Jump to content


Photo

choice of Nikons for landscape photography


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Captzeos

Captzeos

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Location:Prospect KY. USA
  • Interests:Landscape photography, Insects & Flowers

Posted 19 December 2010 - 09:54 PM

Hi Everyone I know this may be a silly question to ask, but since I have read a couple of reviews at B&K on the D700 that mentioned it, I figured what the heck I trust the opinions of the forum in what they think. I have other questions too so don't run away just yet! :rolleyes: The view of a couple of people who shoot landscape photography in this product review said they didn't think the D700 was a good camera for landscape photography. (I think one was comparing it to shooting with film.) That said a little background I have a D300 that I really do think is great, but I bought it just before the D700 hit the market. Now that I am looking at the D700 as a move up I am wondering if something new is probably in the making and I am jumping the gun again. First question: Has anyone heard or know why the D700 wouldn't be a good choice for landscape photography and if so why, and what alternative would be better? Second question: I know no one has a crystal ball here but, whats the opinion of the group on if they think Nikon is going to make either a change in the D700 or maybe a rebate is looming out there in the near future. Last question is that with the D300 I bought the Nikor AF 18~200mm 1:3.5-5.6 ED len. That is the only AF lens I have and to be honest the only zoom lens I have ever really had since all my old Nikor lens where fixed and I felt that they where superior than a zoom lens. What would be a good choice for an additional lens for myself doing mostly landscape photography? Thanks Gary

#2 photographix

photographix

    Planet Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1140 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:tupelo miss.
  • Interests:astronomy

Posted 19 December 2010 - 10:59 PM

i shoot the D200. up from the D70. and i hear great things about the D700 from every one that has it. i don't think you could go far wrong with it for any thing you like to shoot. as landscape lens's go i just scored a tokina DX 12-24 F4 and think it's great but a step under the nikkor which you will need for the full frame of the D700. the sigma 10-20 is a good landscape lens also. with full frame the tokina 17 F3.5 is a good lens. "i like primes over zooms" i had the 17 and loved it when i was shooting film. but i'd say anything from 17mm to 35mm would be good for that kind of work. AF or manual is up to what you like. i would think the landscape wouldn't use AF that much. and you could get some realy nice glass for good price with manual focus too. i won an albiner MF 28mm 2.8 thats sharp as a tack! on ebay for $20 bucks! hope this helped. rick
my placeMy Webpage

#3 Sailjunkie

Sailjunkie

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7234 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Port Moody, BC Canada
  • Interests:Photography, Sailing, Listening to Jazz, Reading

Posted 20 December 2010 - 12:19 AM

My own experience is that the photographer is the critical factor in the success of an image--not the camera. One of my favourite images was shot on a Canon P & S a few years ago. This view is reinforced after seeing the images that Black Pear has taken with the camera on his phone. I also agree that a good wide angle lens can help with landscapes. I bought the Sigma 10-20/f4.5 a year ago, and I have been pleased with it. The irony is that some of my best landscapes have been shot with the 18-105 VR. The minimum focal length is just short enough to work for landscapes; and I don't have to change lenses as often for other types of work. Just my .02 worth. :)
Mark

D810
Various lenses

Member, Canadian Association for Photographic Art

http://markshawphotography.ca

#4 mark2711

mark2711

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 807 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Photography, Motor Bikes, My Porsche Boxster, International Sports, Sport Cars, Flowers

Posted 20 December 2010 - 03:45 AM

Hi Gary I have a D300 as well, I'm sure you can get as much out of a D300 as D700, considering you would be going from DX to Fx full frame. My attitude is after being on this forum since May of this year, and looking at lots of photos from lesser cameras, people are still getting brillant photos, as Mark suggested it's not necessarily the equipment you are using but more the techinque and understanding of photograpy's science Cheers another 2 bobs worth Mark
Mark Rhind

D300

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
Nikon 20mm f2.8
Nikon 50mm f2.8

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8
Carl Zeiss 85mm f1.4 (manual)
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8


Photography is life


#5 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5342 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 20 December 2010 - 06:44 AM

Good landscape photography has nothing to do with the camera and to be honest very little to do with the lens. Its all about the photographer and how they firstly see the scene, secondly how they decide which bit to capture and then where they take the shot from. Yes a wide lens will allow you to emphasize the foreground and a long lens will appear to compress perspective but you need to understand how they do this to get the best shots. Stick with your 18-200mm (its a cracking good bit of kit) and just learn it. Learn it of by heart. Learn it to the point that when you're out for the day and see a scene you imediately think 'that would look great at about 35mm' so when you put the camera to your eye you get exactly what you saw. Untill anyone can do this with their kit I'd recommend them not buying more lenses. As to a replacement for the D700 then it is over due, likely to be anounced in the spring (Vegas probably), will have loads more pixels and full HD video. Personally I don't care. Until the small bodied FX range is as fast as my D300s, has a 100% viewfinder and can beat it for IQ at lower ISO's then I don't want one and actually even then I don't need one.
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

#6 Captzeos

Captzeos

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Location:Prospect KY. USA
  • Interests:Landscape photography, Insects & Flowers

Posted 22 December 2010 - 09:14 PM

Thanks everyone for replying back to me on this. I thought it seemed strange when I read the review on the D700 being not that good for landscape photography. Really just doesn't make sense to me, but hey I thought I would put it the forum to see if they had heard such a thing about it. You know the only thing I can possible see someone saying that is maybe comparing digital to film. I'm not sure where I stand on this myself. After all the film I shot over the years I still would have to scan the transparencies to get a print and I was back in the same boat as if I had taken them with a digital camera.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users