infinity focus / wide open landscape photography

[jean_marie_dederen]

<p>After I realised that my old nikon glass produced reasonable results with some landscape pics I took recently, I have decided to put the 6x6 aside for a while and try out some more! In medium format I had the 120mm lens and the 50mm and 60mm. In nikon's 35mm lenses i have an endless variety of lenses to choose from! I only use BLACK and WHITE and I like <strong>wide open </strong>landscapes (I call them panoramas but I am hesitant to use the word as I have no interest in stitching photographs togeteher, and I found out in a previous thread that landscape refers to that particular practice). I welcome anybody's experience with reference to the following:<br>

LENS CHOICE (preferably old nikon glass; pre-AF which is what I have and can afford; what id your favourite and why? most of the treads I have read -and there are quite a few! - recommend wide angles, which altough they produce razor sharp infinity details, render horizon detail so flat that they are hardly visible)<br>

FILTER CHOICE (I have used yellow and orange; but still feel unsure bout its exact effects; again your personal preference and a motivation is what will inform me)<br>

TRIPOD (I prefer to avoid it; I make small prints and if I managed to hold my hasselblad without shake I should have no problem holding that F2, Fe2 or FM2 nikon body)<br>

FILM CHOICE/SPEED (I would like to know about your preference and why; eg XP2 overexposed by one stop produces finer grain, I learned in another thread)<br>

DOF (how to extend it without losing definition on the horizon; OR: what is your favourite fstop and why)<br>

I prefer early morning and late evening shots; on this side of the equator there never seems to be a shortage of light (even if it doesn't last very long at those particular times).</p>

[Ray House]

<p>Use the tripod, that will also allow you to study compositions and make minor adjustments. Color filters with B/W will lighten same colors and darken opposite colors. Yellow - Darker blue skys w/ more contrast with clouds. Orange - stronger effect. Green - will lighten green foilage and darken reds. Last but not least...Use the tripod!</p>

[jensvind]

<p>I shoot digital so the film part is not an issue but as low iso as possible in any circumstances.<br>

There are many good free programs available on the net for finding the right DOF / aperture /lens combination. I try to set F/16 because it is often in the middle of a Len's aperture possibilities.<br>

When I shoot BW (setup in the camera) I use orange filter for better contrast, or add it in NX2.<br>

I prefer panorama but here is an example of 14mm, and using a wide lens it is a must to have something in the foreground <br>

Tripod needed shooting panoramas.</p><div></div>

[jose_angel]

<p>I currently don`t mix landscape photography with 35mm format, but..</p>

<ul>

<li>I`d choose a slow, fine grained, real b&w film rather than a 400ISO, C41 process. Just for home fun I have recently launched to the FP4 + Perceptol at nominal speed. Maybe I`d use TMAX100 for your kind of task, even if you`re printing small.</li>

<li>Favourite lens; moderately wide (35mm) to tele or whatever. Matter of subject and taste. No limits. I avoid very wide angles maybe because I use to prefer highly detailed subjects. I know that distortion&horizons could be an issue with certain 35mm lenses.</li>

<li>Tripod is a must for landscape photography. If I`m going for a landscape, I take the tripod first, then the camera. It helps in my composition, way of shooting. It makes me think. Maybe it`s silly, but I need it.</li>

<li>Filter choice; I use to avoid filters. If there is too much sky, maybe I use a yellow or dark yellow, and very rarely an orange one. I tend to avoid too much sky on my shots. I`d start testing if results&metering with a dark yellow are ok. Don`t know how this filters affect chromogenic films.</li>

</ul>

<p>BTW, although shot in color with a D700 + 24-70 @ 32mm, f8 - 1/250, could have been the same with my F3 camera:</p><div></div>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Lens--- 25-50mm f4, 24mm 2.8, 28mm 2.8 all AIS</p>

<p>Films--- Pan F 50, Delta 100, Tmax 100...always better to over expose it a little than underexpose it especially when you're not the one cooking it.</p>

<p>Filter--- Red's stronger than orange's stronger than yellow, maybe ND and a graduated ND's handy...</p>

<p>I prefer F11</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Is this a wide open landscape?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know.... but I like it.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Okay, I'll bite. This might be interesting.</p>

<ul>

<li>Lens: 28/3.5 PC-Nikkor. Really handy for fine tuning alignment after setting up a tripod with sliding center post and ballhead. Not needed with a fine pan head and geared elevator center post, tho'. My second choice would be a 35mm PC-Nikkor. I'm not fond of ultra-wides for landscapes, especially for 35mm SLRs - the corners and edges look odd an unnatural. I'd save the ultra-wides for confined spaces.</li>

<li>Filter: Orange. It's my only must-have filter for b&w scenics. Yellow doesn't do enough, red often does too much.</li>

<li>Tripod: I dislike heavy tripods. I mostly use a Slik medium duty legset with Velbon magnesium ballhead, or Bogen/Manfrotto 3001 with Super 3D 3028 pan head. If I was really serious about precise alignment I'd consider a geared pan head, but so far it hasn't been necessary.</li>

<li>Film: T-Max 100 at 100 in Microphen if I'm developing my own (or EI 64-80 in ID-11). Otherwise Ilford XP2 Super at EI 250-320 would do nicely.</li>

<li>Aperture: Usually around f/8-f/16 with this lens for reasonable DOF without going into diffraction to much. Hyperfocal setting would be around 5-8 feet, but I'd probably focus a bit farther away if there's no significant detail closer than 20 feet or so.</li>

</ul>

[Matthew Currie]

<p>I'll bite too. When I'm looking for a wide view, I'm usually looking at mountains and trees and rivers and the like, where a bit of linear distortion is no big deal. For a lens, my current favorite is the 24/2.8 AI, second the 35/2.8PC when I remember to bring it. A 20 is dramatic but often a bit too much, and the perspective effect hard to tame. For some unknown reason I never seem to get anything good out of a 28, and prefer a 35 when the coverage is enough. Choice depends mainly on how much foreground I want. One of these days I'll have to try a 28 again and see if I can break the curse.</p>

<p>I don't mind a heavy tripod, and my current favorite is a Bogen 3221 with a Bogen ball head whose number I can't seem to retain in my brain. Second, always-in-the-car-in-case tripod is a Slik 400DX, whose 3-way head is nice and quick to get level.</p>

<p>I usually shoot either Velvia or Provia 100 slide film for landscapes. Otherwise, some kind of 400 print film in one of variety of secondary cameras that come along when others stay home.</p>

<p>Middle range apertures like f8 or so seem fine with wide angles, since the depth of field is so good, and I usually put the 24 at or near infinity. My general feeling is that the least tolerable softness is in the long-distance details. A mountainside with fuzzy trees and rocks is a throwaway, so I tend to err on the side of infinity focus.</p>

[john_narsuitus]

<p>Camera Choice<br>

When I am doing landscape photography, I prefer a format larger than 35mm. In order to avoid camera shake at slow shutter speeds due to mirror vibration, I prefer a view camera, a rangefinder, or a twin lens reflex instead of single lens reflex camera. Also, even though I love the square format for general shooting; for landscapes I prefer the rectangular format.</p>

<p>Lens Choice<br>

For the wide vista shots like you are describing, I prefer a lens with a 65-degree horizontal angle of view. This translates to a 65mm lens on a 6x9cm medium format camera or a 28mm lens on a 35mm small format camera. Two 28mm lenses that I have used when forced to shoot landscape with a 35mm camera are the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 AIS and the Nikon 28mm f/4 perspective control. Both are sharp. The perspective control lens gives me the ability to capture a wider angle of view by allowing me to easily take two different shots and stitch them together during postproduction.</p>

<p>Filter Choice for Black & White Film<br>

I avoid using filters because I make large prints and therefore try to avoid anything that robs me of detail. However, when I really need a filter, I have an inventory of glass, gelatin, and plastic filters that I can use.</p>

<p>I have never been satisfied with a yellow filter to darken a blue sky. Instead, I use an orange or a red filter. I use a green filter to lighten green foliage. I use a graduated filter to reduce the exposure difference between a bright sky and a dark foreground. I use a polarizing filter to control reflections on water.</p>

<p>Tripod<br>

As I said before, I try to avoid anything that robs me of detail; therefore, I religiously use a tripod with a pan/tilt head. I also use a cable release and a spirit leveler.</p>

<p>Film Choice/Speed<br>

It has been a long time since I have purchased black & white film for landscapes. Therefore, I do not know if these films are still available. However, here are some of the films I liked for landscapes:<br>

Ilford Pan F+ (50)<br>

Ilford Delta 100<br>

Ilford FP4 (ISO 125)<br>

Kodak TMax 100</p>

<p>Notice that all are low ISO films that can capture the fine detail that I want.</p>

<p>Depth-of-Field<br>

The more you stop a lens down, the greater is the depth-of-field. However, since most lenses are not as sharp when stopped down to their smallest aperture, I rarely use the smallest aperture. Instead, I stop the lens down no more than two stops away from its smallest aperture. For example, one of my 28mm lenses stops down to f/32. I rarely use f/32 but instead limit myself to f/16 when I want an image with great depth-of-field and sharpness. I also use the depth-of-field scale on the lens barrel to set the focus at the hyperfocal distance in order to obtain the widest depth-of-field for that f/stop.<br>

.</p>

 

[jean_marie_dederen]

<p>Sorry for my delayed response/appreciation, our server took a dive again. I am amazed that nearly everybody works in the 24-35mm lens range. I can see that you widen the frame considerably, and keep excellent definition with a wide angle lens. But the flattening of what happens on the horizon has kept me back from using anything less than 50mm. In fact I found the short side of the 75-150 E lens and the 80-200 f4.5, f4 so far the most useful. But I will try the wider ones on my next outing. With the hassie I could use the 38 distagon, blow up a small fraction of the frame (usual the top of the frame) and still have reasonable definition. I doubt that this strategy will work with the nikon lenses. Only one person seems to use a zoom nikkor?<br>

LEX: don't you find the orange filter limiting your enlarging of the pictures? I admit that the contrast is stunningly changed but even on my 6x6 prints the picture seems to break up beyond 10 inch.<br>

JOHN: does the rangefinder's absence of the mirrorbox makes such a difference, given you are working with a tripod?<br>

JOSE: definitely wide and open!</p>

[jean_marie_dederen]

<p>Oeps: 'kept me back from using anything less than 50mm' should read 'anything below 50mm'...sorry.</p>

[john_narsuitus]

<p>“JOHN: does the rangefinder's absence of the mirrorbox makes such a difference, given you are working with a tripod?”</p>

<p>Even when I am using a very sturdy tripod, I can see a decrease in image quality due to camera vibration caused by mirror slap when I am shooting with a long telephoto lens and a shutter speed between ½ second and 1/15 second. Therefore, when I am shooting under these conditions, I use my camera’s mirror lock-up feature.</p>

[dennis_george_miller]

<p>28-45 zoom<br>

50-135 zoom<br>

Tmax 100, tech pan 25 (two camera bodies) going to try newer TMY, seems very nice<br>

light hiking tripod<br>

favorite pic last year with IR400</p>