Mark, I use a 150-600 (goes to 960 on a crop sensor) occasionally. When shooting DSLR landscape I'll pack a 100-400, regularly. These days, mot of my landscape is Fujifilm GFS 50 S, so the longest lens with that kit is a 120 macro. Thank-You, Mike
OK don't laugh or judge, to much I'm new and budget is tight, I have a tamron 18-400 f3.5/6.3. Love it for spontaneous walks and I don't need to change my lens for my different compositions.
There's absolutely no reason to laugh at you! It's kinda stupid prejudice that users of these Superzooms have no requirements to a lens. Quite contrary, they have a very high requirement for a lens and that is flexibility. It's just that you prioritize it over the most sharp and crisp and whatever looking image. My goto lens is a 18-135 kit lens, and it's fine for me, too. For more tele range, I got a 70-300 lens. And I don't care what some people want to tell me are the best lenses for me.
I'm in the 18-400 club too😉 I currently adapt it to a Canon M50. I've captured some nice images with it and deleted a bunch, which is the same as every other lens I've used. I will say I have random focus issues using the Canon adapter. I didn't notice any focus problems when I had it on a T7i.
No need to feel inadequate. That's a lot more sensible for most situations than any kit I've ever carried. You should keep it even when you get other lenses later, every photographer needs their own "that one lens" to just throw on, be instantly familiar with and cover all the focal lengths they use. I almost always carry at least two lenses because I'm an idiot that worries too much about image quality even though I know there is almost no difference. When I do grab a single lens it's either a mid zoom or a normal prime, and I have to live with the lack of flexibility.
Glen, the photographer matters more than the gear! In fact, someone without the latest and greatest gear might be a better photographer because he thinks he has to do better, so he tries harder.
I wanted to get a 85mm prime for portraits, then I decided I could use a wide angle for my event photography, now you made me want a super telephoto lens.
Hey Mark, I've photographed landscapes since 2006. I used to live in Arizona before moving to Tennessee. I graduated from Milligan College in 2010 with my fine art photography degree. My favorite long exposure scenario is rolling brook shots in the mossy mountains near my home. Keep up the great work. I've worked as a wedding photographer for almost 10 years. Nature photography keeps me grounded. I recently sold some of my landscapes at a local festival last week. It went really well. I hope I can pursue this form of photography full time one day.
I have a canon 100-400mm super telephoto and the x1.4 converter and haven’t been using them nearly enough. This video has encouraged me to give the super telephoto more thought when out in the field as I often discount a lot of scenes due to compositional issues (when thinking with my 16-35mm)
I remember hen 10 years ago I was using Nikon D90 with Nikkor 18-200, excellent combo. 95% of images I took were at 18mm but the best ones and ones that won micro contests were all shot at 200mm. These days I'm in the Fujifilm system and same rule applies, 60% of my favorite shots come from the long end of my Fujinon 55-200 and at least once a month I am daydreaming about the 100-400, maybe someday.
Don't take this the wrong way, but where have you been all my life?!! Finally, someone who explains all the questions I have about photography in basic, simple terms that I can understand! Thank you so much! I usually binge watch Netflix, but you're my new addiction! I already feel more confident and excited about applying all the tips and tutorials I've seen so far! I am planning a trip to Mt. Washington and Cadillac Mountain in Bar Harbor soon and I will use the tips I've learned to recapture some of my favorite spots. I do have a question about lenses. I have a Pentax Kr and since they have become defunct, do you know if other lenses would be compatible with my camera? Finding Pentax lenses is getting a bit more difficult and I am not sure if camera brand is an absolute when buying lenses. Thanks again, giving you thumbs up, up, up!!
Photos taken with a wide-angle lens are often too common and more likely the viewer has seen them before, so the "wow!" factor would be greatly reduced even though the photographer may think that it's the best photo taken by him or her at that particular location. As you said, the telephoto lens increases composition flexibility and could potentially help the photographer to create a unique image. I like it when I post a photo and someone says "Wow, that is a nice shot. Where is that?". To me, that's more interesting than "Nice shot of El Capitan!"
I've learned more today than I have in a year, 4th video of yours I'm watching and didn't even realize I could do this with my 200-500 lens I bought for wildlife. It's a whole new world.... (sing it).
When I was shooting film, I used a 100-300 mm. Now, that I shoot crop sensor (can't being myself to spring for full frame) I carry a 55-250 STM. Lighter and sharper than my 100-300 and it gives my equivalent up to 450 mm.
I rented both for a long weekend. I felt the 100 to 400 was softer than the 70 to 200 and for me the 70-200 was a better choice as it could do more than just landscape as I like it for street as it goes to 2.8. Still, I like your point about the 100-400 is well taken.
I pre-ordered (and am waiting for) the Sony 200-600. I planned on using it for aviation photography, but now I might try it out on some landscapes. Thanks for the tips.
I agree with you! I just got the 100-400 GM a couple of weeks ago, and love the ability to crop deeply into a scene with the lens itself. It's a very sharp lens. The herons, Seattle Ship Canal and night kayaking on Seattle's Elliott Bay on my Wildmanzen Instagram feed were all shot at around 400mm, hand-held except for the night scene, which was on a tripod. Don't be afraid to get out at night with this lens and a tripod, especially if you have city-scapes available. Once again, your comments are right on the mark. Thanks!
I really appreciate the portrait compositions of landscape subjects. I always feel like I need to take them in landscape mode and yet I find portrait compositions much more compelling sometimes.
My Telephoto lens is a Tamron 70-300, which equals 105-450 on my APS-C camera. I might get a 1.4 Teleconverter, though, to reach about 630mm in total. But, remind that: I recently learned that a Teleconverter spreads the available light which reaches your sensor, so you either have to open up the aperture or turn up the ISO.
Only recently started photography. Using a sigma 17-50 F2.8 on apsc Sony. Also have Sony 70-300 f6. Would love a better tele lens but can’t afford anything any time soon. Want a 10-20mm first.
I just picked up a sigma 100-400 a few days ago and you post this today! Definitely makes me feel better about buying it and looking forward to playing with it out on the scapes!
Got the humble 70-300mm 4.5/6.3 VR a couple of weeks ago.. yeah, it's a "kit" lense, and it is what it is in terms of aperture, but I'm impressed by how well it performs for the price. Pretty damn sharp (mostly in the 70-200 range, but even beyond that is perfectly usable), VR is great, and so is the AF system. Yes, the aperture can be limiting in low light situations, but if you're willing to work around that, you won't be disappointed. Used it for landscapes, wildlife, and portraits, and so far I can't complain.
I love my 100-400mm f/4. On our trip to Alaska last year, I had it mounted on one body and my 16-35mm f/2.8 mounted on the other body. I was amazed how much I reached for the telephoto! More than half of my favorite images were shot with it. Compression of the scene and eliminating distractions were the main reasons...your commentary is spot-on! Thanks again for another great video, Mark.
Great shots Mark! Recently picked up a 70-200, and kinda doing what you did, shooting with it all the time. Really cool to see what you're coming up with using the 100-400.
I identify myself as a landscape photographer and always carry wide angle lenses, but a couple weeks ago I went on a Utah national park road trip and took the canaon 100-400 with me to explore more intimate landscapes....gotta tell ya, the mental switch was tough. Getting in tight to show more intimate images of such large spaces really conflicts with what you are wired to do there. I'm glad I took it, as it allowed me to get some great shots of the arches, without having to do all the hikes. Traveled wit family as little 3 years old, some of the trails were really a challenge, but this focal length allowed me to get close to this iconic places. I agree, this focal length is very much a must in a serious landscape photographers bag.
I think of it like this; when you're a tourist, wide angles are great because they capture the whole scene of an area that you have never been to or rarely go to and you aren't really looking at the small picture. But when you go to that same area often, or you're a local, then you really start trying "new things" or just look and the small things. That's how I view it. I think the Tamron 28-200 for the Sony e mount is THE tourist lens I can think of. Such a large zoom range.
I do a lot of macro focus stacking imagery of flowers at our local BioPark. My most used lens for that work is my 70-300mm, usually at 300mm. I get resulting stacked images that are without question the equal of any such images taken with my 60mm macro lens.
Bought my 200-500mm for wildlife (of course ;) ), but I love it for landscape! I have a day of seascape pics with 50-60 ft ocean swells and 150ft tall ice bergs in the far distance. The 500mm compression makes these images. At 200m it was not the same emotion, ice bergs too far out, but 500mm compressed the ocean swells and brought the ice bergs into the action. It's easily one of my favourite images yet. I it said before, don't sleep on the super tele's, they are more than just a "wildlife lens"...mine has made more land/seascape images than wildlife, lol. ...and Macro too ;) Good Tips in this video Mark!! Cheers,
I have watched a lot of photographers in the last years and i don't use to comment so much ,but you are a little bit special in the way you explain everything, love watching your videos. Well done 👌👍
A fifth reason is isolating a subject with a super telephoto's shallow depth of field. This is perhaps more applicable to close or mid-range shots. Shooting wide open (or stopped down to keep the subject in focus) will throw the foreground and background out of focus, I use this technique with my 500mm f/4; adding a teleconverter increases this effect of course. This is handy to draw attention to a cluster of flowers or colorful leaves when the background is uninteresting or too busy. Just another technique for your mind's set of composition tools.
I'm currently saving up for the 100-400gm. I also shoot animals/birds a lot and haven't gotten a tele since I switched to fullframe as well as to sony. Can't wait. All that's missing after this is the 90mm macro (although I can use my old macro with a manual adapter) and I'm set again :)
The longest lens I used for landscape is a 85 prime. But I am looking forward to purchase a 135 prime. But I don't know if it will be the Sony 135mm F1.8 GM or the Zeiss Batis 135mm F2.8... For landscape only the Batis would be my choice due to the lower weight and size. But I wanna use it for portraits as well and then the F1.8 is so incredible! AHHHH!
Thanks, Mark! Another very interesting video. I have a 70-300 that on my Nikon 7500 (crop) gives me a max. 450 focal length. Will be experimenting more now that I understand the "intimate" landscape concept by using the super tele.
Most interesting video. Originally I approached landscape with a wide angle, but got increasingly frustrated with the limitations that it imposed. Effectively, after the "Golden Hour" I was stuck with the usual challenge of poor lighting and a desperate need for a dramatic sky. Unfortunately on the east coast of Australia the cloud is mostly puffy low cumulus for much of the year. In the last few months I have been doing what you have described......picking out parts of the landscape with a super tele. Often dramatic and very useful to close in on interesting light contrasts in the patterns of the country, trees and other features. Use a Nikon 200-500 and prime 200. When the time is right I can get the trusty wide angle out, but now I can shoot landscape anytime. Thanks for the vid.
Another interesting discussion Mark. I’ve chosen to stick with my 70-200 f/4 along with my 1.7 teleconverter. I give up a stop of light, but haven’t missed it much since I shoot landscapes almost exclusively between f/8 and f/16. I lose a little compared to you at the long end, but I appreciate the weight savings on long hikes. Of course, you could slap a converter on your 100-400 and get way longer too.
Many thanks Bill! Yes - weight savings is always a good thing! I had a 1.4x teleconverter on my trip to Yosemite, but never really needed - the 400mm was more than enough on that trip:) Have a great weekend!
I too am into landscapes and nature and I'm happy I purchased this lens instead of the 70-200. I'm going to take it to a hill station next month and after watching this video I think I'm going to return with some amazing shots. Thanks for this video, Mark!
I was debating between a 70-200 to 100-500 but your video convinced me to aim for the super-telephoto. I mainly do video and my biggest challenge was always capturing the true size, majesty, or presence, you could say, of mountains; now I'm convinced! Thanks so much!!!
Thank you! Help me see what I might be able to do with my large format, film photography. I have a 400 mm lands which is equivalent to about a 135. But the size of the negative is so large, I can easily do 400 by cropping in. Very cool!
Fairly new to your channel but I have immensely changed the way I approach landscape photography since I started watching your videos. Last week I tried to simplify my camera equipment for this specific trip I did, I brought my back up camera (Canon 6D, my #1 is the 5D mark IV) and a Canon 70-300mm (the one that cost around $150US) and try to see If I could squeeze something good outta that lens... I ended up being frustrated, the prisms in that lens seems to be very thin and creates this hazy images with no texture even when well exposed. So after watching this video (and the other one about what lenses should you buy for landscape photography) I purchased the 70-200mm f4, no IS though as it was a huge difference and my budget is very scarce right now. I hope this will improve those long shots. Cheers for the super helpful video.
I do most of my nature stuff with my 70-400 f/4, and carry my 2x all the time. Which gives me enough flexibility. I also carry my 16-35 and 24-70 but I guess that I do most around 100-150mm.
I had a Sony 70-200 2.8 lens, but for the stuff I've been shooting lately during the pandemic, I started to realize how 200mm wasn't enough. I didn't need the 2.8 as I haven't really shot in any situation where I needed a telephoto lens to be that fast so I ended up selling it and bought a 100-400 and then a few months later, added the 1.4x TC. Its now one of my most used lenses.
Super insightful! Thanks for sharing. Your photos in the video were amazing too - planning to grab one of these soon :) What I'm looking forward to most is being able to actually capture the little things I personally notice while shooting and find interesting + being able to isolate them like you said. Automatically makes it more of a unique shot!
Very nice images Mark! Love that Yosemite waterfall great framing with those trees on the side. This is the first video in months to actually inspire me to pick my camera up again and buy another lens. Thanks! 😎👍🏻
Jeremy, thanks for the “nudge”. I bought some tubes a little while ago with the idea of using them with my 10-400 canon but never got round to it! They have been experimented with and are now in my bag. The 100-400 is my main and favourite lens.
Hi Mark, I agree with the telephoto lens technique, I often go down to the Great Falls in Paterson, everyone is taking selfies or wide-angle panoramas, I am watching a Green Heron in a tree below the falls or a little tree growing out from the rocks. I even wrote a little poem to go with it.
Very informative video Mark. I do photography for a national disaster relief organization, and I may need to pick one of these up sooner than later. I've been at a point where I go back and forth on what my next piece of glass will be, and I think you helped me make up my mind on this one. Better get to saving up! Thanks for another great video my friend! See you next week!
@@MarkDenneyPhoto it's something I definitely enjoy. Thought about trying to do some personal photo journalism, as it's all volunteer when I deploy to disaster areas for photography.
Great clip again Mark! I love my 100 - 400gm with 1.4 teleconverter, great to capture intense colour in small pockets of sunrise/sunset sky’s when at 16mm, not much is happening, great to make those distant mountains look huge when there is also a foreground object! How good is this combo going to be on the A7riv! 👍😀
I totally agree with you idea. I used to take my Sigma 10-20 & Sony 70-400 SSM with my A77II whenever my traveling. And the coming future will have a new combination of A6400 with 10-18/4 and FE 200-600 OSS. And I like your shot on 8:59.
Thank you for making this video. I bought the lumix s1 kit and the 70-200PRO lens. I have used the 70-200 lens 1 time and found I am not happy with it. Not enough zoom. My old camera had 480 mm zoom. And I really miss it. I think I am going to see what I can sell my 200 for and pick up a better zoom lens.
So I just called the camera shop I bought my equipment from. They offered me $1000 trade in towards another lens. Which I am leaning towards the Sigma 150-600. I just paid $1700 for it less then 60 days ago. Is this a fair price? Thank you all for helping. I am kind of new to this (been away from cameras for many years) and should have done a little more research before jumping on this lens.
G'day Mark. Thanks for your video. Very practical and informative. I've got a 70-200 mm but I also bought a x2 converter ( both are Canon lenses). I've only just begun to scratch the surface on my longer focal length photography so I was quite interested in your video. Thanks again !
I have a 70-200 2.8 Canon L lens stick it on my 80d with a 2* converter. Absolutely amazing by the way that works out at 640. All the benefits of my 70-200 and the rest.
This is on a Full Frame, so with a crop sensor, it should be even closer. Like a teleconverter. I will definitely look into a 100-400mm. Great video, great photos
I have a Sigma 150-600 contemporary. I absolutely love it, especially for sports, but it is damn heavy. I'm going to try taking it out this afternoon and try some urban landscape shots. Should be able to isolate some interesting things.
Thank you, this was super interesting to me since I am hoping to buy a telephoto zoom in the spring for these exact same reasons. And I loved hearing about your thoughts of composition and seeing comparisons between different lenghts in general.
Thank you so much! I came across your channel last week and has been watching lots of your videos, but this was astonishing! I've been waiting for the upcoming Tamron 75-210 mm for months now, but you completely changed my mind. I've heard about the 100-400 mm, but thought it was way too expensive, but it's about the same price as the 70-200 GM f2.8. So the 100-400 mm FE will be my next lens after the GM 24 mm f1.4!
Thank you Mark. Greetings from Upstate NY. Long time viewer but just now subscribed. I've got two camera kits (FF & M43) with lenses for each to cover 16mm-200mm, respectively. I use my smaller M43 kit for travel/daily hikes and the FF kit for more focused type of shooting or projects. I've been looking at adding a super-telephoto to my M43 kit for some of the reasons you've outlined. Plus M43 lens are very compact with plentiful options. Currently saving up for the Pani 100-400mm. Thanks for providing some additional thoughts to help secure my decision!
Mark Thanks again for another thought provoking tutorial..... Confession, I purchased a used ( EBay ) older model Canon 100-400 for a trip to Alaska 4 years ago for an Alaska Trip.... I decided at the very last moment that it was way too bulky to carry around for two weeks.. I left it home ( here comes the really sad part ) and have never ever shot with it..Had I watched this video in July of 15..... I would have come away with some very classic images........Recently been thinking about selling it .......for a 4/3rd backup but your Tutorial has convinced me to dust the monster off and see what I can compose... your videos are always spot on...... UNDERSTANDABLE......INFORMATIVE.......EASY TO FOLLOW ...THANKS AGAIN Mike👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Nice video Mark. I too was planning to get a telephoto lens. But till date I am still confused of Glass/image quality vs more reach. I use a APS-C Nikon d7200 and my options are the tamron 70-210 VC f4 and nikon 70-300 VR. Since I use a crop sensor, I was wondering if the tamron would be enough in terms of reaching the distant scenes as compared the extra 100mm focal length on the nikon. But nothing beats the constant f4 throughout the focal range. My use cases would be landscape photography only.
Yeah thats a tough one, it suppose it really comes down to how large of a difference the two lenses are from an optical perspective. If they're close then I'd personally go with the 300mm.
Your last photo of the road was my favourite, its like a scene from a movie. Thanks for the video, I have been agonizing between the 100-400 or the 200-600 but I think I will go for the 100-400 due to the extra stop and the optical reviews have been excellent. Cheers!
I really. Ikeda this video. My wife and I have a trip planned for end of August and this will really help. My main lens is a Canon 75 300 4. I'm hoping some day to have a 100 400. That may never happen but this video will help me to use better what I have.
The compression does not come from the focal length but solely on your position (angle) to the objects. But for sure, this effect can be seen rather with a telephoto lense, but saying "the lense compresses" is optically wrong, although I see your point. Thanks for the vid.
I totally agree. Recently I uploaded a few videos about this too. With a telephoto lens you can get more creative and unique photos in my opinion. I used to work a lot with a wide angle lens but nowadays more with telephoto
Compression is not because of the long focal length as such but the distance to the subject. If you crop a wider angle photo shot from the exact same position you will get the same compression effect. Minimalism is another benefit of the long lens which you also show. Too many photographers are caught up too much in traditional concepts like foreground, middle ground and back ground. Nothing wrong with that, but too limiting to only think that way. I find abstract photos also is a benefit that often comes up with a long lens. I recommend also ultra wide lenses, so my landscape recommendation for focal langhts is from 11mm to 400mm or even more.
Now that you shoot Fuji, I’m curious if you’ve looked into the new 70-300mm on the X mount. That should get you beyond the range you used with this 100-400mm.
Hi Mark, I bought the 100-400 few days ago and I am absolutely in love with for the exactly same reasons you explain so well in this video. It so versatile! One question: did you change the original plate for the tripod? I am looking for another solution for my Arca ball head, thanks!
Thank you for the review. I think I've taken a liking to your style of teaching. I think its well balanced and I also appreciate you making comments where you can. I'm looking to shoot huge photos of the sun compressed against landscapes here in California so this was a good vid for me. Thanks again
When you said that you only shot with a 16-35 that really hit me. I currently have the 16-35 and 70-200. Don’t remember the last time I picked up the 70-200
Well observed. The only problem I have with super telephoto full frame is when hiking. The weight becomes painful, at age 70+, which is why I also use M43. Only slightly inferior quality but much less weight.
Hi Mark and Community, I would like to ask you which tele lens I should get. I want to get that lens for some detailed landscapes, occasionally wildlife and rarely sports. Weight isn't a problem for me so I can't pick between the Sony 100-400 GM and the 200-600 G ... what would you chose?
What’s the longest focal length you've used for your landscape photography?
Mark,
I use a 150-600 (goes to 960 on a crop sensor) occasionally. When shooting DSLR landscape I'll pack a 100-400, regularly. These days, mot of my landscape is Fujifilm GFS 50 S, so the longest lens with that kit is a 120 macro.
Thank-You,
Mike
@Sean Nice Sean! That's super reach I'd say!
@@mikemitchell3889 That sounds like a great setup Mike!
250mm on my 700D so, effectively 400mm.
I have used the 200mm on G85 which was equivalent to almost 400mm on MF3s Loved using it.
I use mine primarily to avoid dying falling off the cliffs and rocks. Some things you just can't zoom with legs.
OK don't laugh or judge, to much I'm new and budget is tight, I have a tamron 18-400 f3.5/6.3. Love it for spontaneous walks and I don't need to change my lens for my different compositions.
No judgment whatsoever Glen! I think it's awesome man and yes being able to cover that large of a focal range is a huge benefit within a single lens!
There's absolutely no reason to laugh at you! It's kinda stupid prejudice that users of these Superzooms have no requirements to a lens. Quite contrary, they have a very high requirement for a lens and that is flexibility. It's just that you prioritize it over the most sharp and crisp and whatever looking image. My goto lens is a 18-135 kit lens, and it's fine for me, too. For more tele range, I got a 70-300 lens. And I don't care what some people want to tell me are the best lenses for me.
I'm in the 18-400 club too😉 I currently adapt it to a Canon M50. I've captured some nice images with it and deleted a bunch, which is the same as every other lens I've used. I will say I have random focus issues using the Canon adapter. I didn't notice any focus problems when I had it on a T7i.
No need to feel inadequate. That's a lot more sensible for most situations than any kit I've ever carried. You should keep it even when you get other lenses later, every photographer needs their own "that one lens" to just throw on, be instantly familiar with and cover all the focal lengths they use. I almost always carry at least two lenses because I'm an idiot that worries too much about image quality even though I know there is almost no difference. When I do grab a single lens it's either a mid zoom or a normal prime, and I have to live with the lack of flexibility.
Glen, the photographer matters more than the gear! In fact, someone without the latest and greatest gear might be a better photographer because he thinks he has to do better, so he tries harder.
I wanted to get a 85mm prime for portraits, then I decided I could use a wide angle for my event photography, now you made me want a super telephoto lens.
I also switched from 70-200 F4 to 100-400 GM. I love the countless options to pick exact composition I want.
Hey Mark, I've photographed landscapes since 2006. I used to live in Arizona before moving to Tennessee. I graduated from Milligan College in 2010 with my fine art photography degree. My favorite long exposure scenario is rolling brook shots in the mossy mountains near my home. Keep up the great work. I've worked as a wedding photographer for almost 10 years. Nature photography keeps me grounded. I recently sold some of my landscapes at a local festival last week. It went really well. I hope I can pursue this form of photography full time one day.
I have a canon 100-400mm super telephoto and the x1.4 converter and haven’t been using them nearly enough. This video has encouraged me to give the super telephoto more thought when out in the field as I often discount a lot of scenes due to compositional issues (when thinking with my 16-35mm)
I remember hen 10 years ago I was using Nikon D90 with Nikkor 18-200, excellent combo. 95% of images I took were at 18mm but the best ones and ones that won micro contests were all shot at 200mm. These days I'm in the Fujifilm system and same rule applies, 60% of my favorite shots come from the long end of my Fujinon 55-200 and at least once a month I am daydreaming about the 100-400, maybe someday.
Don't take this the wrong way, but where have you been all my life?!! Finally, someone who explains all the questions I have about photography in basic, simple terms that I can understand! Thank you so much! I usually binge watch Netflix, but you're my new addiction! I already feel more confident and excited about applying all the tips and tutorials I've seen so far! I am planning a trip to Mt. Washington and Cadillac Mountain in Bar Harbor soon and I will use the tips I've learned to recapture some of my favorite spots. I do have a question about lenses. I have a Pentax Kr and since they have become defunct, do you know if other lenses would be compatible with my camera? Finding Pentax lenses is getting a bit more difficult and I am not sure if camera brand is an absolute when buying lenses. Thanks again, giving you thumbs up, up, up!!
Haha! No offense taken at all! Thanks so much and great to hear you’re enjoying the channel Donna!
Photos taken with a wide-angle lens are often too common and more likely the viewer has seen them before, so the "wow!" factor would be greatly reduced even though the photographer may think that it's the best photo taken by him or her at that particular location. As you said, the telephoto lens increases composition flexibility and could potentially help the photographer to create a unique image. I like it when I post a photo and someone says "Wow, that is a nice shot. Where is that?". To me, that's more interesting than "Nice shot of El Capitan!"
I've learned more today than I have in a year, 4th video of yours I'm watching and didn't even realize I could do this with my 200-500 lens I bought for wildlife. It's a whole new world.... (sing it).
When I was shooting film, I used a 100-300 mm. Now, that I shoot crop sensor (can't being myself to spring for full frame) I carry a 55-250 STM. Lighter and sharper than my 100-300 and it gives my equivalent up to 450 mm.
Great video! I'm waiting for my 70-200 GM II, excited for it. I really like the possibilities with 100-400 and will likely add it in the future.
I rented both for a long weekend. I felt the 100 to 400 was softer than the 70 to 200 and for me the 70-200 was a better choice as it could do more than just landscape as I like it for street as it goes to 2.8. Still, I like your point about the 100-400 is well taken.
I pre-ordered (and am waiting for) the Sony 200-600. I planned on using it for aviation photography, but now I might try it out on some landscapes. Thanks for the tips.
My pleasure - thank YOU for watching!
I agree with you! I just got the 100-400 GM a couple of weeks ago, and love the ability to crop deeply into a scene with the lens itself. It's a very sharp lens. The herons, Seattle Ship Canal and night kayaking on Seattle's Elliott Bay on my Wildmanzen Instagram feed were all shot at around 400mm, hand-held except for the night scene, which was on a tripod. Don't be afraid to get out at night with this lens and a tripod, especially if you have city-scapes available. Once again, your comments are right on the mark. Thanks!
Just bought a 70-300 for wildlife but now you have me super excited to try some landscapes!
I really appreciate the portrait compositions of landscape subjects. I always feel like I need to take them in landscape mode and yet I find portrait compositions much more compelling sometimes.
I agree - portrait orientation is always my first go to!
One of my most favorite photos i took with a Fujifilm ultrazoom at 720mm (4/3 micro senzor).
My Telephoto lens is a Tamron 70-300, which equals 105-450 on my APS-C camera. I might get a 1.4 Teleconverter, though, to reach about 630mm in total. But, remind that: I recently learned that a Teleconverter spreads the available light which reaches your sensor, so you either have to open up the aperture or turn up the ISO.
Nice - 630mm is loooong!!
Only recently started photography. Using a sigma 17-50 F2.8 on apsc Sony. Also have Sony 70-300 f6. Would love a better tele lens but can’t afford anything any time soon. Want a 10-20mm first.
I just picked up a sigma 100-400 a few days ago and you post this today! Definitely makes me feel better about buying it and looking forward to playing with it out on the scapes!
Awesome man! You're going to love it - endless amount of creative possibilities!
Got the humble 70-300mm 4.5/6.3 VR a couple of weeks ago.. yeah, it's a "kit" lense, and it is what it is in terms of aperture, but I'm impressed by how well it performs for the price. Pretty damn sharp (mostly in the 70-200 range, but even beyond that is perfectly usable), VR is great, and so is the AF system. Yes, the aperture can be limiting in low light situations, but if you're willing to work around that, you won't be disappointed. Used it for landscapes, wildlife, and portraits, and so far I can't complain.
Awesome to hear Diego! Glad to hear its working out for you - a good VR system is a must in a long lens for sure!
I love my 100-400mm f/4. On our trip to Alaska last year, I had it mounted on one body and my 16-35mm f/2.8 mounted on the other body. I was amazed how much I reached for the telephoto! More than half of my favorite images were shot with it. Compression of the scene and eliminating distractions were the main reasons...your commentary is spot-on! Thanks again for another great video, Mark.
Appreciate it Jimmy! I'd say about 75% of my images from my recent trip to Yosemite were shot with my long lens as well. Good stuff!
In Alaska wide angle polar bear shots are not advised.
Great shots Mark! Recently picked up a 70-200, and kinda doing what you did, shooting with it all the time. Really cool to see what you're coming up with using the 100-400.
Thanks Jeremy!
I identify myself as a landscape photographer and always carry wide angle lenses, but a couple weeks ago I went on a Utah national park road trip and took the canaon 100-400 with me to explore more intimate landscapes....gotta tell ya, the mental switch was tough. Getting in tight to show more intimate images of such large spaces really conflicts with what you are wired to do there. I'm glad I took it, as it allowed me to get some great shots of the arches, without having to do all the hikes. Traveled wit family as little 3 years old, some of the trails were really a challenge, but this focal length allowed me to get close to this iconic places.
I agree, this focal length is very much a must in a serious landscape photographers bag.
It's funny how much different it is from a mental perspective when we're so used to shooting wide. Thanks for the comment Carlos!
Great, well thought out video that really helped me understand. Thanks for your work!
nbelkind Happy to hear it was helpful! Have a great weekend!
I just got a used 70-300 but see myself wanting this at some point, the ability to add the teleconver for wildlife would be handy.
I think of it like this; when you're a tourist, wide angles are great because they capture the whole scene of an area that you have never been to or rarely go to and you aren't really looking at the small picture. But when you go to that same area often, or you're a local, then you really start trying "new things" or just look and the small things. That's how I view it. I think the Tamron 28-200 for the Sony e mount is THE tourist lens I can think of. Such a large zoom range.
love the composition in your video, the window around your head really works in drawing my attention to you speaking. keep the good work!
Michael Smidotzkiy Many Thanks Michael!
I do a lot of macro focus stacking imagery of flowers at our local BioPark. My most used lens for that work is my 70-300mm, usually at 300mm. I get resulting stacked images that are without question the equal of any such images taken with my 60mm macro lens.
Bought my 200-500mm for wildlife (of course ;) ), but I love it for landscape! I have a day of seascape pics with 50-60 ft ocean swells and 150ft tall ice bergs in the far distance. The 500mm compression makes these images. At 200m it was not the same emotion, ice bergs too far out, but 500mm compressed the ocean swells and brought the ice bergs into the action. It's easily one of my favourite images yet.
I it said before, don't sleep on the super tele's, they are more than just a "wildlife lens"...mine has made more land/seascape images than wildlife, lol. ...and Macro too ;)
Good Tips in this video Mark!!
Cheers,
Really appreciate it Will! I agree - super tele's are one of the most versatile lenses out there!
I have watched a lot of photographers in the last years and i don't use to comment so much ,but you are a little bit special in the way you explain everything, love watching your videos. Well done 👌👍
Florin Andrei Thanks so much for this comment - I really appreciate it!
A fifth reason is isolating a subject with a super telephoto's shallow depth of field. This is perhaps more applicable to close or mid-range shots. Shooting wide open (or stopped down to keep the subject in focus) will throw the foreground and background out of focus, I use this technique with my 500mm f/4; adding a teleconverter increases this effect of course. This is handy to draw attention to a cluster of flowers or colorful leaves when the background is uninteresting or too busy. Just another technique for your mind's set of composition tools.
I'm currently saving up for the 100-400gm. I also shoot animals/birds a lot and haven't gotten a tele since I switched to fullframe as well as to sony. Can't wait. All that's missing after this is the 90mm macro (although I can use my old macro with a manual adapter) and I'm set again :)
Yep, you'll be all set then! Thanks for watching this week's video!
The longest lens I used for landscape is a 85 prime. But I am looking forward to purchase a 135 prime. But I don't know if it will be the Sony 135mm F1.8 GM or the Zeiss Batis 135mm F2.8...
For landscape only the Batis would be my choice due to the lower weight and size. But I wanna use it for portraits as well and then the F1.8 is so incredible! AHHHH!
Nice video, Mark! You make some very useful points, and they are illustrated very well. Thoughtful and interesting!
Many thanks Bruce!!
Thanks, Mark! Another very interesting video. I have a 70-300 that on my Nikon 7500 (crop) gives me a max. 450 focal length. Will be experimenting more now that I understand the "intimate" landscape concept by using the super tele.
Margarita N My pleasure! Glad to hear the video was helpful!
Most interesting video. Originally I approached landscape with a wide angle, but got increasingly frustrated with the limitations that it imposed. Effectively, after the "Golden Hour" I was stuck with the usual challenge of poor lighting and a desperate need for a dramatic sky. Unfortunately on the east coast of Australia the cloud is mostly puffy low cumulus for much of the year. In the last few months I have been doing what you have described......picking out parts of the landscape with a super tele. Often dramatic and very useful to close in on interesting light contrasts in the patterns of the country, trees and other features. Use a Nikon 200-500 and prime 200. When the time is right I can get the trusty wide angle out, but now I can shoot landscape anytime. Thanks for the vid.
Glad to do it and happy to hear you enjoyed it! Many thanks!
I agree that using that type of lens can significantly expand your image options.
It was like opening a creative flood gate once I started to get comfortable with it - good stuff for sure!
dude the moab cliff shot is just splendid!! going soon to iceland with the 100-400gm - your vid was helpful - ty
Another interesting discussion Mark. I’ve chosen to stick with my 70-200 f/4 along with my 1.7 teleconverter. I give up a stop of light, but haven’t missed it much since I shoot landscapes almost exclusively between f/8 and f/16. I lose a little compared to you at the long end, but I appreciate the weight savings on long hikes. Of course, you could slap a converter on your 100-400 and get way longer too.
Many thanks Bill! Yes - weight savings is always a good thing! I had a 1.4x teleconverter on my trip to Yosemite, but never really needed - the 400mm was more than enough on that trip:) Have a great weekend!
I too am into landscapes and nature and I'm happy I purchased this lens instead of the 70-200. I'm going to take it to a hill station next month and after watching this video I think I'm going to return with some amazing shots. Thanks for this video, Mark!
Glad to do it and I appreciate you watching!
I was debating between a 70-200 to 100-500 but your video convinced me to aim for the super-telephoto. I mainly do video and my biggest challenge was always capturing the true size, majesty, or presence, you could say, of mountains; now I'm convinced! Thanks so much!!!
Thank you! Help me see what I might be able to do with my large format, film photography. I have a 400 mm lands which is equivalent to about a 135. But the size of the negative is so large, I can easily do 400 by cropping in. Very cool!
Fairly new to your channel but I have immensely changed the way I approach landscape photography since I started watching your videos. Last week I tried to simplify my camera equipment for this specific trip I did, I brought my back up camera (Canon 6D, my #1 is the 5D mark IV) and a Canon 70-300mm (the one that cost around $150US) and try to see If I could squeeze something good outta that lens... I ended up being frustrated, the prisms in that lens seems to be very thin and creates this hazy images with no texture even when well exposed. So after watching this video (and the other one about what lenses should you buy for landscape photography) I purchased the 70-200mm f4, no IS though as it was a huge difference and my budget is very scarce right now. I hope this will improve those long shots. Cheers for the super helpful video.
Enjoyed your presentation where you clearly explained and showed the benefits of using a telephoto lens in taking landscapes. Many thanks, Mark.
I do most of my nature stuff with my 70-400 f/4, and carry my 2x all the time. Which gives me enough flexibility. I also carry my 16-35 and 24-70 but I guess that I do most around 100-150mm.
thoughts on having a 70-200 2.8 and a 2x teleconverter? allows for 2.8 in low light/portraits, and 400mm when needed for landscapes
I had a Sony 70-200 2.8 lens, but for the stuff I've been shooting lately during the pandemic, I started to realize how 200mm wasn't enough. I didn't need the 2.8 as I haven't really shot in any situation where I needed a telephoto lens to be that fast so I ended up selling it and bought a 100-400 and then a few months later, added the 1.4x TC. Its now one of my most used lenses.
Mark,
Excellent tips on rocking the virtues of the long lens!
Thank-You,
Mike
Thanks Mike! Glad ya think so!
Super insightful! Thanks for sharing. Your photos in the video were amazing too - planning to grab one of these soon :) What I'm looking forward to most is being able to actually capture the little things I personally notice while shooting and find interesting + being able to isolate them like you said. Automatically makes it more of a unique shot!
Very nice images Mark! Love that Yosemite waterfall great framing with those trees on the side. This is the first video in months to actually inspire me to pick my camera up again and buy another lens. Thanks! 😎👍🏻
I spoke too soon.. was still watching now I have to comment on that gorgeous road shot you took with the canopy of trees.. spectacular shot man! 👍🏻👍🏻
Dylan Bishop That’s great to hear Dylan! Appreciate ya watching man!
I am part of a macro group and people use this lens with extension tubes to take photos with the 100-400! It’s my next lens purchase for sure :)
Ahhhh that's an interesting twist to a super tele - great idea!
Jeremy, thanks for the “nudge”. I bought some tubes a little while ago with the idea of using them with my 10-400 canon but never got round to it! They have been experimented with and are now in my bag. The 100-400 is my main and favourite lens.
Hi Mark, I agree with the telephoto lens technique, I often go down to the Great Falls in Paterson, everyone is taking selfies or wide-angle panoramas, I am watching a Green Heron in a tree below the falls or a little tree growing out from the rocks. I even wrote a little poem to go with it.
Very informative video Mark. I do photography for a national disaster relief organization, and I may need to pick one of these up sooner than later. I've been at a point where I go back and forth on what my next piece of glass will be, and I think you helped me make up my mind on this one. Better get to saving up! Thanks for another great video my friend! See you next week!
Sounds like a great cause you're photographing for! You're a good man, Erick!
@@MarkDenneyPhoto it's something I definitely enjoy. Thought about trying to do some personal photo journalism, as it's all volunteer when I deploy to disaster areas for photography.
Hi Mark, some absolutely superb compositions taken there, excellent video mate, very helpful. Great content as always 👍
Mark, Many thanks . You did a good job 👍. Brought out some good points using telephoto a lens. Happy shooting.
Richard Gerber Thanks Richard! Very much appreciate that.
Great clip again Mark! I love my 100 - 400gm with 1.4 teleconverter, great to capture intense colour in small pockets of sunrise/sunset sky’s when at 16mm, not much is happening, great to make those distant mountains look huge when there is also a foreground object! How good is this combo going to be on the A7riv! 👍😀
Oh it would be the perfect match for sure:)
I totally agree with you idea.
I used to take my Sigma 10-20 & Sony 70-400 SSM with my A77II whenever my traveling.
And the coming future will have a new combination of A6400 with 10-18/4 and FE 200-600 OSS.
And I like your shot on 8:59.
Ming Lai Many thanks Ming!
Thank you for making this video. I bought the lumix s1 kit and the 70-200PRO lens. I have used the 70-200 lens 1 time and found I am not happy with it. Not enough zoom. My old camera had 480 mm zoom. And I really miss it. I think I am going to see what I can sell my 200 for and pick up a better zoom lens.
So I just called the camera shop I bought my equipment from. They offered me $1000 trade in towards another lens. Which I am leaning towards the Sigma 150-600. I just paid $1700 for it less then 60 days ago. Is this a fair price? Thank you all for helping. I am kind of new to this (been away from cameras for many years) and should have done a little more research before jumping on this lens.
I occasionally bring my 500mm f8 prime, it's very compact and light - roughly 800g and less long than most regular telephoto lenses
That is pretty light considering the reach!
@@MarkDenneyPhoto oh yeah, it's the Tamron SP 500mm f8 lens. Very sharp (if you can use it properly)
Love that lens, I do not carry my 70-200 for landscapes anymore. I agree with Mark 100%.
Cal Mukumoto Thanks Cal!
G'day Mark. Thanks for your video. Very practical and informative. I've got a 70-200 mm but I also bought a x2 converter ( both are Canon lenses). I've only just begun to scratch the surface on my longer focal length photography so I was quite interested in your video. Thanks again !
Jim Demetriou Thanks Jim!
Happy to hear the video was helpful!
Very true, I love my 100-400 as well. You found really nice landscapes, congratulations!
B AM Thanks so much!
So many breathtaking images! Loved this video.
Nighthawk Thanks so much!
I have a 70-200 2.8 Canon L lens stick it on my 80d with a 2* converter. Absolutely amazing by the way that works out at 640. All the benefits of my 70-200 and the rest.
Ahhhh yes! Mega reach - that's nice:)
I currently own a 75-300mm. I will be doing away with that at some point, and moving to 150-600mm. Good video mark, more tools for the tool box.
Great to hear! Have an awesome weekend!
Can you do a video on what you focus on and if any images are stacked focus images etc? Great video....
This is on a Full Frame, so with a crop sensor, it should be even closer. Like a teleconverter. I will definitely look into a 100-400mm. Great video, great photos
I have a Sigma 150-600 contemporary. I absolutely love it, especially for sports, but it is damn heavy. I'm going to try taking it out this afternoon and try some urban landscape shots. Should be able to isolate some interesting things.
Haven't used one before but think I'm gonna rent one for my a7iii for our trip to Kauai in Sept. Keep up the great videos
Thanks Scott! I wish I had mine when I was in Kauai last year - what an amazing island!
You won’t regret it!
Hi Mark, I always enjoy your video. I've been thinking of buying a super telephoto lens for some time and I find this video very inspiring.
Fully agree. I use almost always super telephoto. Rarely below 100mm
Longest with 800mm .
Thank you, this was super interesting to me since I am hoping to buy a telephoto zoom in the spring for these exact same reasons. And I loved hearing about your thoughts of composition and seeing comparisons between different lenghts in general.
Thank you so much! I came across your channel last week and has been watching lots of your videos, but this was astonishing! I've been waiting for the upcoming Tamron 75-210 mm for months now, but you completely changed my mind. I've heard about the 100-400 mm, but thought it was way too expensive, but it's about the same price as the 70-200 GM f2.8. So the 100-400 mm FE will be my next lens after the GM 24 mm f1.4!
Thank you Mark. Greetings from Upstate NY. Long time viewer but just now subscribed. I've got two camera kits (FF & M43) with lenses for each to cover 16mm-200mm, respectively. I use my smaller M43 kit for travel/daily hikes and the FF kit for more focused type of shooting or projects. I've been looking at adding a super-telephoto to my M43 kit for some of the reasons you've outlined. Plus M43 lens are very compact with plentiful options. Currently saving up for the Pani 100-400mm. Thanks for providing some additional thoughts to help secure my decision!
Many thanks for watching & subscribing Miguel! Really appreciate it!
Very well thought and nicely put together with examples
Thanks Rakesh! I'm glad you think so!
Mark Thanks again for another thought provoking tutorial..... Confession, I purchased a used ( EBay ) older model Canon 100-400 for a trip to Alaska 4 years ago for an Alaska Trip.... I decided at the very last moment that it was way too bulky to carry around for two weeks.. I left it home ( here comes the really sad part ) and have never ever shot with it..Had I watched this video in July of 15..... I would have come away with some very classic images........Recently been thinking about selling it .......for a 4/3rd backup but your Tutorial has convinced me to dust the monster off and see what I can compose...
your videos are always spot on...... UNDERSTANDABLE......INFORMATIVE.......EASY TO FOLLOW ...THANKS AGAIN Mike👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
You. Are. The. Man. Mike! Really appreciate!
This video basically solidifies my decision on getting this lens ... sold me 70-200 f4 as well .... have you shot action sports with this lens mark ?
I'm with ya on almost always shooting at 200. That's when I bought my 200mm L prime.
Oh nice! 200mm prime!
Nice video Mark. I too was planning to get a telephoto lens. But till date I am still confused of Glass/image quality vs more reach. I use a APS-C Nikon d7200 and my options are the tamron 70-210 VC f4 and nikon 70-300 VR. Since I use a crop sensor, I was wondering if the tamron would be enough in terms of reaching the distant scenes as compared the extra 100mm focal length on the nikon. But nothing beats the constant f4 throughout the focal range. My use cases would be landscape photography only.
Yeah thats a tough one, it suppose it really comes down to how large of a difference the two lenses are from an optical perspective. If they're close then I'd personally go with the 300mm.
@@MarkDenneyPhoto If optical performance is the factor then it's definitely the tamron 70-210 f4 that is the winner.
Your last photo of the road was my favourite, its like a scene from a movie. Thanks for the video, I have been agonizing between the 100-400 or the 200-600 but I think I will go for the 100-400 due to the extra stop and the optical reviews have been excellent. Cheers!
Mike Potter Thanks Mike - appreciate you checking out the video!
I really. Ikeda this video. My wife and I have a trip planned for end of August and this will really help. My main lens is a Canon 75 300 4. I'm hoping some day to have a 100 400. That may never happen but this video will help me to use better what I have.
Wow, crazy good video, actual pictures, and good commentary! Subbed!
The compression does not come from the focal length but solely on your position (angle) to the objects. But for sure, this effect can be seen rather with a telephoto lense, but saying "the lense compresses" is optically wrong, although I see your point. Thanks for the vid.
I totally agree. Recently I uploaded a few videos about this too. With a telephoto lens you can get more creative and unique photos in my opinion. I used to work a lot with a wide angle lens but nowadays more with telephoto
RAWSTER Photo I find a long lens much easier from a creative perspective lately as well!
Compression is not because of the long focal length as such but the distance to the subject. If you crop a wider angle photo shot from the exact same position you will get the same compression effect. Minimalism is another benefit of the long lens which you also show. Too many photographers are caught up too much in traditional concepts like foreground, middle ground and back ground. Nothing wrong with that, but too limiting to only think that way. I find abstract photos also is a benefit that often comes up with a long lens. I recommend also ultra wide lenses, so my landscape recommendation for focal langhts is from 11mm to 400mm or even more.
Now that you shoot Fuji, I’m curious if you’ve looked into the new 70-300mm on the X mount. That should get you beyond the range you used with this 100-400mm.
Thank you so much! Very interesting video! Thank you so much!!!
Hi Mark, I bought the 100-400 few days ago and I am absolutely in love with for the exactly same reasons you explain so well in this video. It so versatile! One question: did you change the original plate for the tripod? I am looking for another solution for my Arca ball head, thanks!
Nice ! Thanks for the info.. Aloha from Maui
Diverbuilt Glad to do it - appreciate you checking it out!
Thank you for the review. I think I've taken a liking to your style of teaching. I think its well balanced and I also appreciate you making comments where you can. I'm looking to shoot huge photos of the sun compressed against landscapes here in California so this was a good vid for me. Thanks again
Great to hear Steve! Glad you enjoyed the video!
When you said that you only shot with a 16-35 that really hit me. I currently have the 16-35 and 70-200. Don’t remember the last time I picked up the 70-200
Hahah - yep that was me as well!
Same. I also had a 24-70 which I ended up selling it because I only carry 16-35 and 70-200 everywhere.
Amazing video, I actually learned something. The photo at 11:40 looks like a painting, I had to double check :)
youuuuuuuuuuutube Much appreciated - thank ya!
@@MarkDenneyPhoto where was that photo at 11:40?
Well observed. The only problem I have with super telephoto full frame is when hiking. The weight becomes painful, at age 70+, which is why I also use M43. Only slightly inferior quality but much less weight.
I’m using a 150-600 on an apsc... its fun
I loved the Yosemite falls pic and that cloudy Moab pic. Those are great.
Thanks Joseph! Glad to hear it!
Thanks for this video. I learned a lot.
PhatCrayonz Great to hear - Many thanks👍
Hi Mark and Community,
I would like to ask you which tele lens I should get. I want to get that lens for some detailed landscapes, occasionally wildlife and rarely sports. Weight isn't a problem for me so I can't pick between the Sony 100-400 GM and the 200-600 G ... what would you chose?