a lens I like better due to price and performance. The Canon 1.2mm is no slouch but price delta won that day.
Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,555
Registered: ‎06-25-2014

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?


@ebiggs1 wrote:

"... they are the 3rd of the price of the Canon ..."

 

I see only two reasons to not buy real deal Canon brand lenses.  One and first off is Canon doesn't make one like it and you need it. Two, you can't afford the Canon.  It doesn't make a hill of beans if Canon makes the best lens in the world, if none of us can afford to buy it.

If I were a younger man perhaps I would consider the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Lens for example.  But I would have to figure hard and long if it could make me back eleven grand.  At this point in my life there is no way I can put that kind of money in a single lens. 

 

There is no question the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM Lens is a better lens than the Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Lens.  But is it that much better?  To some it is and more power to'em.  However, in normal use you will have to look carefully to see the difference.  Do you need the extremely better build of Canon L, you will want to buy the Canon. Or, is the lens going to rest comfortably in the bottom of your cushy camera bag most of its life?  To me in my profession the Canon makes sense. To the vast majority of hobbyists, the Tok just might fill the bill nicely.


The Canon 16-35mm f/4L is also a good lens, at a lower price than the f/2.8 version. At the time I bought mine, I believe it was considered a bit sharper than the f/2.8 II. But I guess the current f/2.8 III is sharper still.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 13,066
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Best lense/settings for shooting cars/nature?

Well for me there is a logic in buying and keeping the trio in the fixed f2.8 aperture.  It is a part of the equation I don't have to consider when the pressure to perform is on.  In that case less is best as it usually is.

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement