Ideal lens lineup for landscapes

[brett_kosmider]

This question may garner more than a few 'it's your own preference' responses, but

I'm wondering what other people have as far as lens selection when shooting

landscapes.

 

I have a Mamiya RB67, currently with a 50mm C and a 90mm C lenses. Wondering

where to go from there. With prices as they are I'll be able to afford 2 more lenses.

 

Just looking to see what other people shoot with (no matter what make or model) and

why they shoot with those lenses.

 

Thanks,

Brett Kosmider

[jay_.]

I wouldn't think of lugging an RB67 into the field so I shoot Hasselblad, and the format is slightly different so perhaps my choices won't apply, but I use 40, 50, 80, 150 and 2x-Mutar; and a variable extension tube for macro with the 150.

[brooks short]

Brett,

 

I prefer the 110 over the 90 and the 65 and especially the 250 are nice focal lengths.

[martin_patek_strutsky]

Brett,

 

in addition to the 50mm and 90mm my third lens would definitely be the 180mm Sekor. My fourth lens would be the 65mm or 360mm.

 

The tele lenses (180, 360mm) are usually excellent even if you decide for an older sample.

 

The older wide angles (50, 65mm) sometimes had quality problems. It would be a good investment to pay a little more for a late 'Sekor C' or for a 'KL' lens.

[wim_van_velzen]

For my 6x6 I use 50, 80, 150, 250 and 250 + 2x conv. Would I use a Mamiya RZ67 I am almost sure I would opt for the 50, 65, 110, 180, 360. A 90 could replace the 65 and 110.

<p>

But all this is up to your own preferences and uses. <a href="http://www.fotografiewimvanvelzen.nl/webarticle04.htm">This article</a> might be useful.

<p>

Cheers, Wim

[b_kosoff]

I've been figuring out what to bring on landscape trips for a while now. As a

former studio photographer I got used to having all my gear available and it's

hard to break that habit.

 

I do 2 different types of trips which usually last a few weeks, fly/drive and

drive only. Fly/drive trips are the most challenging as the need to carry on all

the gear limits what i can bring. My 2 most recent setups have been a Fuji

GX680III system. As that camera body is so huge i can only carry one body

with me, I do bring 3 film magazines though and a polaroid back. As far as

lenses go I bring 65mm, 100mm and 150mm Fujinons, and to save space

and weight i use my view camera lenses, 180mm Sinaron SE, 210mm

SinaronSE, 240mm and 300mm APO Ronars, and a 400mm Osaka tele.

Sometimes I bring a 250mm Imagon as well. And believe it or not all that fits

into a backpack and shoulder bag along with polaroid film and 150 rolls of

film. I will also wear some of the gear in a photographers vest on the plane.

This kit ends up weighing in over 60 pounds without the tripod.

 

In an effort to simplify, I recently acquired a Fuji GX617 system, with 3 lenses,

the 105,180 and 300mm fujinons. The idea being the the film is so huge that i

can crop into at will and still have a large negative area but be able to

simulate other focal lengths through cropping. This kit all fits in one back pack

and a small shoulder bag for film. This kits weighs about 30 pounds.

 

For drive trips I'll take the GX617 system and a view camera system, either a

Canham DLC, or a Sinar P2 if i'm planning on doing some long exposure

shots and want a heavier, more stable camera. in that case the lenses are

65mm, 90mm, 115mm, 150mm, 210mm, 240mm, 300mm, 480mm. All

Rodenstocks.

 

I also bring other gear, such as a laser rangefinder, a laptop computer with

GPS Topo and astronomical software , and night vision. I err on the side of

being overly prepared.

[brett_kosmider]

Brian,

 

Wow, not only do you hit the road in style (mucho gear), but your portfolio is

amazing. Really great stuff! It only shows that sometimes it pays to pamper yourself

with "that one extra lens". I specially like the 617 shots. very nice work.

 

BK

[roman_sonnleitner1]

Hi,

I have been using a 6x6 format MF system so far, and mostly used a 45mm or 50mm lens for landscapes, though those were not wide enough for my taste. My secon-most used lens was the 120mm, third the 65mm, and fourth the 250mm; I never really cared a lot for the 'normal' 80mm (likewise, in 35mm I like 24 or 28mm, 35mm, 85mm, 135mm, but don't use the 50mm a lot for landscape - though I love the 50 with a rangefinder for people-pictures...); just switched to a 645 system, got a 35mm, 70mm and 150mm so far, don't have a lot of experience with this setup yet, but will probably get something in the 110-120mm range eventually...

[b_kosoff]

Brett and Peter thanks for the kind words.

[sumo_kun]

I have a Pentax 67II but I'm poor so I only have the 45mm and the 75mm for it. I also have a set of extension tubes just in case I see some macro stuff. I've only ever wanted a longer lens like a 200 in 2 occasions so far. I like wides.

[rosswordhouse.com]

I like to keep my life simple and light. I shoot a G617 with a fixed

105mm. It has served me well in just about every situation. Only

once or twice did I wish for a 300mm. I then just shoot it with the

105 and crop it to meet my vision.

 

I'm a 1 camera, 1 lens, 1 film type of person. I almost always

shoot wide vista pano's so if I need to get closer I use my feet. If I

need to get farther then my trusty feet are there again.

 

I don't see the need for a ton of extra's when you are hiking into

the backcountry. It's just more you have to lug around on the off

chance that you will need it. Sure I have probably missed a

couple of shots because of this, but having a lighter pack has

made for a more enjoyable hiking experience. When you are

hiking a good 6-8 miles then every lost pound counts. My whole

pack with water comes in right around 25lbs. You can hike all

day with a pack like that.

 

If I was a road side shooter then I would deck myself out to the

tilt, but then I would be in the poor house, or the dog house with

my wife :-)

 

Keep it simple, keep it light, keep it shooting.

 

www.rosswordhouse.com

[brett_kosmider]

Thanks to all. I appreciate the insight and learning how other people work (and

confirmation that we all don't work exactly the same - a good thing).

 

Looks like I'm going to try to trade the 90mmC for a 90mm KL (better glass) and

stock the rest of the lineup with a 180mm KL and possibly the 360mm KL if I can

stomach it. The 250mm KL is a close 2nd on that one.

 

Thanks,

BK

[aricmayer]

Brett,

 

Just to prove that it's your preference, my advice to you is to sell all that stuff and buy a

Hasselblad SWC 905, Simply the best wide angle camera ever made. The 38mm lens is

sharp from 22" to infinity when stopped down. It's super compact. You have to walk a lot

to compose, but since it is so light and such a joy to use, you'll be bounding through the

landscape in no time. You will shed all that weight you gained from staying so close to the

car with your RB67. Your love life will take off when those Swedish chics from the foreign

exchange photo tour see your great piece of engineering... Ok, well, anyway, perhaps I

digress. That's my choice.

[brett_kosmider]

Aric,

 

LOL - good stuff! I will have to check out the Hassy you mentioned. I'm sure, in due

time I will discover that I need another camera to play with (we're all addicted to this

stuff aren't we?). I chose the Mamiya for the 6x7 aspect, as much as I enjoy the

aesthetic a 6x6 offers.

 

Thanks for the fresh perspective - I'll have to investigate that camera!

 

BK

[aricmayer]

Cheers, Brett.

[todd_schoenbaum]

I have the same setup as you and the third lens I added to it was the 180mm KL, I was thinking of the 250mm KL, but it was harder to come by and more expensive. And looking back, I am glad I got the 180 as I think the 250 would have been too long. I think that 3 lenses is plenty with 6x7 negs, and I would spend the rest of the money on an extension tube and a polaroid back. By the way, the polaroid back was the best $100 I spent on equipment in a long time.<p>

 

todd schoenbaum<br>

http://www.celluloidandsilver.com