Whilst pixel peeping...

[swifty]

Mucking around with files from a recent trip, I came across these scenes that were reminiscent of ink paintings so I processed it accordingly.






Forgive the poor quality of the shots above since I found these scenes within a scene whilst pixel peeping and these are just crops of this frame below which in itself has been slightly cropped to remove some power lines in the lower left corner:



Now the top crops are of course way too low a resolution to be published in any meaningful way but I do like the content and the ultra flat painting-like perspective. This little exercise has taught me a few things about seeing and paying attention to detail.
I haven't done the maths but the FOV of the top crop would be well into the ultra teles range, something around 500mm+ FF equivalent.

All this does lead me to the point of this thread and what I'd like to discuss.

Often the recommended landscape lens are wide or ultra wide angles so at the opposite end of the spectrum, has anyone tried landscapes using their ultra teles? eg. >400mm
Or would atmospheric conditions over long distance make it too difficult to get high quality detailed images (what I suspect)? There was very little contrast (haze?) in my example and the processing was quite tricky to bring out any half decent result.

The longest lens I've ever owned is only 200mm so I'm quite the novice when it comes to ultra teles.

[Glenda]

I think you'll find quite a few do. A friend took an amazing landscape with his 300mm F4 with 1.4x teleconverter attached. I know I've taken scenes with my ultrawide which after looking at them, would have been better taken with a longer lens. Mainly when the most interesting part of the image is distant and of course the ultrawide makes it appear even more distant.