Who needs wide angle (28mm, not 35mm)

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Sasha, Jul 17, 2003.

  1. Sasha

    Sasha Guest

    Hi.

    It looks like wide angle lenses (<35mm) are used mainly for real
    estate and interior photography and I am not going to do it. A friend
    tolds me that for nature photos I must have wide angle lenses
    (e.g. 28mm) and usual 35mm is a bad choice. Is he right?
     
    Sasha, Jul 17, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sasha

    bowser Guest

    Certain subject matter requires the use of wide angle lenses, no matter what
    the description. Rest assured, the use of wide angle lenses is not limited
    to real estate or architectural photography.

    The subject matter dictates the focal length chosen, not the general
    category of the shot. For what it's worth, I've done a ton of real estate
    photography using telephotos. Sometimes, a house looks better when you back
    off and capture it in it's setting.
     
    bowser, Jul 17, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sasha

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <> on 17 Jul 2003 16:00:46 +0300,
    I personally find 28mm very useful, especially indoors. Likewise 24mm.
     
    John Navas, Jul 17, 2003
    #3
  4. Sasha

    Jim Townsend Guest

    I don't know about nature shots.. Wide angle tends to make things look farther
    away than they really are. That's not what you'd want when photographing a
    bird in a distant tree. The number one reason to have a wide angle lens for
    nature would be to do landscapes.

    I don't now about wide angle being a bad choice. Some people prefer it. But
    any way you look at it, only you know how wide your lenses need to be.

    Think back about all the pictures you've taken. How many times have you found
    you couldn't fit everything in the viewfinder ? If it's happened a lot, you
    probably need a wide angle lens to serve your shooting style. If it's never
    happened, then go with the longer lens.

    There's always the option of stitching two photos to give the same result if
    you need it in a pinch.
     
    Jim Townsend, Jul 17, 2003
    #4
  5. Sasha

    David Chien Guest

    If you're doing nature and landscape shots, don't worry! The beauty of
    digital cameras is that you can easily stich the images together into a
    bigger (ie. same as a wider angle lens picture) picture using common
    panoramic photo stiching programs.

    www.panoguide.com

    eg. If I swirl around from left to right and snap 3-4 pics, I can easily
    match a super-wide 14mm 180 degree wide angle lens just by stiching
    everything together.
     
    David Chien, Jul 17, 2003
    #5
  6. Sasha

    Andy Guest

    Hi David. By stiching pictures made by a wide angle lens You did not have a
    perspective problem ? I think a "normal" lens should be used to make
    panoramic pictures. Am I right ?
     
    Andy, Jul 17, 2003
    #6
  7. you can do this, and get results that are a lot better than none at all.
    My Canon has a built in mode for doing so that makes it easy to overlap
    at a good accuracy. But...it's hardly the same, and of course results
    in a very narrow aspect ratio. Stitching can show glitches too.
     
    Jason O'Rourke, Jul 17, 2003
    #7
  8. Sasha

    Lionel Guest

    In a lot of cases, yes. As always, it depends totally on what you're
    shooting. For example: I regularly shoot live bands on stage with my 10D
    (1.6x factor vs 35mm film), & I almost exclusively use either a 28mm/1.8
    prime, or a 20-35mm/2.8L zoom.
     
    Lionel, Jul 18, 2003
    #8
  9. No, I don't think I've ever needed a wide angle lens for nature
    photos, except in one extreme case where I wanted to have both
    the river deep down in a canyon and the mountains on the horizon
    in the same photograph.

    But I do use a wide angle lens for two purposes. One is photos
    similar to the one described above, where I want something in
    the immediate foreground or actually on the ground in the
    picture along with something farther away.

    The other is photographing people, for example in a market or
    sitting around a table, like when playing a board game,
    particularly when these people should not know they are being
    photographed. I point the camera at the table and take a photo
    with all the people around.

    28 mm doesn't cut it though. 24 mm was my best compromise. I
    would like 20, but the 20 mm lenses are a lot bigger and more
    expensive already.

    One word of warning. Beginners often think that they need a wide
    angle lens to get everything into the picture. This is only
    rarely true. In most cases where a beginner wants to have
    everything in the picture it is actually better or at least
    sufficient to just have a part of the motive in the picture.
    What you gain in width, you lose in depth.

    Hans-Georg
     
    Hans-Georg Michna, Jul 18, 2003
    #9
  10. Sasha

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    It depends what aspects of nature you are after. If you are after
    individual flora or fauna, you will rarely have any use for a wide-angle
    lens. You will use mainly telephoto and macro. If you like shooting
    scenery, then the wider lenses will see more use.
    --
     
    JPS, Jul 18, 2003
    #10
  11. Sasha

    David Chien Guest

    Hi David. By stiching pictures made by a wide angle lens You did not have a
    Most pano programs like MGI Photovista 2.0 that I love and use, have
    a built-in setting you can change to match the length of the lens you
    use from <9.5mm through 1000mm+. Knowing this, it'll fix any problems
    when stiching images together.

    Quite nice I must say, and my wall sized panos look great!
     
    David Chien, Jul 18, 2003
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.