วีดีโอ

I'm team zoom. I came across your presentation by accident. I completely agree. I switched to Olympus after my Nikon went for a swim in a stream aaargh. I bought the OM-1 as a replacement, I also bought the 12-100mm, f4.0 and 90mm. f3.5 for macro as starter lenses. Since switching to Olympus the weight loss is phenomenal as is the image stabilisation. I often cropped my wide angle shots to get rid of some of the clutter. I now primarily use my zoom, take a wide angle and various zoom shots to compress the image and find I do less faffing on the computer when I get home. At the wide end 12mm (24mm full frame equivalent) is sometimes not wide enough, but not that often. At 100mm (200mm full frame) the reach gives to capture distant subjects and the ability to compress the scene so it is very suitable for landscape, seascape, street photography, or wildlife. Though there are occasions when I fail to capture the composition as I saw it in my mind's eye. But I can't see me be buying a specific wide angle lens, definitely sticking with the two I've got. The 12-100mm is also a very good macro lens, I have managed to get some great images of summer flowers, fungi and spider webs that have captured dew drops. I have seldom used my 90mm. My zoom is definitely my go to lens.

Having shot for 40+ yrs I have heard about most of rules which I agree can be helpful for beginners. But IMO one needs to keep seeing lots of good pics to eventually 'get your eye in' or in effect 'learning how to see'. Nowadays I don't 'sweat' the so say rules (aka good advice guidelines) I just do what feels right to me. I kind of instinctively know what works. More often ir not most of my more successful compositions follow one or more of the main 'rules' .... but it's not because I'm consciously setting out to do so. Experience over 40 years, 25+ winning club competitions and latterly achieving success in international salons, has helped me to 'just see'. I believe with enough practice, viewing top work by proven artists, receiving critical feedback on your own work that one eventually just 'starts to see' instinctively. OK that's not much help to newbies starting out, but it works for me.

I realized how flawed wide angle lenses are for landscape 2 years ago, and in fact right now I have fallen on the other side, I prefer the long focal length lenses for landscape, for me even the 24-70 mm are way too wide, i find myself more and more using beyond 150 mm for landscape, going as far as 400 mm, it completely changes the perspective of what you are shooting.

Great advice. I own a 14-24, 35, 85, 100-400, and a drone. No more than two of the items mentioned ever make it into my camera bag if I go out for a hike or travel. If I shoot close to my car I bring my “everything bag”. The 100-400 and drone are used the most by far, especially for landscapes. The 85 mostly for portraits, and the 35 for general walk-around photography. With this kit I’m done purchasing lenses. I may upgrade a camera body or drone, but unless something breaks I’m not spending another dime on glass.

I have two main lenses. 24-120mm f4 and 80-400mm. However, I do have a 16mm f1.8 prime for night sky/milkyway and for some landscape. And finally a 50mm f1.8 because it's required under penalty of incarceration in most countries.

Great video, very useful info. I recently picked up a vintage lens, an Auto Chinon 55mm f1.7 on an M42 mount, I've been using it on my lumix g3 micro 4/3 camera.📸

I own the 16-35 and the 70-200 2.8 and am on the way for a 24-70 4.0. I never believed in getting the most recent gear and will not change to mirrorless, even if I could afford this. I am working with a 6D MK I and a 7D Mk II, which I both got in good condition very cheap. The 24-70 will be my last buy, maybe I will trade the 7D MK II for 5DSR , when they become affordable and that will be it. I am not a pro, so I don't need any more for years to come. What you issue here, really does make me think a lot, teh 70 - 200 is go to my lens for portriat as well. When I purchased the 70-200 from a friend of mine, he also offered me a 100-400 F 4 and told me to take the later, but I did not even think about it, because the 70-200 is so much more versatile. Well i will try what you say, once I have found the 24-70 and go for it. Time being, I enjoy the 6D, because it's so light and delivers beautiful color rendering. So good lesson here, Roland from good old Germany. (onemoresubby)

Interesting observations. Ryan Dyar, who is a way better photographer that any of the ones you show in this video, shot the majority of his images with a 12mm lens. Food for thought.

I use mostly wide angle lenses and it's absolutely true what you mentioned about mastering composition and loosing it with small things moving or changing. Thank you for the invaluable advice that may save us years to aquire. In my defense I like street photography and realstate as business.

Nikon: 13 lenses Fuji: 8 lenses Olympus/ 1 lens Sony: 1 lens

I think your range of subjects is limited. I have a 12-100 F4 lens. It's rinse it under the tap sealed against water. It's somewhat equivalent to your two lenses combined. It's time you upgraded to mirrorless, I have no difficulty levelling my cameras with ultrawide lenses Canon might have the best system for you, but it might not. Check them out. My lenses of choice for landscape photography are Canon's TS-E lenses. I now use them on a Lumix S1R with a Sigma EF-L adaptor. It's better than anything Canon had at the time. Still is, in my view. Otherwise, I use M43 cameras. Because of AML Leukaemia and age, I recently bought an OM-5 and 12-45 F4. Well weather sealed, no bag required as I can carry it in my pocket. Or on my wrist. It hasn't been on a tripod yet. In principle, I can take any of my cameras and any one of my compatible , zoom or primes, lenses and have hours of fun photographing landscapes, the streets. Or yours.

I am autistic, it affects the way I see stuff. I followed Alister Benn for a year or two, decided he was making no sense at all. I used to follow NigelI, for the adventure. I like diagonal lines. Parallel lines. Curved lines. Real lines, implied lines. I watch one of his videos occasionally. If you don't like people/things facing out of the picture, you miss a lot of good photos. A photo I remember from forty years ago was exactly that, a nun, in her habit, stepping out of the frame. I have nothing against a choppy sea. It doesn't have to have a rock or a porpoise to make an interesting photograph. Perhaps, if you look closely, you will see a face, perhaps Jesus or your favourite deity. I have a bird in one of mine, a seahorse in another. I know of a photo claimed to be a picture of Jesus. It was a patch of light and shadow in snow, nothing sharp. I don't understand any of emotion, mood, composition. Those follow from autism. Some of my photos are sharp, some are blurry from out of focus, motion blur, camera movement. Reflections from inside the train are fine, those are part of the scene. Holding the camera high over my head works, so does putting the camera on the ground.

Hi. I'm a MFT shooter (Olympus/OM System). I agree, my 12-40mm f2.8 is my "go to" lens. It is almost welded to my camera body. My next choice is my 40-150mm f2.8, giving me a little more reach toward the telephoto end. Sometimes it is nice as well to have my 300mm f4 on hand to achieve those more intimate distant shots. I am sorry but I refuse to ditch my 7-14mm f2.8 because there is the odd occasion where it does lend itself to the situation. All these lenses are razor sharp pro lenses. I do see your point of view, but I do not agree with you entirely. I would remind though that in my favour my lenses are physically smaller and lighter, than their full frame equivalents.

But 24mm to 200mm are not two lenses. Yes two zoom lenses. But it is still more than 6+ lenses to confuse your photography. And hurt your back, knees and shoulders... Go with two primes instead. And learn to use them with their limitations.

I ma new to landscape photography. I have been wondering why I don't see photographers using the 24-70 and the 70-200. I have thought the 24mm range would do wide angle when desired. I own 3 primes, 1 wide angle 16mm , and the 70-200. My 50mm and my 70-200 seem to be my go to lenses. Any feed back is welcomed.

the nikon z 24-120 is a system-seller. best 24-120 ever made by a large margin. perfectly sharp all through to the corners. the landscapers dream.

As I recently changed to Sony e-mount, I only have 2 lenses: 24-70 & 60-600. So far it covered it all for me....(more then landscape obviously) But I'm not making my money with it, just happy with the amazing results I get and I agree: the less you have to choose between lenses the more moments you will capture. Personally I rather have some grey filters with me then a wide angle.

Made me smile. At 82 I shoot "utility photography" for nonprofits. I can do almost anything with a kit similar to yours: Canon R6 and R50 with a EF 24-105/4 L and spectacular 70-200/2.8 L II. Weirdly, the R50 and 70-200 take wonderful portraits at 300mm/F2.8 equivalent. The R6 and 24-105 are fine for theater needing 1/500 and faster (with help from Adobe Denoise).

Without a 16-35 you'll miss so many great shots in an urban landscape like Amsterdam. Even in Agra, there are shots you'll be forced to crop because the space doesn't let you get far enough away to take advantage of frames or even leading lines. For some indoor settings, if you want to give a sense of the place, an ultra-wide delivers like no other. Maybe our choice of lens comes down to the kind of images we like to capture.

I disagree, for me a 14mm f1.8 and 135 f1.8 are all I need. See here is the problem with your thesis. You just recommended the two most basic and usually first two lens every photographer buys/owns. From that point they buy others to experiment for fun, so you're just re-packaging what everyone else says, hence why they are part of a thing called a "holy trinity". A true photographer starts with the holy trinity, then looks at what he/she uses most over the course of a year or so, then buys specialized lens at those ranges. For example I found I either used 16mm on the wide of a 16-35 or 135 in the middle range of a 70-200. Hence my choice of 14 / 135. I then move my body or don't take the shot if I cant make it work within that range. It makes your shots more unique to you, and also keeps you from just shooting everything.

Great compilation and view on composition! I guess the most challenging aspect for photography.... Looking forward to the PDF...

I particularly like your approach of looking at photography to be statistically modeled. Same for looking at photos and finding out which lenses are most used. Very fresh. I love it.Thank you.

More astute guidance - thank you!

I always understood that image stabilisation should be off when using a tripod 🤔

I just sold my Fuji 10-24 mm because I ended up using the 24 too often and wasn't able to master the wide end 😢

“To consult the rules of composition before taking a photograph is like consulting the rules of gravity before going for a walk” Edward Weston. The TH-cam method of composition. 1. Travel to far off land 2. Fit super wide angle 3. Identify clump of grass/sod of earth/rock to be used for foreground interest 4. Take the landscape picture with subject so small that it could and shoud be photoshopped out.😉

Rule of the thirds never let you down! I think weather conditions come first, but mix the two together and it all comes together! Thanks for your views on this matter.

The 24-70 is only suitable IF you have a full frame camera. A pricy option for most people, but yes for professional photographer that is most likely the best kit.

Well done and needed to be said. My experience in observing landscape photographers adhering strictly to the most popular composition rules is that many images by many photographers look much the same and in the end becomes somewhat boring as you see the same theme in almost every image. It's like someone using AI principles without AI. Just my opinion...

Since I’ve subscribed to watching you, I love your content! It is really added to my Landscape game. It really simplifies what leading landscape photographers do.

That's what I always say: 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8

I’m a newb. I’ve wanted a wide angle because I only own a 24-105…I can’t quite get everything in with 24mm I have a Sony A7iv I wanted to add a wide and a telephoto… Thoughts?

Well said . After 45 years I have sold all of my prime lenses & I just use multi focal range lenses , I also use a crop sensor camera too , I've noticed no difference at all in the images from full frame & it's unlikely I'll enlarge any prints to huge sizes.

Very interesting. Thank you.

Primes serve a purpose for controlled settings. You control where you put the camera. Telephotos are obviously when you can't control it. If you want special shots, use a prime, if you want to take pictures, use a zoom. It's really that simple. No telephotos are going to replace a great wide or a great long lens.

16-35 f2.8 and Tamron 28-200. they fit in a very small bag with the camera body. The 16-35 gives me the option of some astro and came in really useful with the recent aroura we had. The Tamron is great for 95% of the shooting I do and has more than enough detail. gone are the days that I carry a 70-200

another good video -----back in the day I sold camera s---film type only----people would come in to the store with ridiculous ideas ----and be misold ---I think you have the right idea---its all about your skills.However, I would like an opinion on the following ----for landscape work ---would you choose a fuji with 100million megapixel or another camera---your thought please question 2 I was seriously thinking of the OM mk1 version 2 -----your thought please.

great video ----when I think about it your right ----Fritz Hemle only used a telerollei and and standard Rollei -----but he knew how to use them

I only use one lens: the good old 24 - 70 f 2.8

on the leica M I would use only two lenses a 35mm and a 50mm i would leave the 70mm at home til I sold it

Maybe so, if you only shoot landscape. The outfits I have assembled enable me to handle a multitude of tasks and in different formats. I have not found a zoom lens that is distortion-free throughout its range, so they are out. Maybe we work with different criteria.

Wonderful video.

12-60mm & 50-200mm on an Olympus. Love them. Basically the 12-60mm lives on the camera. Btw f2,8-4 for both.

No nonsense advice without all the unwanted verbals.

As a Canon owner, I've decided to go with the 24-105 and 70-200. I do toss my 16 f2.8 in the bag as well. I love super wide shots in some instances, and the 16mm is so tiny it makes almost no impact on space or weight. I'm not a profession and have no desire to be one, but I enjoy the learning process and getting the shot I want even if it never gets shared or makes me a buck. Thank you for the great advice!

I agree. My walking around lens is 24-105 and I also have a 70-200, but haul around a 100-400 for wildlife.