Landscape Equipment Discussion - Is bigger better?

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

02/15/2014 11:11:13 AM · #1

I have had a love/hate relationship with my SLRs. As my lens collection has grown, so has my bag collection, strap/harness collection, tripods, etc.

I have two of the best lenses Nikon has made...the 24-70 F2.8 and the 70-200mm F2.8. I opted out of the third in the trifecta, the 14-22, because of it's size and weight, and opted for the 16-35 VR.

These for use with the 24MP D600 (and/or the APS-C D7100).

But the catch is: that's one freaking bulky and heavy kit. I have NEVER taken all three lenses out with me on a landscape hike. I always opt to take the 28-300 or 18-200 as my tele option.

And virtually all of the time when I go shoot the best landscape scenery it's on a vacation. It's a bit much, even if the best part of the vacation to me is the shooting.

That's why, for the last year or more (since buying the Sony RX100), I've been toying with (dreaming about ) going smaller and lighter. But what small and light cameras are good for landscapes? Although I have a lot of good enlargements hanging (and used in shows) that were taken with everything from a Canon G2 through a range of 6 to 16 MPixel SLRs, I am always amazed by the level of detail I get in 20-24 MP shooting. I was afraid to go 36 MP due to my already massive storage requirements, but even that is beginning to sound more \"right\" to me for landscape shooting.

So I'm curious for people's thoughts on any of the new \"smaller\" cameras for landscapes...there are options at every pixel density now, even 36 MPixel full frame in a more compact camera. I always read all the DPReview stuff and pixel peep the images. But all the serious changeovers are expensive and I'm not totally convinced worth it at this point (all kinds of tradeoffs)

I've looked at:

The Fuji line - seems to have great lenses and interface, but pixel peeping them, the detail doesn't seem to be there. (Though great at high ISO). Gets' raves from users. But is it just really for street photography, or is it good for landscapes? And will this really lighten or reduce my load?

Sony line - Good high res, but as APS-C, or full frame, may not really be that much smaller or lighter with lenses.

Oly and Panny M43 - Definitely smaller. More lens choices. Actually, I have the Panny G5, and the 100-300/200-600, but have not invested in lenses to use it for landscapes seriously. Partly because the wide angle lens (the 7-14) is pretty expensive, and I'm not sure worth it. And Though the 12-35 F2.8's might be getting there, though I think I'd lean toward the Oly which would mean no IS.

What do you think? Is there a smaller alternative good for an emphasis on landscapes (with a bit of everything else thrown in)?

Heck, since the RX100 is so convenient but not that good for landscapes (no viewfinder, not quite wide enough), I even bough the FZ200 when it went on fire sale lately. Incredibly convienient, with a incredible lens, sharp corner to corner, but a small sensor and 12 MP files means I'm not seeing the same level of detail and punch.

I've thought about--for the price...just going back to my old \"lens kit\" with the D7100, in fact, it's what I've been taking on trips lately). The D7100, the 10-20mm sigma, and the 18-200 Nikon (and the 10.5 fisheye). It's still a bit heavy, but minus the fisheye, I can fit it in a Tamrac Velocity 6, which is pretty innocuous and easy to carry. Of course, that excludes the tripod, which is easier to carry on my Lowepro sling.

Or maybe I just have Gear Aquisition Syndrome. But I just can't seem to find the right balance of gear and convenience.

Anyway, please share your thoughts and your own situations. Maybe it will keep me off DPReview for a while :)

Message edited by author 2014-02-15 11:14:19.

rooum

02/15/2014 11:41:33 AM · #2

I'm completely taken with the Sigma DP Merrill cameras at the moment - I gushed about them just yesterday in this thread here.. I have the DP2M and the DP3M and they are pretty much perfect for landscape (which is what i got them for, that and macro). The two cameras fit into a small bag with some filters so that and a light tripod means i'm jumping round the hills and mountains. Very lightweight kit. If i want wider than the 45mm eqiv of the DP2 then i figure i could stitch. I've held off completing the set with the DP1M but even with all three it is still much lighter than my D700 and lens. Image quality wise they are stunning. Much talk online and in reviews of them matching the Nikon D800e and even Medium Formant level quality. They do come with a lot of drawbacks though - rubbish at high ISO, terrible battery life, annoying workflow due to the files not being supported by Adobe etc - but if you use the cameras as if they actually were pocket size medium format and use low ISO, tripod, take time over each shot then they are little miracles. I adore the things.

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/15/2014 11:47:41 AM · #3

im waiting to see what sony does next. The a6000 looks to be a APS-C dslr killer.

if only they'd put as much effort into thier glass as they do their sensors. if they start making EF mounts, look out.

Message edited by author 2014-02-15 11:48:43.

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

02/15/2014 12:02:31 PM · #4

Originally posted by rooum:

Interesting! Thanks, I missed that thead (and I didn't pay much attention to the blurb on DPReview with the funny looking camera shape!). But I just went through it. Very promising, but as a fixed lens camera, with no viewfinder, I can't help but compare it to the RX100 for this purpose.

And basically, the main limitation of the RX100--which takes amazing photos really--is the lack of a viewfinder (well that and a bit of a klutzy user interface).

With the difference in sensor and sensor size, I'm sure the Sigma is better for dynamic range. It would be fun to compare them side by side though!

You are right about stitching...I've done it with my various compacts to make up for lack of wide angle, and it can give you some great results.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

02/15/2014 12:09:03 PM · #5

Sony A7R with a couple of wide angle legacy lenses until they come out with better lens choices. Manual focus only but you have the time for composing and focusing in landscape photography.

rooum

02/15/2014 12:09:42 PM · #6

Yes, the lack of a viewfinder is a bit of a drawback particularly in bright sun. There are viewfinders available of course but, for myself, i don't think they are worth the cost. Like is said, these cameras basically live on a tripod and used like view cameras so i can just put a coat over my head! I know some people use hoodman loupes on them though.

Sony Sonnar FE 2.8 35mm ZA

02/15/2014 12:16:12 PM · #7

Originally posted by Mike:

I'm watching that too! Good glass and reasonable lens sizes are key. Zeiss autofocus lenses seem like a nice plus her (also available for the Fuji's too, but they are 16 MP). And I have not really compared size much, but it reminds me that there is a site to do that, so here's one interesting set:

//camerasize.com/compact/#440.149,488.393,489,482.412,535.84,467,ha,t

Oh, left out the fuji...only a 18-55 lens in landscape FL on the site, but here's that added:

//camerasize.com/compact/#467,535.84,493.359,489,482.412,488.393,440.149,ha,t

Message edited by author 2014-02-15 12:22:12.

jagar

Samsung Galaxy S9/S9+

02/15/2014 12:29:17 PM · #8

How about the sony A7R, it's very small and light and can't be beaten for resolution, it's also weather proof and the native lenses are small, the 35mm 2.8 zeiss being tiny. I have the 24mp version because i mainly shoot street and dont need the 36mp, the two primes i have are super sharp, the best lenses i have ever used. I carry the A7 with a prime and a Fuji x-pro with a zoom in one small bag and i never notice the weight.

Message edited by author 2014-02-15 12:31:20.

02/15/2014 12:43:06 PM · #9

Originally posted by jagar:

Definitely on my watch list -- some negatives in the reviews though, like a very loud shutter, and some reported shutter vibration blur issues.

Here's another comparison, looking at the longest, pro-like lens I could find for each camera (there was nothing long in the database for the fuji, and I just left the RX100 in for size compare).

The Sony with the 70-200 looks "almost" as big as the Nikon with 70-200 but is quite a bit lighter.

//camerasize.com/compact/#467,520.359,489,349,482.366,347.35,535.392,488.392,440.107,ga,t

Unfortunately, sort by weight on the site only sorts by camera weight, not camera + chosen lens.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

02/15/2014 12:46:18 PM · #10

Another issue I've been thinking about relating to sensor size.

For landscapes, a larger sensor may not be to my advantage since I want large DOF. With a FF sensor, I need a higher F stop. Obviously the FF has advantages though in dynamic range, and IQ. Maybe APS-C is a good compromise after all, or even M43.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

02/15/2014 12:54:09 PM · #11

If you're just taking walking-around landscapes use your "fantastic" RX100 and stitch -- you don't need to be very accurate about framing so lack of viewfiner is less important. If you're going somewhere to take a specific "proper" landscape take the "proper" equipment you already have. Consider using a lightweight folding hand-truck/luggage carrier to use instead of wearing it all, the modern version of old-time photographers' burros.

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

02/15/2014 01:59:19 PM · #12

I don't know about Fuji's not having detail... I'm consistently astonished at how much detail I get out of that X100s.

And yes, I do think APS-C is a good compromise. :D

rooum

02/15/2014 02:08:51 PM · #13

Originally posted by Cory:

I don't know about Fuji's not having detail... I'm consistently astonished at how much detail I get out of that X100s.

Yes, i think the more recent wave of Fuji's have incredible detail. I downloaded a RAW file from a X100s recently and it is very good indeed.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

02/15/2014 04:39:09 PM · #14

Originally posted by Olyuzi:

Sony A7R with a couple of wide angle legacy lenses until they come out with better lens choices. Manual focus only but you have the time for composing and focusing in landscape photography.

The problem with the A7R is that there are no lenses for it yet. You can use "legacy" lenses for it, but the problem is that people are finding that while adapted lenses work pretty well at the normal-tele focal lengths, results are not good at the wide end. There are some reasons based on physics or optics or some such that I can't recall at the moment, but I think the A7R is probably out for D800-style landscape photography until someone comes out with a UWA lens in the right mount for that thing.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

02/15/2014 04:52:42 PM · #15

I contemplate the same thing. I have a D800, and essentially the same lens bag as you do Neil, and the same issues with the size and weight of my camera bag. I don't find 36 megapixels to be much of a "problem." I think it's more of a problem in theory than in practice, and maybe is a problem for people with older computers. I don't notice that performance of Lightroom, Photoshop, Nik, etc is any better when I'm editing RX100 images, for example.

But back to the size/weight thing. The only time my D800 leaves the house anymore is when the RX100 won't get the shot. If I need wider, longer, faster, shallower DoF, or closer, then the D800 comes out, to the point where I was shooting something with the D800 and 17-35 and I needed something longer than 35mm, and I just pulled the RX100 out of my pocket and shot with that. I'm considering selling my 24-120 f/4, because I never use it.

As far as landscapes, I dunno. I contemplate m4/3 sometimes. The Olympus OM-D E-M1 seems like a very nice camera, and there are a wide range of excellent m4/3 lenses. I suspect it would fit my needs just fine. Except...I shoot wildlife, I have a trip coming up to shoot wildlife, and long/fast is the weak link of the m4/3 world. Damn.

Olyuzi

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7

Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH

02/18/2014 05:16:10 PM · #16

Originally posted by Ann:

Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Sony A7R with a couple of wide angle legacy lenses until they come out with better lens choices. Manual focus only but you have the time for composing and focusing in landscape photography.

The problem with the A7R is that there are no lenses for it yet. You can use "legacy" lenses for it, but the problem is that people are finding that while adapted lenses work pretty well at the normal-tele focal lengths, results are not good at the wide end. There are some reasons based on physics or optics or some such that I can't recall at the moment, but I think the A7R is probably out for D800-style landscape photography until someone comes out with a UWA lens in the right mount for that thing.

I think that issue has to do with the direction that light takes when exiting the rear of the lens and how it strikes the sensor. It's not uniform throughout the image circle. Lenses are designed so that light usually strikes the sensor perpendicularly in the center of the image circle then fans out to more extreme angles the closer it gets to the borders and corners. (Angle of incidence, I believe.) This results in the best image quality (for the lens) in the center, and poorer IQ at the extreme edges and corners where sharpness decreases and vignetting increases. This is more pronounced in wide angle lenses and less so in normal and teles. It wasn't a problem in the days of film because film lies flat in the camera and is able to use all of the light striking it towards image making. But the light wells of digital camera sensors have depth and some of the light striking those wells at extreme angles is wasted and does not register towards image making.

It's an even bigger problem for the Sony mirrorless full frame cameras because of their very shallow registration distance AND much larger sensor. The distance between the rear of the lens and the large FF sensor in these cameras make for extreme angles of incidence, so more wasted light, and poorer image quality. It's less of a problem for mirrorless cameras with smaller sensors especially when using their native lenses. Mirrorless cameras are able to be designed smaller and more svelte because by getting rid of the mirror box registration distance is greatly reduced as compared with DSLRs that have much longer registration distances (by about double).

Imagine a chimney (one photodiode). When the sun is high in the sky, midday, more light enters the chimney because the direction of light is perpendicular to the bottom of the chimney (sensor). This is analogous to the greater registration distance of a DSLR. Towards evening, when the sun is closer to the horizon, a lot less light enters the chimney because the direction of light comes to it at an extreme angle and is not able to enter the chimney top. (shallow registration distance of a mirrorless camera.)

There may not be an easy resolution to the problem for Sony, even with future native E-mount lenses. As I understand it, there are two solutions: one is to manipulate the light with microlenses, and the other is to design telecentric lenses which greatly increase lens size, weight, and bulk.

Landscape photography with UWA lenses can create problems such as with perspective distortion or appearing too distant. Many photographers use wide-normals to short-teles unless they are very close to the subject, don't have room to back up for proper framing, or want to include a foreground subject in the frame. Maybe the op should take a survey of his landscapes to see what focal lengths are used most and see if he could away using either of the two existing FE primes, especially when used with stitching software.

EstimatedEyes

Fujifilm X-T5

Fujifilm XF 16-80mm f/4 R OIS WR

02/18/2014 06:13:01 PM · #17

Have been watching this thread for a while, and will throw out the Pentax K-3 equipped with a limited prime gets you the small and lightweight characteristics you are looking for in a 24 Mpx APSC fully weather sealed package. The 15 and 21 limiteds are particularly good for landscapes. I have tried micro 4/3 systems and other similar but much prefer having a full prism viewfinder to composing on an LCD screen or EVF, particularly with landscapes. YMMV.

Whether you go pentax or not, you can save a lot of size and weight by trimming your kit to a few primes and zooming with your feet (but watch out for those cliffs). I will frequently travel with a 15, 40, 70 and 100 macro and a 1.7 TC that gives plenty of reach for most applications (particularly with a 1.5x APSC crop factor) and fits into a small backpack or even a beltpack. Throw in a supezoom or a small 135 or 200 prime and you can cover just about anything you come across.

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

02/19/2014 10:01:18 AM · #18

Originally posted by EstimatedEyes:

I'm sure it's a great camera, but it's only a few mm smaller than my D7100 (and weighs more actually). I could do the same with a 20mm prime there. I've thought about that, and the 10-20mm Sigma isn't really too much lens to carry.

If I could live with 16MP and they would release their ultra wides (or zooms), the Fuji X-T1 is looking pretty good. Pictured with the 18-55, the camera and lens weigh less than my D7100 alone (and looks to be the size of the E-M1 and weighs less).

//camerasize.com/compact/#467,535.84,489,482.412,520.359,488.393,485.80,440.149,ha,t

Message edited by author 2014-02-19 10:02:20.

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/19/2014 01:37:46 PM · #19

if anyone is interested, i took some photos yesterday of a bridge i went to yesterday for work.

lets just say that the rx100 is flat out amazing. i was impressed with its low low ability but in great light these thing has insane resolving power.

send me a pm and i send you a file so you can see for yourself.

i am planning on taking the 5dii out with a 17-40 to the same site next week and i'll be able to compare it to a FF sensor.

Message edited by author 2014-02-19 13:37:54.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

02/20/2014 10:52:10 AM · #20

Mike--Yes, and part of my belief that high res sensors are still important for landscapes:

Here's a reduced full frame shot from the RX100:
//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/10000-14999/12253/orig/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1091047.jpg

And a 1:1 UNEDITED (and not sharpened) crop from the same original:

//images.dpchallenge.com/images_portfolio/10000-14999/12253/orig/Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited_1091049.jpg

Maybe a 16 MP would have that too, but I've always been impressed when looking at images 1:1 on the RX100 (and my 24mp sensors).

Message edited by author 2014-02-20 10:52:57.

LanndonKane

Nikon D800

02/20/2014 11:16:52 AM · #21

I would happily devote a good portion of my life to a rigorous program of weight training if that was what was needed for me to carry the camera with the largest sensor. You couldn't imagine the amount of times I needed to grab a low light shot and I didn't have time to set up my tripod, or when nothing but the look of an ultra wide angle on a full frame would cut it. I tromped around New Zealand for weeks, and had back and neck aches like you wouldn't believe, but the quality of the images I bagged were fully worth it. If I had a medium format camera I would do it all over again with that.

Mike

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

02/20/2014 12:27:36 PM · #22

Originally posted by LanndonKane:

its one thing to lug it all around on purpose, i cant count the number of times i drug out all my gear and never used it, but "just in case".

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

02/20/2014 01:00:13 PM · #23

Originally posted by Mike:

Originally posted by LanndonKane:
I would happily devote a good portion of my life to a rigorous program of weight training if that was what was needed for me to carry the camera with the largest sensor. You couldn't imagine the amount of times I needed to grab a low light shot and I didn't have time to set up my tripod, or when nothing but the look of an ultra wide angle on a full frame would cut it. I tromped around New Zealand for weeks, and had back and neck aches like you wouldn't believe, but the quality of the images I bagged were fully worth it. If I had a medium format camera I would do it all over again with that.

its one thing to lug it all around on purpose, i cant count the number of times i drug out all my gear and never used it, but "just in case".

Hey there Lanndon. :)

If you're looking for a rigorous physical endurance challenge, and high quality images, do feel free to come out here and I'll let you pack around my large format rig for a while... I've figured out how a single person can manage it, but it's a real challenge. ;)