Landscape Lense?

[D_LOS]

Hi All,

I am looking for a good lense for landscape photography and have looked into buying the:

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G

I read reviews and it sounds like a really good lense but i couldn't really find anything that said it was good for landscape photography. I currently have a Nikkon D90 with the AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR. I plan on going to shenandoah national park this weekend to try it out since i just bought my D90 about a week ago, but i've read that a prime lense takes much clearer pictures. I'm new to photography so let me know if i'm in the right or wrong direction with this lense. I'm also open to any other suggestions, but my price range is up to only about 300$

Thanks,

Dan

[MTO4Life]

I know my primes take a slightly sharper picture, but with your 18-105, you have the wide end covered with the 18mm

The 35mm is a great lens, and would be a nice walk about lens, but you have to be happy with the purchase. Hopefully someone with more knowledge will jump in here....

[inkista]

The 35/1.8 is a great portrait lens, but looking at the test data dpreview collected on it, it may be less wonderful for landscape photography, since it shows an increase in chromatic aberration and loss of sharpness when it's stopped down past f/5.6. You might do better looking for an old, slow manual focus prime, such as the AI 20mm f/3.5. Assuming you only want this lens for landscape shooting.

As MTO4Life says, your kit lens can produce satisfactory landscape results, if you know how to use it, and how to post-process.

With landscape photography, the basic techniques to get more sharpness are to use a low iso and a smallish aperture (say f/8-f/16) to increase the depth of field and increase lens sharpness (lenses rarely perform at their best wide open) and a tripod to make up for the longer shutter speeds that inevitably ensue from stopping down and using low isos.

Learning about hyperfocal distances can also be useful.

[D_LOS]

Originally Posted by MTO4Life

I know my primes take a slightly sharper picture, but with your 18-105, you have the wide end covered with the 18mm

The 35mm is a great lens, and would be a nice walk about lens, but you have to be happy with the purchase. Hopefully someone with more knowledge will jump in here....

Thanks MTO4Life, i'll probably still look into getting the 35mm as a nice portrait lense then.

[D_LOS]

Originally Posted by inkista

The 35/1.8 is a great portrait lens, but looking at the test data dpreview collected on it, it may be less wonderful for landscape photography, since it shows an increase in chromatic aberration and loss of sharpness when it's stopped down past f/5.6. You might do better looking for an old, slow manual focus prime, such as the AI 20mm f/3.5. Assuming you only want this lens for landscape shooting.

As MTO4Life says, your kit lens can produce satisfactory landscape results, if you know how to use it, and how to post-process.

With landscape photography, the basic techniques to get more sharpness are to use a low iso and a smallish aperture (say f/8-f/16) to increase the depth of field and increase lens sharpness (lenses rarely perform at their best wide open) and a tripod to make up for the longer shutter speeds that inevitably ensue from stopping down and using low isos.

Learning about hyperfocal distances can also be useful.

Thanks for the advice inkista, i will definitely be taking my tripod and setting my camera for aperture priority.

[CaptainNH]

A 30mm lens certainly wouldn't be thought of as a conventional landscape lens (particularly on a crop), that said, never under-estimate the value of a long lens in landscape photography. Some of my best landscape photos have been taken with my 70-200mm.

I agree with the others - stopping down your 18-105 on a good study tripod would be my first stop.