bclaytonphoto opened this issue on Apr 23, 2009 · 8 posts
bclaytonphoto posted Thu, 23 April 2009 at 4:42 PM
http://digital-photography-school.com/17-stunning-wide-angle-images
Do you have a wide lens??
Me...Tokina 17-35mm
Fred255 posted Thu, 23 April 2009 at 5:06 PM
I used to have a EF16 - 35 mm L lens but I sold it because on a 1.6x crop it was not wide enough. I now have a Sigma 10-20mm which I love
ecurb - The Devil
L8RDAZE posted Fri, 24 April 2009 at 12:59 PM
2 of the popular wide angle lenses with loads of example photos
Tamron 11-18 - www.pbase.com/cameras/tamron/sp_af_11-18_45-56_di_ii_ld_if
Sigma 10-20 - www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/10-20_4-56_ex_dc_hsm
inshaala posted Fri, 24 April 2009 at 4:09 PM
Not actually that impressed by most of those photos (a lot are bad crops/comps or over processing), but there are some good ones in there (red bridge , traffic lights).
I have an 8mm Fish and a 10-20mm Sigma - also a 17-85mm, but barely use it now as i have a 50mm and a 70-200... the 20-50 range is a bit non-starter with me - not really portrait, not really landscape kinda range... and 50-70mm gap is barely a problem...
"In every colour, there's the light.
In every stone sleeps a crystal.
Remember the Shaman, when he used to say:
Man is the dream of the Dolphin"
Rich Meadows Photography
Meowgli posted Fri, 24 April 2009 at 4:58 PM
have to say Rich I'm feeling a real lack of a walkaround lens at the moment, I probably miss a few shots fiddling around changing between the 10-20 and the 50... surely the 17-85 must be on the camera a bit when on the move? I absolutely loved using my dad's 28-300 when travelling in France.. the convenience means you're much less likely to miss a shot but I have to say there are always going to optical compromises in a lens like that (personally I thought the colours were a little flat, it was pretty damn soft wide open and gotta watch out for CA).... got my eye on the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 to fill the gap when I have some dosh!
of those in the link I liked the first 2, also the church interior, and the one with the green boat in the foreground... the rest I don't reckon were anything special.... and speaking of that 'gap', I'd say at the moment I'm shooting about 70% of the time with the 10-20, but yearn for a bit more reach for street shots..
TomDart posted Sat, 25 April 2009 at 7:56 AM
I really did like some of the shots. My personal take is apparently out of style in general, since I have problems appreciating photos that simply look like digital paintings...with overworked contrasts and color and detail. Still, getting past my limits on that, I did like the church interior a lot. The girl with the phone to her ear was also nice in my view...and the cat could have been on the inside back cover of a 1960's magazine.
Garlor posted Sat, 25 April 2009 at 11:27 AM
My 10 -20 Sigma needs to get out more, she spends too much time at the pC, I dare not take her flying because she is far to keen looking at bits of the aircraft when i point her outside. But she wants to go to town next time i am out shopping and she has promised to try not to make all the buildings look like they are falling on top of me.
Meowgli posted Sat, 25 April 2009 at 11:34 AM
hehe - funny... yep its all about the angles, if you can shoot with the field of view parallel with the ground I think it does a pretty good job, as soon as you start tilting though you're looking at a painful half hour in photoshop warping and distorting everything back into shape! ... have to say though, it doesn't irritate me enough to consider shelling out for a tilt/shift lens, and I always find something slightly odd about trying to stitch vertical panos of buildings.. just seems like too much bother for most subjects imo... so um.. hurray for wide angles..!