Thanks for sharing the one lens you need for landscape photography. Here are mine: 90mm f/5.6 Fujinon for 4x5 inch monorail view camera 65mm f/5.6 Fujinon for Fuji GSW690 medium format rangefinder 50mm f/4.5 Mamiya for RB67 medium format SLR 28mm f/2.8 Nikkor for Nikon 35mm SLR 28mm f/2.8 Zeiss Biogon for Contax 35mm rangefinder 14mm f/2.5 Panasonic for Olympus micro 4/3 16-55mm f/2.8 weather-resistant auto focus Fujinon for weather resistant Fuji X-Pro2 digital mirrorless
Thanks for mentioning me and for featuring my photo, but you had things a little mixed up 😉. The new Nikkor 14-30mm for the Z-mount is an f/4 lens. I actually switched to the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens to (1) get more light into the camera which (2) allowed me to shoot at a relatively low ISO 3200, and (3) for 10-13 seconds to avoid light trails. This photo is actually three images (10 seconds each) overplayed on Lightroom.
I bit the bullet and bought a Canon 80d (second hand) which was delivered on Monday! Can’t wait to try it out with my ef 10-18mm at the weekend, weather permitting in the UK of course. Also got the efm 11-22mm for my M50.......I’m now broke, but happy 😃 😃
16-35 mm nikkor, My first FX lens. Love it to bits. Cost me close on a grand (Dont tell my wife !) Worth every penny. I use mine on a tripod most of the time, monopod when no tripod. Results are just stella. My lad uses Canon. He bought their 16 35 F2.8. Cost a fortune. He shoots landscapes and never goes below F4 most of the time. So, as you were saying, having the F2.8 was really a waste of money, which he does now concede. Kids eh !!
I was needing a wide angle lens for landscape photography with my Canon M-50. After watching your review of the Tokina 11-16mm I seriously considered buying it. I was torn between it and the Canon EF-M 11-22mm. I went with the EF-M 11-22 because of the increased focal range, the 5.91 inch minimum focus distance, room in my bag and overall weight. The only real advantage the Tokina had over the Canon was the 2.8 aperature and since I don't do astro photography that was a non-issue. Both lenses cost about the same. I am thrilled with my choice. I love the EF-M 11-22mm. It is the sharpest lens I own! It is leaps and bounds better build quality and picture quality over the EF-M 15-45 and the difference in focal range is night and day on the wide end. I went on a 3 day photo trip and out of the 6 lenses I own I only used 2- the EF-M 11-22 and the EF-M 55-200mm. I own the Viltrox M2 adapter and use it for other lenses but I definetly feel like I made the right choice, for my purposes, going with the native mount EF-M 11-22. Hope this helps others. There is a good example of what the lens will do on my Instagram @naturebypamfitzpatrick. (The photo with the waterfall and storm clouds)
It's a good wide angle focal range. Sometimes on the wide end it will distort pretty heavily. Especially people but I really like mine. I never used it for video though.
There is an alternative that gathers more light, has filter thread, and that is a 17-35mm f2.8D. That's the one I have. I had a few nice milky way shots with it too.
Last week I went to Reelfoot Lake in Tennessee to shoot egrets and ospreys. (Reelfoot is more noted for eagles, but they don't show up until Jan.) I paired my Nikon D500 with my 200-500, f/5.6 to specifically shoot these birds, which, BTW, I am happy to report that I got some real keepers. (No bouquets of roses to me, though. I hired a guide with a boat and set the D500 on manual auto ISO. The guide and my rig did the rest.) But the lake is shallow and filled with lily pads and flowers everywhere... plus tons of Cyprus trees. The entire place is simply gorgeous, which frankly, I was not expecting. That's when I brought out my D750 and Nikon 24-120, f/4, VR to try to capture some landscapes, sunrises and sunsets. During post, I just wasn't satisfied with the width limitation of the 24 mm. (I had my 18-140 in my bag, but it is a DX.) Moreover, many times, I have cropped an image severely to enlarge something that is small in the distance that I didn't see when I was shooting. The D750's number of MPs are not enough to keep these cropped subjects sharp. So, today, I traded my D750 in for a D850 and after seeing your review on the 16-35, I bought it, too. Don't get me wrong. Your review is not the first one I have watched on this lens. I have been wanting a wide-angle lens for over a year, and have watched at least a dozen other reviews. Yours is without a doubt, the best. You tipped the scales for me on the 16-35. Incidentally, I'll tell the camera store that it owes you a commission. :-) Keep up the good work. I gave you a thumbs up and subscribed. Looking forward to watching more of your videos. Many thanks.
Glad the video helped. Sometimes you need that wider lens. I think you will be very happy with it. I totally get why you want more MP in your camera. There definitely are limitations to the 24mp in the D750. How is it working with the files? I have friends that have said that camera is unforgiving in that it shows every bit of shake if your shutter speed is a bit slow.
I now shoot landscapes on a Nikon D800 with an f2.8 Nikon 24mm D lens (both bought used) and I love the results. To be honest I find wider distorts too much for my liking. However I shoot with a sigma 10-20 on my D7200 for IR.
Thank you for this honest video review and for the logical fact that I will never use f/2.8 in landscape photography. I had the same idea because I was considering those lens but wherever I read they stay comparing and saying that f/2.8 are better sooo excessively in a way that almost means that those f/4 are useless.
1:50 and 2:45 “This wide-angle lens is good for wide shooting” “This wide-angle lens is not a telephoto lens” ......uuuumm,...what a shockingly informative video
He actually did a video on it if you look back through the channel. Probably about 2 years old. The video is titled The best camera strap is no camera strap. I believe there's a link in that video for it. I forgot the name of the company. We both have been using them for years and prefer that to a neck strap
Thank you for this good video. I am looking for a good lense to use for landscapephotography. I was comparing this Nikon lense with the Sigma 18-35mm and I think this lense will be the better option for me. I just want to mention: At the end of your video, you were talking about nightskyphotography, specially the milky way. For this I am using the "Tokina SD 11-20 F2.8". Specially when you are using a cropsensor camera, it is one of the best options. Greetings
Hi Bill, thank you for your experience and input on the Nikon 16-35mm. My only concern before purchasing this lens is the vignetting & edge distortion that tends to happen when wide open on 16mm. In your opinion, what might be the maximum threshold setting on this lens before it begins to vignette? 18mm? Also, can changing the aperture to a certain number eliminate vignetting as well? Cheers from Canada.
Most wide angle lenses are going to have some distortion but this is a one click fix in a program like Lightroom. Once you put the lens into the program it will fix both issues.
Hi Bill. Yo didn't mention Tamrons 15-30 F2.8 G2 lens. Have you used it ? what are your thoughts. I would be using it with a EOS R. I have your Tamron 24-70 and working great so i am thinking this would be good too. Thanks in advance
I haven't used that lens. I have thought that that lens was made for crop sensor cameras. Just make sure you can use it on a full-frame camera before you buy it. If that's the ones I'm thinking of it's also a 1.8 aperture. Very nice lens just not sure it's for full frame.
@@BillEricPhotography I checked and it is full frame ef mount, Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD G2 for Canon Digital SLR Camera (Tamron 6 Year Limited USA. Thanks for making me check.
I've taken thousands of images with that lens not once as anyone ever said to me those images look a little soft in the corners! I think we all get a little nitpicky with that kind of stuff. I've found it to be a really great lens and actually one of the sharpest images I have ever taken was with that lens.
@@BillEricPhotography I had two copies of the 16-35f4 and both were very soft on my d850 and adapted to to my Z5. I'm not just talking about when pixel peeping I'm talking visibly soft corners at normal viewing size on my 27 inch 4k monitor. I now have the 14-24mm and difference in sharpness is huge. Only problem now is I can't use filters on this lens.
For me that trade-off isn't worth it. I love being able to use filters and I hate adding filters like Lee filters with all of those adapters. I guess it depends what you're going to be doing with those images if you're going to print them huge maybe that would matter.
There are some people who believe the Z mounts lenses are far superior, and using the FTZ adapter for F mount lenses does not give you the same results, but I think that is marginal at the best of times. Thanks again.
Yes in that is a constant 2.8 aperture lens. It's easier to create images with a shallow depth of field even when the lens is at its widest focal length. But it's also a very expensive lens.
@@BillEricPhotography could you explain why it would work on the canon adapter and not the viltrox? Im looking to add the next lense to my collection and its a toss up between the canon 11-22 EF=M mount or something like the tokina cause I really wanted that 2.8 and only have the viltrox adapter right now.I did find the tokina EF mount for aps-c sensor www.amazon.com/Tokina-ATXAF116DXIIC-11-16mm-DX-II-Canon/dp/B00E3Y4XZM/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=Tokina+11-16mm+f%2F2.8+canon&qid=1582116124&s=electronics&sr=1-6
I found myself loving more UW lenses more than standard zoom for my photography workflow. I just wanted to ask, because Im looking for 16-35 f4, how it is at 35mm f4 ?
I don't know from where you get the super, super sharp. I own this lens 16-35 f4 VR and I am so dissapointed with it. Sick lens, I can't get sharp pictrures using on a d810. To start this lens is 1000.00 but in my hands feels like a 200.00 lens. I sold my sigma super wide 2.8 the same I got from ebay for 30.00, why I mention this. Because the quality is a hair different. I don't sell my pictures, I want it to keep the stu-pidity of being a nikon photographer. The reality su-cks a used sigma was better for only 30.00. Not to mention the focusing scale on the lens, oh my God. This scale is from a toy, a scale of 2 feet only and the infinity mark doesn't work. I remember a class about shooting using the infinity mark for super sharp pictures, with this lens is a jocke, here you forgot to mention how this lens work. It is a shame. I wasted my money.
Could you help us newbies out and stop saying "this lens" or simply "this"? How about saying the lens name or brand and specs. Especially when comparing 2 of them? Thanks!
Lovely illustrative pictures.
Thanks Thomas!
I love my 16-35 f4, use it all the time in the parks. The 16-35 and 24-120 are my main lenses.
It's a great lines and I would say most of my nighttime long exposures are shot with it. It's a nice complement to the 70 to 200 at night.
Thanks for sharing the one lens you need for landscape photography.
Here are mine:
90mm f/5.6 Fujinon for 4x5 inch monorail view camera
65mm f/5.6 Fujinon for Fuji GSW690 medium format rangefinder
50mm f/4.5 Mamiya for RB67 medium format SLR
28mm f/2.8 Nikkor for Nikon 35mm SLR
28mm f/2.8 Zeiss Biogon for Contax 35mm rangefinder
14mm f/2.5 Panasonic for Olympus micro 4/3
16-55mm f/2.8 weather-resistant auto focus Fujinon for weather resistant Fuji X-Pro2 digital mirrorless
Thanks for mentioning me and for featuring my photo, but you had things a little mixed up 😉. The new Nikkor 14-30mm for the Z-mount is an f/4 lens. I actually switched to the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens to (1) get more light into the camera which (2) allowed me to shoot at a relatively low ISO 3200, and (3) for 10-13 seconds to avoid light trails.
This photo is actually three images (10 seconds each) overplayed on Lightroom.
Anytime! Thanks for the clarification. I think the point is if you shoot images like that, looking at an f2.8 version might be a better route.
The shot at 3:34 is such an awesome image! Perfectly executed. It also shows that first and foremost creativity is key to good photography. Well done!
Thanks! That was a fun shot to try to capture. Anytime you can be on something that's moving and make the world blur it makes for an interesting shot!
I bit the bullet and bought a Canon 80d (second hand) which was delivered on Monday! Can’t wait to try it out with my ef 10-18mm at the weekend, weather permitting in the UK of course. Also got the efm 11-22mm for my M50.......I’m now broke, but happy 😃 😃
I'm curious to see if there is a big difference between the images with those two setups. Imagine they will be very similar.
I’ll let you know as soon as it stops raining, Bill 👍🏻 Looking forward to trying them out though.
16-35 mm nikkor, My first FX lens. Love it to bits. Cost me close on a grand (Dont tell my wife !) Worth every penny. I use mine on a tripod most of the time, monopod when no tripod. Results are just stella.
My lad uses Canon. He bought their 16 35 F2.8. Cost a fortune. He shoots landscapes and never goes below F4 most of the time. So, as you were saying, having the F2.8 was really a waste of money, which he does now concede. Kids eh !!
Love mine also and still use it all of the time!
I was needing a wide angle lens for landscape photography with my Canon M-50. After watching your review of the Tokina 11-16mm I seriously considered buying it. I was torn between it and the Canon EF-M 11-22mm. I went with the EF-M 11-22 because of the increased focal range, the 5.91 inch minimum focus distance, room in my bag and overall weight. The only real advantage the Tokina had over the Canon was the 2.8 aperature and since I don't do astro photography that was a non-issue. Both lenses cost about the same. I am thrilled with my choice. I love the EF-M 11-22mm. It is the sharpest lens I own! It is leaps and bounds better build quality and picture quality over the EF-M 15-45 and the difference in focal range is night and day on the wide end. I went on a 3 day photo trip and out of the 6 lenses I own I only used 2- the EF-M 11-22 and the EF-M 55-200mm. I own the Viltrox M2 adapter and use it for other lenses but I definetly feel like I made the right choice, for my purposes, going with the native mount EF-M 11-22. Hope this helps others. There is a good example of what the lens will do on my Instagram @naturebypamfitzpatrick. (The photo with the waterfall and storm clouds)
Thanks for the great review of that lens. It was a tough up for me also. I went with the Tokina because I had owned one and loved it.
@@BillEricPhotography Glad I'm not the only one who waivers on these decisions. 😉
I too have a 16-35 lens and have had it for some time and I agree it is sharp and very versatile for landscapes.
Thanks, nice review
I agree it's one of those lenses that will live in your bag forever.
Hi, the long exposure shot on the ride is awesome 👌🏼... what type of ND filter did you use? Any suggestions for a cheap 77mm ND filter for a newbie?
This is probably the best lens review I have seen. The way you presented the information is very logical and understandable.
Thanks Lonnie! I appreciate the nice comment!
Great video helped me a lot . Thanks for sharing
Happy to help!
I just bought the 16-35 for the vr i'm hoping it will work well as a walk around video lens
It's a good wide angle focal range. Sometimes on the wide end it will distort pretty heavily. Especially people but I really like mine. I never used it for video though.
Thanks@@BillEricPhotography
Great review, and amazing images you created.
Thanks!
There is an alternative that gathers more light, has filter thread, and that is a 17-35mm f2.8D. That's the one I have. I had a few nice milky way shots with it too.
That is a another good choice but unfortunately it won't work with the new mirrorless cameras.
@@BillEricPhotography
By design 😢
Last week I went to Reelfoot Lake in Tennessee to shoot egrets and ospreys. (Reelfoot is more noted for eagles, but they don't show up until Jan.) I paired my Nikon D500 with my 200-500, f/5.6 to specifically shoot these birds, which, BTW, I am happy to report that I got some real keepers. (No bouquets of roses to me, though. I hired a guide with a boat and set the D500 on manual auto ISO. The guide and my rig did the rest.) But the lake is shallow and filled with lily pads and flowers everywhere... plus tons of Cyprus trees. The entire place is simply gorgeous, which frankly, I was not expecting. That's when I brought out my D750 and Nikon 24-120, f/4, VR to try to capture some landscapes, sunrises and sunsets. During post, I just wasn't satisfied with the width limitation of the 24 mm. (I had my 18-140 in my bag, but it is a DX.) Moreover, many times, I have cropped an image severely to enlarge something that is small in the distance that I didn't see when I was shooting. The D750's number of MPs are not enough to keep these cropped subjects sharp. So, today, I traded my D750 in for a D850 and after seeing your review on the 16-35, I bought it, too. Don't get me wrong. Your review is not the first one I have watched on this lens. I have been wanting a wide-angle lens for over a year, and have watched at least a dozen other reviews. Yours is without a doubt, the best. You tipped the scales for me on the 16-35. Incidentally, I'll tell the camera store that it owes you a commission. :-) Keep up the good work. I gave you a thumbs up and subscribed. Looking forward to watching more of your videos. Many thanks.
Glad the video helped. Sometimes you need that wider lens. I think you will be very happy with it. I totally get why you want more MP in your camera. There definitely are limitations to the 24mp in the D750. How is it working with the files? I have friends that have said that camera is unforgiving in that it shows every bit of shake if your shutter speed is a bit slow.
Great lens .. amazing shots
Thanks n
Superb video my friend .. I get mine on Tuesday!
Enjoy it!
I now shoot landscapes on a Nikon D800 with an f2.8 Nikon 24mm D lens (both bought used) and I love the results.
To be honest I find wider distorts too much for my liking. However I shoot with a sigma 10-20 on my D7200 for IR.
I know what you were saying that I like 16 mm even though it distorts a little bit. It's a nice wide look!
Hi, what an amazing video. Keep up the good work! I look forward to your next video.
Thanks, 👍
Thank you brother.
👍🏻👍🏻
The AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8 is also worth a look. I got it used for about 600 Dollars. It has no VR but who needs that for landscape photography?
Totally agree with you. That was on my short list also I decided to go with the 16 mm just because of the little bit wider focal length.
Thank you for this honest video review and for the logical fact that I will never use f/2.8 in landscape photography. I had the same idea because I was considering those lens but wherever I read they stay comparing and saying that f/2.8 are better sooo excessively in a way that almost means that those f/4 are useless.
I feel most f4 lenses a perfect for landscape photography.
1:50 and 2:45 “This wide-angle lens is good for wide shooting” “This wide-angle lens is not a telephoto lens” ......uuuumm,...what a shockingly informative video
It’s possible that there are some beginners who might not already know everything that you already know, like terminology and lens focal lengths, etc.
@@BillEricPhotography ..Well said.....well said
Thanks for the great video. Appreciate the guidance. Out of curiosity, what is the hand/wrist grip you have on the D750? I am struggling to find one.
He actually did a video on it if you look back through the channel. Probably about 2 years old. The video is titled The best camera strap is no camera strap. I believe there's a link in that video for it. I forgot the name of the company. We both have been using them for years and prefer that to a neck strap
THANK YOU
👍
●Yes, but use a filter in front, dust will get inside immediately.
Dust has never been an issue for me using filters. As long as they're mostly clean you should be fine.
@@BillEricPhotography you've completely misread or misunderstood my sentence, read again. 🙂
Just where do you think dust enters a lens? A filter over the front element makes zero difference! 🙄
Thank you for this good video. I am looking for a good lense to use for landscapephotography. I was comparing this Nikon lense with the Sigma 18-35mm and I think this lense will be the better option for me. I just want to mention: At the end of your video, you were talking about nightskyphotography, specially the milky way. For this I am using the "Tokina SD 11-20 F2.8". Specially when you are using a cropsensor camera, it is one of the best options. Greetings
We will check out that lens thanks!
Hi Bill, thank you for your experience and input on the Nikon 16-35mm. My only concern before purchasing this lens is the vignetting & edge distortion that tends to happen when wide open on 16mm. In your opinion, what might be the maximum threshold setting on this lens before it begins to vignette? 18mm? Also, can changing the aperture to a certain number eliminate vignetting as well? Cheers from Canada.
Most wide angle lenses are going to have some distortion but this is a one click fix in a program like Lightroom. Once you put the lens into the program it will fix both issues.
Hi Bill. Yo didn't mention Tamrons 15-30 F2.8 G2 lens. Have you used it ? what are your thoughts. I would be using it with a EOS R. I have your Tamron 24-70 and working great so i am thinking this would be good too. Thanks in advance
I haven't used that lens. I have thought that that lens was made for crop sensor cameras. Just make sure you can use it on a full-frame camera before you buy it. If that's the ones I'm thinking of it's also a 1.8 aperture. Very nice lens just not sure it's for full frame.
@@BillEricPhotography I checked and it is full frame ef mount, Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD G2 for Canon Digital SLR Camera (Tamron 6 Year Limited USA. Thanks for making me check.
Pity the Nikon 16-35f4 is very soft in the corners even when stopped down.
I've taken thousands of images with that lens not once as anyone ever said to me those images look a little soft in the corners! I think we all get a little nitpicky with that kind of stuff. I've found it to be a really great lens and actually one of the sharpest images I have ever taken was with that lens.
@@BillEricPhotography I had two copies of the 16-35f4 and both were very soft on my d850 and adapted to to my Z5. I'm not just talking about when pixel peeping I'm talking visibly soft corners at normal viewing size on my 27 inch 4k monitor. I now have the 14-24mm and difference in sharpness is huge. Only problem now is I can't use filters on this lens.
For me that trade-off isn't worth it. I love being able to use filters and I hate adding filters like Lee filters with all of those adapters. I guess it depends what you're going to be doing with those images if you're going to print them huge maybe that would matter.
Apart from Landscape phg....is this lens a good " walk- around " lens??
Yes but it is a little wide, if you are looking for an all purpose walk around zoom, you might be better with something in the 24-70 range.
Have you tried the Nikkor 14-24 2.8?
I have not. I have heard it's a very nice lens.
I am in confusion which one to buy Nikon 16-35mm f/4 or Nikon 20mm f/1.8. Want your recommendation.
For landscapes I would get the 16-35.
Are the images cropped in post at all?
Most times I do some cropping.
Would this lens fit straight on a Nikon Z5 ? or do you need this in a Z Mount version ?
You would need the FTZ adapter or buy this focal length with z Mount. The one I reviewed in the video needs the adapter.
@@BillEricPhotography Apologies I believe I was referring to the 16-35mm lens. Thank you for the reply.
There are some people who believe the Z mounts lenses are far superior, and using the FTZ adapter for F mount lenses does not give you the same results, but I think that is marginal at the best of times. Thanks again.
I agree. I don't think the adapter affects the image much. The z lenses are very sharp!
Hi is 16 35 mm f4 good for videography?
Yes, it's nice and wide and also stabilized.
I saw the entire video ,just to identify which lens he is talking about!
This,that,this ,that...make it more hearer friendly my brother!
Will do, thanks for the feedback!
Content quality is brilliant! 👍🏻atb
Is it very different than the kit lens which comes with the M50 14 to 45?
Yes in that is a constant 2.8 aperture lens. It's easier to create images with a shallow depth of field even when the lens is at its widest focal length. But it's also a very expensive lens.
Thank you for the video. To use the Tokina on the Canon M50, would you recommend the standard adapter or the viltrox speedbooster?
The tokina lens won't work with the viltrox adapter. It's a crop sensor lens so it will work perfectly with the Canon adapter.
@@BillEricPhotography could you explain why it would work on the canon adapter and not the viltrox? Im looking to add the next lense to my collection and its a toss up between the canon 11-22 EF=M mount or something like the tokina cause I really wanted that 2.8 and only have the viltrox adapter right now.I did find the tokina EF mount for aps-c sensor www.amazon.com/Tokina-ATXAF116DXIIC-11-16mm-DX-II-Canon/dp/B00E3Y4XZM/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=Tokina+11-16mm+f%2F2.8+canon&qid=1582116124&s=electronics&sr=1-6
I would stick with the m mount lenses. The 11-22 has been great and you don't need any adapters!
I found myself loving more UW lenses more than standard zoom for my photography workflow. I just wanted to ask, because Im looking for 16-35 f4, how it is at 35mm f4 ?
That's a good lens but there is a little bit of distortion. Very sharp!
@@BillEricPhotography thats great because distortion is easy to fix...blurry details is not. Thanks for answering. 😊
Np👍
I don't know from where you get the super, super sharp.
I own this lens 16-35 f4 VR and I am so dissapointed with it.
Sick lens, I can't get sharp pictrures using on a d810.
To start this lens is 1000.00 but in my hands feels like a 200.00 lens.
I sold my sigma super wide 2.8 the same I got from ebay for 30.00, why I mention this. Because the quality is a hair different. I don't sell my pictures, I want it to keep the stu-pidity of being a nikon photographer. The reality su-cks a used sigma was better for only 30.00.
Not to mention the focusing scale on the lens, oh my God. This scale is from a toy, a scale of 2 feet only and the infinity mark doesn't work.
I remember a class about shooting using the infinity mark for super sharp pictures, with this lens is a jocke, here you forgot to mention how this lens work. It is a shame. I wasted my money.
Sorry to hear that, I have had no problems at all using this lens, I’ve been very happy with it.
Could you help us newbies out and stop saying "this lens" or simply "this"? How about saying the lens name or brand and specs. Especially when comparing 2 of them? Thanks!
Sure , I forget not everyone is well versed in gear sometimes. Will definitely keep that in mind.
I shoot with a D750. I just bought the 16mm-35. Do you have an Instagram?
Yes disneyimagemakers on Instagram
Disney? I'm gone, buhbye👎👎
Adios!