Best single landscape lens for a D800?

<p>Thinking about forking out $3K for beaucoup megapixels makes my stomach churn a little, but adding to my dilemma is the fact I'm a DX user now and don't have a landscape lens for FX of suitable quality for a 36MP sensor. I'm thinking maybe Nikon 17-35mm, or 16-35mm, or Zeiss 25mm (f/2 or 2.8, I'm not sure). Other possibilities? General thoughts?</p>

<p>Nikon's new 36MP D800 is not available yet. The closest thing I have used is the older D3X that is 24MP. The 17-35mm/f2.8 AF-S is already showing soft corners on the D3X. The one lens that I really like on the D3X is the 24mm/f3.5 PC-E lens, but that is lens very expensive and is also manual focus. However, having tilt/shift is great for landscape.</p>

<p>I have never used the 16-35mm/f4 outside of a camera store, but its distortion problems are well known.</p>

<p>Samyang manual focus 35mm f1.4 got stunning reviews and cheap (but do check bad copy variations)! The nikon 14-24mm is wesome especially for a zoom. 24mm T/S is great, no doubt but an expensive one trick pony. The zeiss are expensive and MF only. Might look at the recent tokina wide zooms...</p>

I have the 16-35mm f/4.0 Nikkor. It is very sharp from f/8.0-11, where I like to shoot a lens outdoors for DOF. When you

shoot the lens on-axis, distortion is well-managed with a lens correction program in a RAW converter like Adobe Camera

Raw.

<p>If you just want it for landscape I would lean towards the Zeiss ZF.2 line. I don't see much need for zooms for landscape photos, nor do I need AF. In fact I find both can get in the way a bit.</p>

<p>The Zeiss 21mm f2.8 Distagon is truly in a league of its' own in many respects.</p>

There's no such thing as a "landscape" lens. I and others use everything from super-wide, eg 14mm on FX, to 200mm

and beyond. Zooms are convenient for framing and especially when you cannot "zoom with your feet," in tight spaces, but many prefer primes because of perceived, if not always measurable, higher image quality. Autofocus is genuinely superfluous and irrelevant when the camera is, as it should be, leveled, on a tripod. Chose your lens, or lenses, based on their optical quality, and usefulness for the type of images YOU enjoy making.

Enjoy your D800. I cannot wait for mine.

<p>I regularly shoot landscapes with my Tamron 70-300 VC - on Ektar or Reala film, it holds up to 5400 PPI scans, so that and my 50mm 1.8G are on my short list for D800 lenses.</p>

<p>Oh, did you mean that you shoot landscape in wide angle? :)</p>

<p>I agree there is no "best" landscape lens. I use lenses on my D300 from 11mm to 400mm for landscapes, and on my 4x5 from 90mm to 300mm, plus lenses from the 1850s, 1890s, 1920s, 1990s. It all depends on the scene and what I want to create, what sort of look I want. If I had to pick just ONE lens for a D800 for dedicated landscapes, it would be a Nikon PCE lens, probably the 24mm PCE. For landscapes I'd rather have a much cheaper camera with a PCE lens than an expensive camera without one. Really, when I am serious about landscapes I am still shooting 4x5. D800 won't change that for me. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>Why is the idea that a wide angle lens is a requirement for landscape photography so embedded in everyone's psyche?</p>

<p>I am also mystified by the great appeal that a PCE lens has for so many people. How many pictures do you need to take where the prominent foreground recedes into the distance? PCE: yes for architecture and interiors, but why so essential for landscapes unless the above is the only kind of shot you want to take? I guess I don't get it - perhaps this is because I don't own one. Perhaps you can shed light on this, Kent, re a tilt-shift?</p>

<p>R Smith: < Why is the idea that a wide angle lens is a requirement for landscape photography so embedded in everyone's psyche? > Not sure where you're getting this. The OP mentioned interest in 'the best' lens in the context of 16-35mm range so it would stand to reason he's not looking for a 50, 85, 200 or 500mm lens. We're simply answering the question in the context of the 'wideangle' question. Nobody is suggesting 'required'.</p>

<p>Because these are the lenses the OP suggested and most of the suggestions given are wide angles. Also, historically, most people answer "wide angles" whenever this question is asked in Photonet. I am with Kent and Eric on this one. I just wonder why it is so, because it is an attitude I find very common from talking to other photogs.</p>

<p>I always remember once being told that someone's 24mm was "better" than my 28mm because "it got more in". So my comment was a comment on these threads in general and not solely aimed at this particular thread.</p>

<p>Another vote for the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon. If you truly want a "landscape lens," the fixed focal length and manual focus should be fine for you. In terms of resolution and price/performance, this thing is a beast. Rent one on LensRentals.com for a few bucks and see if you like it. If you do like it, they will apply your rental fee to the price of a new lens.</p>

<p>Go to about 10 mm. Then you won't have to focus or compose and you will have the whole landscape. Sorry I couldn't resist. Seriously, on my last landscape outing I left my super wide zoom at home because of weight. I rarely get a keeper using super wide lenses. </p>

<p>If you have not already done so, navigate to John's Photo.net page, click on his personal home page/blogspot, click on John's photo, and you will arrive at his Zenfolio website. Check out his horizontal and vertical landscape photos to have a feel for why he is interested in a wide angle lens. From John's list of ideas, I would choose a Zeiss prime. But that's me, and I still like prime lenses.</p>

<p>Your idea to go with a zoom is more valid than many people assume, IF you avail yourself of your RAW conversion software's ability to correct for geometric error, CA, vignetting, lens softness, etc. at every aperture and every aperture. I use DxO Optics Pro, but I understand that Lightroom has similar capability. DxO has correction tables for all the Nikon body/lens combinations, as well as the Zeiss MF lenses.</p>

<p>I'm not so familiar with the Nikon/Zeiss comparisons, but Zeiss doesn't always win in the Canon/Zeiss comparisons. No one should automatically assume that Zeiss will be superior. Once again, your RAW conversion software is going to have a huge impact on the contrast and color balance and saturation. We're not shooting Kodachrome anymore, so we shouldn't select our lenses as if we were still under the same constraints as in the good ole film days.</p>

<p>As an addendum, if I were photographing in the southwest US, and for example, included slot canyons in my plans, I would welcome the advantage of a zoom lens: More compositional choices, and no lens changing in what can be a dusty environment. Primes and zooms both have their place. It's personal preference.</p>

<p>The Nikon 16-35 f:4 is reputed to be one of the sharpest lenses they've produced. You don't need a fast lens for landscape shooting.</p>

<p>If you like super wides the 21mm ZF. For a more moderate wide angle the oddly maligned 25mm f2.8 Distagon ZF is outstanding for landscapes as well as its newer brother lens the 25mm f2 Distagon.<br>

Finding a zoom that does justice to 36MP might be hard but I suppose we will have to wait and see what actually works well or not.</p>

<p>Thanks for the thoughtful responses. Somehow I knew it wasn't going to make the final choice any easier! Frankly I'd like to replace almost all my lenses, but that will take time. I like to shoot wide most of the time, so that's why I'm looking at that range for my #1 lens. If there was such a thing as a 20-105mm that got raves, though, I'd be on it.</p>

<p>Nikon just published a technical guide for the D800 and D800E including a list of Nikon lenses that will provide "enhanced sharpness" including the 24-70, 24-120 VR, 70-200 VR2m 200-400, and micro 105 G.</p>

<p>I find the most thoughtful lens reviews and best comparisons are done by Lloyd Chambers on diglloyd.com. Some of it is free but the in-depth reviews you have to pay for. If you are dropping serious cash on a D800E and the right lenses for it this may be a sensible expense.</p>

In landscape situations where manual focusing would be necessary, how feasible could it be to focus with D800's Live View?

 

I am tempted by a D800/Zeiss 50mm 1/4 for mountain hiking. Maybe the time has come to retire my faithful F3/Nikkor 50 1/4...

<p>Didier I focus that way on the D700/D3 and my ZFs all the time. Works extremely well and particularly for compositions where you are isolating some feature with a wide aperture setting. I expect my D800E, when it comes in 2 months time, to be used the same way.<br>

One serious advantage of any manual focus lens is a hard infinity stop which is a lifesaver if you do nocturnal landscapes.</p><div></div>

<p>Robin,</p>

<p><em>" PCE: yes for architecture and interiors, but why so essential for landscapes "</em><br>

<em><br /></em><br>

<em><br /></em>Shift allows you to put the horizon anywhere in the frame you want while keeping level horizons and anything inside the frame straight, trees, buildings etc. Look down <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-TS-E-17mm-f-4-L-Tilt-Shift-Lens-Review.aspx">this page</a> at the girl leaning on the gate for a dramatic illustration of the effects.</p>

<p>Whilst I am not interested in starting a flaming war, or any aggravation what so ever, whilst Nikon is truly wiping the floor with Canon at the moment, one area Canon are leaps and bounds ahead of Nikon is in the tilt shift lenses. I know one Nikon pro who owns a 5D MkII just to use with his 17mm TS-E.</p>