Yes, that 24-70 “kit lens” (f/4) is incredible value for money. If you shoot landscape, primarily from tripod, aperture closed to over f/8, then this lens makes you forget that more expensive lenses might be better in some ways, completely.
Totally Agree! Don't tell Angry Photographer (Ken of Theoria Apophasis) though. He was savage on that lens (let alone anything Nikon these days). Lost his mind I tell you.
@@ElGrecoDaGeek - he's been on my black list in T for ages. The Brits have this saying "better a noble savage than a savage noble" and this applies to their society at large as it never had something like the French Revolution to teach nobles a lesson. Well, the man is plain savage on all levels with zero civilization. Why do people fall for deluded theatrical people with Münchhausen complexes, narcissism and worse psychotic personality disorders? It must be in our genes, as some biologists say that women prefer assholes and men prefer bitches. In the long run that is what humanity ends up with for 100% - nice men finish last because they are at the bottom end of the competition line for reproduction. Apophasis for channel name is a dead giveaway.
Also a Fuji shooter and went out for Autumn colour yesterday. I don’t have the 35mm 1.4 yet but want to get one soon. I took the 16-55 f2.8. It’s on the heavy side but as a single carry lens on the X-T3 in a waist band bag it worked out just fine. I would like some OIS as the light was poor and I blurred some shots with a too low shutter speed but the keepers are tack sharp and the colours vibrant.
Always a pleasure to see Pebbles walking with you. She seems to be such a nice company! I got that 24-70 f/4 as a kit lens with my Z6ii, and Im so happy with it. I just wished the range was a bit higher. But this is because I was used to the 18-105 I got as a kit lens with my previous D5300. But quality isn't comparable; the 24-70 is really wonderful
Me too, disappointed Nikon haven’t done a 24-105. My thinking is as quality of pictures is so good can zoom in. If they do put out z 24-105 probably won’t upgrade.
I totally agree with you Nigel, woodland photography is one of the most peaceful things to do! Keep up the good work, and continue to enjoy life to the fullest.
I find that my Sony F4, 24 105 is my go to lens for woodland, occasionally just need the additional reach that the kit lens does not have. Enjoyed you vlog v much 👍😊
My experience with going to wider angles - I never >owned< zooms in the past 55 years of photography - was that the step from 50mm to 28 opened new possibilities and even when the difference in angle was big, it was relatively uncomplicated (28/50=0.56). Then the step to 24 felt like an evolution with new possibilities, but not a big shock too (24/28=0.86). At some point, I added a 20mm and I had to figure out point of view and perspective completely over again (20/24=0.83). There is a linear relation between focal length and angle changes. Some reflection on what is going on, led me back to perspective drawing class. It is the “square law” that relates “distance” (a ”linear” thing) to the associated “area” (a “power of 2” thing) . Simply put, if at distance 1 we consider an area of 1 by 1, then the area we see at distance 1 is 1; at distance 2 this becomes 2x2 is area 4 and at distance 3 the area becomes 3x3=9. The explanation is in here, for the “inverse square law” that predicts flash power relative to distance. If we look at the (inverse) square law from the side, then we see that >relative< changes between steps closer to the starting point are bigger than farther away from it. In flash this explains how we can play with lighting the subject versus the background through the use of flash-subject distance. Well, in landscape photography, or wide-angle in general, the relative area changes over distance nearby being much more than farther away, we suffer from the inverse problem in that the relative size in the picture, of what is in the foreground becomes much bigger. It’s the well known portrait of a boxer’s fist being much larger in the photograph than their head. My experience is that this “foreground effect” effect becomes a hurdle wider than 24mm. You really have to reinvent "point of view". A road in the middle of the frame becomes a way too big area in the frame, generally and choosing another point of view that gives a different perspective becomes a requirement, most of the time. Such empty space (in the case of the road) needs a filler, a prop, a something, if our shot is not about “emptiness”. When you shoot “the woods” then the 20 can become a nuisance. Shoot the blooming meadows in the Alps in Spring or Summer, or poppy fields in Italy’s rolling hills and the 20 helps you create a popping foreground that exaggerates in greater detail, what is farther in the distance. You could shoot an environmental portrait at about 1.5m distance (avoid the edges of the frame) that isolates the subject from the background, not in background blur but because everything at distance is much smaller.
Having a limited budget, I like to use my Sony R1 with its amazing 24-120 lens that is so sharp across all focal lengths and apertures. No need to change lens, great quality images with APS sensor and Carl Zeiss lens. I paid £40 for it. So anyone who thinks photography has to be expensive, don’t believe it. Get out there. Thank you Nigel for your passion and your willingness to share 👍🏻
Love those conditions at the start - I actually think your new version of "Wise" was even better than your first! I am very envious of your beautiful woods in the UK, particularly in autumn, though our bush and rainforests here in Australia can have their own (albeit often messy) beauty. Thanks for all your inspiration with woodlands, it's definitely one of my favourite places!
I don't shoot landscape but I love your videos. Your calm voice, great choice of music, it all makes it sooo relaxing to watch. And as a bonus I learn something new.
I recently took a road trip to Colorado to shoot the fall colors. I took two lenses: the Canon 24-105mm f/4 for landscapes, and the Canon 400mm f/5.6 for wildlife. After watching the video, I decided to enumerate the photos I had taken at different focal lengths with the 24-105. The results are interesting: 40% of the photos were taken at a focal length greater than 70mm. In short, I love the 24-105 range, and would feel quite restricted if limited to 70mm or less...I love the Canon 24-105mm!!!
A 24-70 is a "X3" zoom above which factrr performance degrades. Going to a X5 or even an X10, they are compromises and image quality drops off. The 24-105 is a nominal "X4", reasonable but the wide end of an long zoom is generally for finding the subject. Most extra-long zooms are best backed off a little from full extension.
I use the 24-105mm Canon lens for nearly all my photos. I've noticed that in very tight woodlands and forests, even focal lengths over 70mm are very common in my images.
Lovely to see Pebbles again, I agree the 24-70 most versatile for woodland. Went out with 70-300 on APSC other day and struggled to get composition. Will go with Z7 & 24-70 f4 great combo.
I love my 24-70 2.8 even with its extra weight. However, when I drove through the western US in 2019, the 70-200 was my go to lens for those more open scenes.
did wonder where doggy was and glad you went and got your Pebbles. somehow completes the scene! 🐾 find walking in woodland so soothing almost like being in a bath, never want to leave. wonderful photos and education, also the fascinating insight into woodland terrain of Tenerife.
Thank you Nigel for this video, really inspiring. I am amazed that you can bring beauty out of woodland even if it’s raining! That was one of my big concern, to only shoot when I had great sunny weather. Thank you once again for the inspiration!
Kind of arrived to the same conclusion.... : Shooting at F8-11 with a correct zoom is plenty sufficient for printing. Now I only take primes one at a time and "turn my vision" at set focal length. Otherwise i go with a 28-48mm + 75-150mm all F4 manual lenses. My thought goes wide lens vs long lens, and then go short vs go long on that lens. So far so good :D
Woodland around here usually isn't very dense. Often there's plenty of space between trees so I usually stick to my 70-200 2.8 to get more compression in the scenes. But the 24-70 is always in the bag.
Lovely video Nigel 👏👏 you did however have me in tears 😢 we had to say goodbye to our little Poppy, a border terrier cross, in April and this is the first autumn I’ll be out shooting in woodland without my little shadow. Keep up the great videos 👍
forgot to mention, the earlier Wise, for this viewer. Absolutely beautiful and loved the now missing tree on the left of the composition as well as the fallen trunk, across the foreground to the right. Colours too, immense image. (second Wise also very nice, but as you said, more a 'record' shot).
Great video Nigel. Loving the soft woodland look to these images. Made me giggle when you were telling pebbles not to jump all over the ferns/bracken. Marley can be like a bull in a china shop sometimes bouncing over everything so I can totally relate to that. I feel lost without him when hes not with me out on location. I love to use my 24/85mm lens in woodlands or go wide.. Only issue I face with it is there's no image stabilisation on it so I have to be very steady taking shots with it or use the tripod. I agree 60mm is a great focal length. I feel going less brings in too much foliage and can often leave the shot looking distracting. Loved the point you made about going to the edge of the woodland for more directional light. That 58mm shot @10:37 is really stunning. I relate woodland photography close to street photography as its seperating the chaos from the madness. Woodlands are very busy locations to shoot in but I love it as it makes it that little more challenging to find a composition. Loved the images throughout this video Nigel. Really inspiring to watch. Thank you for sharing! Have a great week! ;)
I often found a 24-70 didn't have just quite enough reach for me, so I paired a Sigma Art 24-105 with my D850. Now with my Z7 I'm using a 24-200 since I got tired waiting on the Z mount 24-105. I must say that its a great lens with very little downside. And now that Nikon has finally announced the Z 24-105 I'm a bit confused whether I want it after all!
Great conditions for magical images, when you were at the beginning of the video. There’s something mystical about the natural woodland scenes you capture so well. Thank you for the informative explanation on best practice for shooting with the versatile lens you were using. Great to see your ‘bestie’ in amongst the ferns! Fabulous.
A telephoto will not only give a shallower DoF for the same aperture as a wider one, but also foreshorten the view as the focal length increases. This can be useful, or not. It depends on what you want to achieve,. And maybe how much you can zoom with your feet. A wide to telephoto zoom is not just about framing the shot, it is a creative tool.
Woodland is the hardest to shoot for me. All the different leaves, brambles, branches, remind me of those dense passages of woodwinds in Beethoven's symphonies where I can't quite differentiate the voices. Like your approach.
Your video was perfect timing for me today! I am in the Olympic Rainforest (Washington state, USA) and so in love with these woodlands. My burning question for you (you alluded to it briefly in the video) is what do you recommend in dealing with relatively low light conditions and breezes moving the vegetation? High ISO’s?
Me too Nigel , love the Forest peace felt .. . Thank you so much for your guidance here, so appreciated. AND So glad you took the comp at 12:25 , beautiful!. Pardon my silly ol gear question. Re: Considerations on entering mirrorless as hybrid instrument , especially stills for crisp details in foliage as not so easy to tell on youtube. Do you find the details are improved on the mirrorless vs the ol dslr like the D810/D850?I ask because its important to my-eyes for seeing details to develop details in drawings]. ps. Been wanting to order your course decidedly amazing collection of images [Woodlands book] , yet just have to wait a while after our elections as our rand is madly steep at the mo, so...hope it gracefully improve erelong.
So glad I found you on you tube. Sensational info. Simply I am a retired enthusiast. Landscapes main interest.I have a Z6 . I would like to get larger sensor to increase image detail. I gather you can not simply photo-stack to get a bigger image or use Topaz Gigapixel software to increase the image size. You simply need to have say the Z7 or ZII 45MP to get more pixels & up the image details ? Value your thoughts . I have not the money to go up to the Z9. Cheers dvcid for Australia
Back in my film days, I liked, no, loved slide film. I tried 28mm and my results, on slides , were too "far". I used a 35-70 and really like the results. Now, entering digital, wider angle lenses can be used.
My steady lens is the Canon 24-105 F4L, on the crop 80D, I have not seen anything to say this is a compromise with not having the 24-70, for wide shots I couldn’t bear to part with my Tamron 10-24.
In woods you don’t need either very wide angle or well over 70mm You are like 150mm on a crop with your kit . By restricting yourself it is a lot easier and more creative, better results. You will get better compositions by restricting yourself.
Although my favorite lens is 90mm macro, 24-70( in my case 2.8) is the most versatile one for me. Any time I wonder which to take but only 1, I take 24-70. Photos , video, architecture, woodland, landscape, a kind of macro. I am fed up with upstocking gear while on the go. Cheers, mate!
I have a Sony a6600 and I love my old alpha mount f2.8 16-50mm-(24-75mm in 35mm format) auto focus lens. It works really well with my Sony LA-EA-5 adapter. Heavy, but all I can afford now. Focus stacking is so much easier on the a6600 with its touch screen. I use Helicon Focus because I'm incompetent with Photoshop 😎😎
24-105 f4 for me. There maybe a fractionally better image quality on the f2.8 but once you stop down to the best aperture for the individual lens it is hardly noticeable. In landscape work the subject is static, the camera can be stabilised on a tripod or other support and a greater depth of field is the usual requirement. 95% or more lenses will be stopped down to a minimum of f5.6 and therefore i don't see the need for a fast 2.8. They are heavier and far too expensive. For wildlife (my primary subject) and sport it is a totally different matter and i always buy and use the fastest lenses I can afford.
loved this video but for the first 5 minutes I wasn't sure which of the 24-70s you were using ...the f2.8 or the f4? until 5:30 then I saw you had the f4 in hand. phew. If I'd been patient you answered my question 9:00
Hey Nigel, great video! I was wondering, how are you cleaning the IBIS sensor of your Z6/Z7? Do you still do it yourself like you explained in one of your older videos? Thanks!
Nigel, I love your videos! Thanks for all the hard work you put into these and sharing your knowledge. May I ask you a question on the Nikon Z System: When doing long exposure, longer than 30sec, I can't figure out how the get a preview of the image, nor an indication on the exposure. What am I missing? It would be great to get any idea on the exposure when using ND filters and shutter speeds more than 30sec. Thanks so much and keep it up! Best regards from Germany! Sebastian
picking a favourite lens seems like a sweet problem for me at the moment. i want to upgrade my camera body, but really can't seem to part with the feel of a OVF and there doesn't really seem to be a particularly great equivalent to a canon 90d mirrorless wise in terms of price or specs.
I understand …. It’s difficult without spending lots of money ….. I went from a Canon 60d to a Fuji XT2 ….. took a bit of getting used to, but overall very happy now …..while I miss the OVF, I do like other features of EVF, and I love having smaller gear
Very helpful video again, as always. Thanks! Question: What shutter speed did you use on the photo at 5:10? Those ferns were blowing about quite a bit.
This is ~28-85 mm equivalent so basically yes, with a little shift to the long end... So if you can live with lesser wide and lesser shallow depth of field, fully legit.
Thanks for this video. I lke the idea of restricting yourself to one lens. This weekend I only used a 50 mm prime, it was restrictive but also good. @nigel, do you use some sort of XLR-adapter on your Z-camera for video? I recently bought a Rode NTG5 and it requires phantom power so I am looking for a solution where I don't have to go through a audio recorder.
Hi Nigel, nice inspirational video, I use a Nikon D500, do you have any recommendations for a woodland lens since this lens only fits the Z nikons, I think. Cheers, Ian
So...I shoot crop...so would it be fair to say that in my case...in your opinion, something like the 17-55 would be your ideal choice for woodland? I'm really torn as to what lens to get...I recently picked up a D7500. Probably won't be going full-frame until later next year at the soonest unless a killer deal on a body pops up...I currently have a 70-200 f/4 and the 50mm f/1.8. I want to add something wider. Not sure if I should go ultra-wide and grab the 10-24 or 12-24, or bump it up to a standard zoom and go 16-35 or 17-55.
if you would have watched the video you would understand when he pointed out twice why he doesn’t like the 24-105. but we have to let the world know our opinion.
i would like to know how the 24-70 compares to fixed focal lenses in that range. Is the zoom nowadays really almost as sharp and resolving as the primes?
Hi Nigel, Another very interesting video. I can imagine how lovely it feels having you pal Pebbles with you. Would you consider using the heavier f2.8 in the dark woods but without carrying a tripod or does the tripod allow you to take more considered photos?
I had an instructor/woodshop. He said he did not like this lens. He stated that it is too close to what we normally see, making things more boring. Less dramatic. At least he did not say the 24-70 was a mistake like some others say when you don't shoot the way they want you too, but he stated he preferred lenses outside the normal view although he did say 24 is closer to wide angle but not a focal length he would choose. I have come to the conclusion, there is no best lens. They all serve a purpose, it is the photographer that makes the image special, not the lens.
The 24-70 used here is the f4 “kit lens” with the Nikon FF mirrorless cameras. When bought with camera it is cheap as chips and unbelievably good…probably the best kit lens ever made. A must have if you are buying into the Nikon system
@@Kaarne Whether you're EF(-S) or RF, take a look at the 24-105mm F4L. That's next on my list as I build up my kit. Still fairly expensive, but not like the 24-70mm F2.8Ls.
Great tips and photos Nigel, as usual! Quick question: With a crop-sensor camera does shooting at the millimeters you cited, 16mm, 24mm, 70mm hold true? I’m a tad confused if I’m honest about this. Thank you.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
I love Pebbles! I love to see the shots with her in them. They tell a story along with the rest.
So glad you went back and got Pebbles. Love her love of mud....such a Springer thing.
Yes, give me a decent zoom any day of the week. I use an 18-55mm with my 7d for woodland and landscape more than anything else.
I agree, finding zoom lenses are my preferred choice over primes for woodland photography. My most used lens is my Sony 24-105, love it
Same here, 24-105mm is my go to lens
Agree too, adore my primes for portraits and street but for woodland it has to be my 12-24mm and 24-70mm combo
It was neat around 7:30 to see Nigel basically walking around inside the eventual photograph and talking about various parts of it.
Yes, that 24-70 “kit lens” (f/4) is incredible value for money. If you shoot landscape, primarily from tripod, aperture closed to over f/8, then this lens makes you forget that more expensive lenses might be better in some ways, completely.
Totally Agree! Don't tell Angry Photographer (Ken of Theoria Apophasis) though. He was savage on that lens (let alone anything Nikon these days). Lost his mind I tell you.
@@ElGrecoDaGeek - he's been on my black list in T for ages. The Brits have this saying "better a noble savage than a savage noble" and this applies to their society at large as it never had something like the French Revolution to teach nobles a lesson. Well, the man is plain savage on all levels with zero civilization. Why do people fall for deluded theatrical people with Münchhausen complexes, narcissism and worse psychotic personality disorders? It must be in our genes, as some biologists say that women prefer assholes and men prefer bitches. In the long run that is what humanity ends up with for 100% - nice men finish last because they are at the bottom end of the competition line for reproduction. Apophasis for channel name is a dead giveaway.
My favourite focal length is the 50mm full frame eq. I mainly use the Fujifilm 35mm f2 in woodland. I use my feet I do not use a zoom lens
Also a Fuji shooter and went out for Autumn colour yesterday. I don’t have the 35mm 1.4 yet but want to get one soon. I took the 16-55 f2.8. It’s on the heavy side but as a single carry lens on the X-T3 in a waist band bag it worked out just fine. I would like some OIS as the light was poor and I blurred some shots with a too low shutter speed but the keepers are tack sharp and the colours vibrant.
Always a pleasure to see Pebbles walking with you. She seems to be such a nice company!
I got that 24-70 f/4 as a kit lens with my Z6ii, and Im so happy with it. I just wished the range was a bit higher. But this is because I was used to the 18-105 I got as a kit lens with my previous D5300. But quality isn't comparable; the 24-70 is really wonderful
Me too, disappointed Nikon haven’t done a 24-105. My thinking is as quality of pictures is so good can zoom in. If they do put out z 24-105 probably won’t upgrade.
I totally agree with you Nigel, woodland photography is one of the most peaceful things to do! Keep up the good work, and continue to enjoy life to the fullest.
I find that my Sony F4, 24 105 is my go to lens for woodland, occasionally just need the additional reach that the kit lens does not have. Enjoyed you vlog v much 👍😊
My experience with going to wider angles - I never >owned< zooms in the past 55 years of photography - was that the step from 50mm to 28 opened new possibilities and even when the difference in angle was big, it was relatively uncomplicated (28/50=0.56). Then the step to 24 felt like an evolution with new possibilities, but not a big shock too (24/28=0.86). At some point, I added a 20mm and I had to figure out point of view and perspective completely over again (20/24=0.83). There is a linear relation between focal length and angle changes. Some reflection on what is going on, led me back to perspective drawing class. It is the “square law” that relates “distance” (a ”linear” thing) to the associated “area” (a “power of 2” thing) . Simply put, if at distance 1 we consider an area of 1 by 1, then the area we see at distance 1 is 1; at distance 2 this becomes 2x2 is area 4 and at distance 3 the area becomes 3x3=9. The explanation is in here, for the “inverse square law” that predicts flash power relative to distance. If we look at the (inverse) square law from the side, then we see that >relative< changes between steps closer to the starting point are bigger than farther away from it. In flash this explains how we can play with lighting the subject versus the background through the use of flash-subject distance. Well, in landscape photography, or wide-angle in general, the relative area changes over distance nearby being much more than farther away, we suffer from the inverse problem in that the relative size in the picture, of what is in the foreground becomes much bigger. It’s the well known portrait of a boxer’s fist being much larger in the photograph than their head. My experience is that this “foreground effect” effect becomes a hurdle wider than 24mm. You really have to reinvent "point of view". A road in the middle of the frame becomes a way too big area in the frame, generally and choosing another point of view that gives a different perspective becomes a requirement, most of the time. Such empty space (in the case of the road) needs a filler, a prop, a something, if our shot is not about “emptiness”. When you shoot “the woods” then the 20 can become a nuisance. Shoot the blooming meadows in the Alps in Spring or Summer, or poppy fields in Italy’s rolling hills and the 20 helps you create a popping foreground that exaggerates in greater detail, what is farther in the distance. You could shoot an environmental portrait at about 1.5m distance (avoid the edges of the frame) that isolates the subject from the background, not in background blur but because everything at distance is much smaller.
For someone who's a total beginner at shooting woodland, that tip about starting at the edge of the woodland was gold. Thanks man. 🙏📷✌️💚
No worries - glad you found it helpful. Good luck!
I love my Z 24-70 f2.8 S on my Z7 for darker Forest /Woodland work >> better than the F4 as a result of conditions = double the light
Having a limited budget, I like to use my Sony R1 with its amazing 24-120 lens that is so sharp across all focal lengths and apertures. No need to change lens, great quality images with APS sensor and Carl Zeiss lens. I paid £40 for it. So anyone who thinks photography has to be expensive, don’t believe it. Get out there. Thank you Nigel for your passion and your willingness to share 👍🏻
Love those conditions at the start - I actually think your new version of "Wise" was even better than your first! I am very envious of your beautiful woods in the UK, particularly in autumn, though our bush and rainforests here in Australia can have their own (albeit often messy) beauty. Thanks for all your inspiration with woodlands, it's definitely one of my favourite places!
Agreed Lisa , it feels more pure the second ..x
Thanks so much Lisa
I don't shoot landscape but I love your videos. Your calm voice, great choice of music, it all makes it sooo relaxing to watch. And as a bonus I learn something new.
I recently took a road trip to Colorado to shoot the fall colors. I took two lenses: the Canon 24-105mm f/4 for landscapes, and the Canon 400mm f/5.6 for wildlife. After watching the video, I decided to enumerate the photos I had taken at different focal lengths with the 24-105. The results are interesting: 40% of the photos were taken at a focal length greater than 70mm. In short, I love the 24-105 range, and would feel quite restricted if limited to 70mm or less...I love the Canon 24-105mm!!!
Cracking piece of kit the 24-105 👌🏻
A 24-70 is a "X3" zoom above which factrr performance degrades. Going to a X5 or even an X10, they are compromises and image quality drops off. The 24-105 is a nominal "X4", reasonable but the wide end of an long zoom is generally for finding the subject. Most extra-long zooms are best backed off a little from full extension.
I use the 24-105mm Canon lens for nearly all my photos. I've noticed that in very tight woodlands and forests, even focal lengths over 70mm are very common in my images.
Lovely to see Pebbles again, I agree the 24-70 most versatile for woodland. Went out with 70-300 on APSC other day and struggled to get composition. Will go with Z7 & 24-70 f4 great combo.
Absolutely love Pebbles. (had 2 Spaniels myself)
Didn't seem right without seeing Pebbles. Beautiful shots. Love my 24-70!!!
As always, fantastic video, Nigel
Love this vid…inspired me to get out to our local woodlands with my Z7 and my dog👍
I love my 24-70 2.8 even with its extra weight. However, when I drove through the western US in 2019, the 70-200 was my go to lens for those more open scenes.
did wonder where doggy was and glad you went and got your Pebbles. somehow completes the scene! 🐾 find walking in woodland so soothing almost like being in a bath, never want to leave. wonderful photos and education, also the fascinating insight into woodland terrain of Tenerife.
Thank you Nigel for this video, really inspiring. I am amazed that you can bring beauty out of woodland even if it’s raining! That was one of my big concern, to only shoot when I had great sunny weather. Thank you once again for the inspiration!
Kind of arrived to the same conclusion.... : Shooting at F8-11 with a correct zoom is plenty sufficient for printing. Now I only take primes one at a time and "turn my vision" at set focal length. Otherwise i go with a 28-48mm + 75-150mm all F4 manual lenses. My thought goes wide lens vs long lens, and then go short vs go long on that lens. So far so good :D
Yesterday I got my copy of your 2022 Calendar. It doesn't get better than this 😀
Woodland around here usually isn't very dense. Often there's plenty of space between trees so I usually stick to my 70-200 2.8 to get more compression in the scenes. But the 24-70 is always in the bag.
Lovely video Nigel 👏👏 you did however have me in tears 😢 we had to say goodbye to our little Poppy, a border terrier cross, in April and this is the first autumn I’ll be out shooting in woodland without my little shadow. Keep up the great videos 👍
forgot to mention, the earlier Wise, for this viewer. Absolutely beautiful and loved the now missing tree on the left of the composition as well as the fallen trunk, across the foreground to the right. Colours too, immense image. (second Wise also very nice, but as you said, more a 'record' shot).
Yes - that tree that had been felled made the image I think
Great video Nigel. Loving the soft woodland look to these images. Made me giggle when you were telling pebbles not to jump all over the ferns/bracken. Marley can be like a bull in a china shop sometimes bouncing over everything so I can totally relate to that. I feel lost without him when hes not with me out on location. I love to use my 24/85mm lens in woodlands or go wide.. Only issue I face with it is there's no image stabilisation on it so I have to be very steady taking shots with it or use the tripod. I agree 60mm is a great focal length. I feel going less brings in too much foliage and can often leave the shot looking distracting. Loved the point you made about going to the edge of the woodland for more directional light. That 58mm shot @10:37 is really stunning. I relate woodland photography close to street photography as its seperating the chaos from the madness. Woodlands are very busy locations to shoot in but I love it as it makes it that little more challenging to find a composition. Loved the images throughout this video Nigel. Really inspiring to watch. Thank you for sharing! Have a great week! ;)
Hello Nigel, I absolutely agree with you about the 24-70 mm f4 lens. It's my go-to lens. Awesome shots.😎👍👏👏
Always enjoy your vlogs, Nigel
I often found a 24-70 didn't have just quite enough reach for me, so I paired a Sigma Art 24-105 with my D850. Now with my Z7 I'm using a 24-200 since I got tired waiting on the Z mount 24-105. I must say that its a great lens with very little downside. And now that Nikon has finally announced the Z 24-105 I'm a bit confused whether I want it after all!
I have torn between the f4 24 70 and the 24 200 as my "go to lens" after seeing this I will try just the 24 70 again. thanks!
Great conditions for magical images, when you were at the beginning of the video. There’s something mystical about the natural woodland scenes you capture so well.
Thank you for the informative explanation on best practice for shooting with the versatile lens you were using. Great to see your ‘bestie’ in amongst the ferns!
Fabulous.
I love this format of tutorial stile
So good to see Pebbles, again!
Nice images, Nigel! Great compositions!
A telephoto will not only give a shallower DoF for the same aperture as a wider one, but also foreshorten the view as the focal length increases. This can be useful, or not. It depends on what you want to achieve,. And maybe how much you can zoom with your feet. A wide to telephoto zoom is not just about framing the shot, it is a creative tool.
Just stunning ..x
Amazing you were able to get such great shots in the woodlands with 24mm.
8:45 of pebbles - great story shot :)
Woodland is the hardest to shoot for me. All the different leaves, brambles, branches, remind me of those dense passages of woodwinds in Beethoven's symphonies where I can't quite differentiate the voices. Like your approach.
Your video was perfect timing for me today! I am in the Olympic Rainforest (Washington state, USA) and so in love with these woodlands. My burning question for you (you alluded to it briefly in the video) is what do you recommend in dealing with relatively low light conditions and breezes moving the vegetation? High ISO’s?
Me too Nigel , love the Forest peace felt .. . Thank you so much for your guidance here, so appreciated. AND So glad you took the comp at 12:25 , beautiful!. Pardon my silly ol gear question. Re: Considerations on entering mirrorless as hybrid instrument , especially stills for crisp details in foliage as not so easy to tell on youtube. Do you find the details are improved on the mirrorless vs the ol dslr like the D810/D850?I ask because its important to my-eyes for seeing details to develop details in drawings]. ps. Been wanting to order your course decidedly amazing collection of images [Woodlands book] , yet just have to wait a while after our elections as our rand is madly steep at the mo, so...hope it gracefully improve erelong.
So glad I found you on you tube. Sensational info. Simply I am a retired enthusiast. Landscapes main interest.I have a Z6 . I would like to get larger sensor to increase image detail. I gather you can not simply photo-stack to get a bigger image or use Topaz Gigapixel software to increase the image size. You simply need to have say the Z7 or ZII 45MP to get more pixels & up the image details ? Value your thoughts . I have not the money to go up to the Z9. Cheers
dvcid for Australia
Back in my film days, I liked, no, loved slide film. I tried 28mm and my results, on slides , were too "far". I used a 35-70 and really like the results. Now, entering digital, wider angle lenses can be used.
So beautiful shots .
My steady lens is the Canon 24-105 F4L, on the crop 80D, I have not seen anything to say this is a compromise with not having the 24-70, for wide shots I couldn’t bear to part with my Tamron 10-24.
In woods you don’t need either very wide angle or well over 70mm
You are like 150mm on a crop with your kit . By restricting yourself it is a lot easier and more creative, better results. You will get better compositions by restricting yourself.
Love how Bebbles is playing his own games 😊
Beautiful images
Although my favorite lens is 90mm macro, 24-70( in my case 2.8) is the most versatile one for me. Any time I wonder which to take but only 1, I take 24-70. Photos , video, architecture, woodland, landscape, a kind of macro. I am fed up with upstocking gear while on the go.
Cheers, mate!
I have a Sony a6600 and I love my old alpha mount f2.8 16-50mm-(24-75mm in 35mm format) auto focus lens.
It works really well with my Sony LA-EA-5 adapter. Heavy, but all I can afford now. Focus stacking is so much easier on the a6600 with its touch screen. I use Helicon Focus because I'm incompetent with Photoshop 😎😎
Beautiful video!
24-105 f4 for me. There maybe a fractionally better image quality on the f2.8 but once you stop down to the best aperture for the individual lens it is hardly noticeable. In landscape work the subject is static, the camera can be stabilised on a tripod or other support and a greater depth of field is the usual requirement. 95% or more lenses will be stopped down to a minimum of f5.6 and therefore i don't see the need for a fast 2.8. They are heavier and far too expensive.
For wildlife (my primary subject) and sport it is a totally different matter and i always buy and use the fastest lenses I can afford.
Thank you…. what a beautiful video. I’m glad you brought pebbles 😍. I have to admit, my favorite photos are of pebbles 🤗
Wonderful stuff
loved this video but for the first 5 minutes I wasn't sure which of the 24-70s you were using ...the f2.8 or the f4? until 5:30 then I saw you had the f4 in hand. phew.
If I'd been patient you answered my question 9:00
I'd love to know the shutter speed for these photos. Also, what, if any, filters are you using?
Wow,amazing,l love it.thanks a lot
Hey Nigel, great video! I was wondering, how are you cleaning the IBIS sensor of your Z6/Z7? Do you still do it yourself like you explained in one of your older videos? Thanks!
Yes - I clean it every few weeks.
Thanks Nigel! Beautiful images!!
I'm getting seriously annoyed with the lack of fog in my area so far this autumn. Great vid, thank you.
Nigel, I love your videos! Thanks for all the hard work you put into these and sharing your knowledge. May I ask you a question on the Nikon Z System: When doing long exposure, longer than 30sec, I can't figure out how the get a preview of the image, nor an indication on the exposure. What am I missing? It would be great to get any idea on the exposure when using ND filters and shutter speeds more than 30sec. Thanks so much and keep it up! Best regards from Germany! Sebastian
"Violent agreement," LOL. My 24-105mm f/4 is my go-to lens for intimate woodland compositions.
fantastic to see your videos 😊
Find these videos so relaxing for some reason; love the focus on one small technical area. Also where in Tenerife is this??
Woodland photography is my antidepressant!
‘Don’t jump on the ferns’ 😂😂reminds me of when my dog ran away with part of my composition
24-70 is the best in general for me.
absolutely great lens the nikon z 24-70 f4 👍
Nigel, isn't there a trick or a safe tip to handle all the green hues properly? Is it all about having a calibrated monitor?
picking a favourite lens seems like a sweet problem for me at the moment. i want to upgrade my camera body, but really can't seem to part with the feel of a OVF and there doesn't really seem to be a particularly great equivalent to a canon 90d mirrorless wise in terms of price or specs.
I understand …. It’s difficult without spending lots of money ….. I went from a Canon 60d to a Fuji XT2 ….. took a bit of getting used to, but overall very happy now …..while I miss the OVF, I do like other features of EVF, and I love having smaller gear
Upgrade from 90d would be pointless, i ve seen extraordinary photos with apc canon with sigma legendary lens 18-35 f1.8 in woodlands.
@@NikosPer you've got it wrong. My current setup is one 40D with 120k actuations and T2i with 19k ;)
@@rokpodlogar6062 oh ok then! i am still with a 350d and a Sx50 HS ;)
Very helpful video again, as always. Thanks! Question: What shutter speed did you use on the photo at 5:10? Those ferns were blowing about quite a bit.
Beautiful.. thanks for sharing ❤️🙏🏽.. Love to Pebbles ❤️
I suppose a 14-42mm kit lens for M43 would give similar results ?
This is ~28-85 mm equivalent so basically yes, with a little shift to the long end... So if you can live with lesser wide and lesser shallow depth of field, fully legit.
Thanks for this video. I lke the idea of restricting yourself to one lens. This weekend I only used a 50 mm prime, it was restrictive but also good. @nigel, do you use some sort of XLR-adapter on your Z-camera for video? I recently bought a Rode NTG5 and it requires phantom power so I am looking for a solution where I don't have to go through a audio recorder.
Great video as always!!!
Nice video , you and pebless 👍❤️
Hi Nigel, nice inspirational video, I use a Nikon D500, do you have any recommendations for a woodland lens since this lens only fits the Z nikons, I think. Cheers, Ian
So...I shoot crop...so would it be fair to say that in my case...in your opinion, something like the 17-55 would be your ideal choice for woodland? I'm really torn as to what lens to get...I recently picked up a D7500. Probably won't be going full-frame until later next year at the soonest unless a killer deal on a body pops up...I currently have a 70-200 f/4 and the 50mm f/1.8. I want to add something wider. Not sure if I should go ultra-wide and grab the 10-24 or 12-24, or bump it up to a standard zoom and go 16-35 or 17-55.
Beautiful pictures……I have a question: is the canon lens 24-105mm f/4.0 USM fine too for woodlands photography?
Of course it is!
Did you name the new shot Too Wise? We walked around our local wood yesterday, going to check my focal lengths now 😁
Amazing photo, Nigel 📸
If you like a 24-70... you should try a 24-105 ;D Beautiful photos from Tenerife! :D
if you would have watched the video you would understand when he pointed out twice why he doesn’t like the 24-105. but we have to let the world know our opinion.
i would like to know how the 24-70 compares to fixed focal lenses in that range. Is the zoom nowadays really almost as sharp and resolving as the primes?
Yes basically 👍🏼
@@NigelDanson Thank you, that sounds very good.
More nice images. Glad you explained the jacket. Seemed a bit odd. 👍 🥂
For me, it wasn't so much the jacket itself, as the combination of jacket & shorts. I always feel a bit awkward when I end up wearing such a combo. 😆
Hi did you use any filters with 24 70 f4 lens?
Thank you. 👍📷😎
Witch linse would you go for on a nikon D7200?
Hi Nigel, Another very interesting video. I can imagine how lovely it feels having you pal Pebbles with you. Would you consider using the heavier f2.8 in the dark woods but without carrying a tripod or does the tripod allow you to take more considered photos?
Great video .. very insightful … when would you take the 24 70 f4 and the 24 70 f2.8 and when would you use either in your experience .. Thanks Nigel
Weight is the only deciding factor on that one. If hiking a long way I would take the F4
The new version of 'wise' has a calmer, more atmospheric feel to it.
Can we get a Pebbles calendar next year?? 😃
Love the music. Is it available somewhere?
I had an instructor/woodshop. He said he did not like this lens. He stated that it is too close to what we normally see, making things more boring. Less dramatic. At least he did not say the 24-70 was a mistake like some others say when you don't shoot the way they want you too, but he stated he preferred lenses outside the normal view although he did say 24 is closer to wide angle but not a focal length he would choose. I have come to the conclusion, there is no best lens. They all serve a purpose, it is the photographer that makes the image special, not the lens.
You got me intriqued on the 24-70 mm. But damn, it's way too expensive for me to even think of buying it, sadly.
The 24-70 used here is the f4 “kit lens” with the Nikon FF mirrorless cameras. When bought with camera it is cheap as chips and unbelievably good…probably the best kit lens ever made. A must have if you are buying into the Nikon system
@@Hemlck I only have Canon gear, unfortunately.
@@Kaarne Whether you're EF(-S) or RF, take a look at the 24-105mm F4L. That's next on my list as I build up my kit. Still fairly expensive, but not like the 24-70mm F2.8Ls.
@@JROwensPhotos That's over 1000 €, too. No way I'm able to buy a 1000 € lens. :'D For now, I'll settle only dreaming about owning those lenses.
Great tips and photos Nigel, as usual! Quick question: With a crop-sensor camera does shooting at the millimeters you cited, 16mm, 24mm, 70mm hold true? I’m a tad confused if I’m honest about this. Thank you.
no - if it is a 1.5 crop then divide them by 1.5
@@NigelDanson Thank you, Nigel. One day I'm going to change all to full-frame. Having to do these mental machinations are not enjoyable.
your not gona go to la palma next are you Simon? i wouldnt recomand it at this time