What is the Best Canon Lens for Landscape Photography

[ccrnkovic]

Just wondering if I could have some recommendations of what the best landscape lens is or what do you recommend?
Thanks

[kiwi]

Nikon 12-24

Oh, hang on canon.....hmmmmm....pass

I hope that was helpful

[Kym]

Sigma 10-20 Canon mount. (It is a very good WA lens)

[RaoulIsidro]

Full Frame: Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8L USM MarkII
Cropped 1.6: Canon EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM

[enduro]

all depends what you are shooting!

Canon 10-22mm. Sigma 10-22mm, Canon 17-40mm, Sigma 17-70mm ... something longer .... something prime?

I'd have to say that just about all good landscapers have had or have the Canon 17-40mm. Some would have the Sigma 17-70mm too, which is a very good lens on comparison.

For me, I have been very happy with the 10-20 range and the 17-70 range for a fulll set. If I upgrade the 17-70 it might be for the new version or the 17-40mm.

[JM Tran]

all depends what you are shooting!

Canon 10-22mm. Sigma 10-22mm, Canon 17-40mm, Sigma 17-70mm ... something longer .... something prime?

I'd have to say that just about all good landscapers have had or have the Canon 17-40mm. Some would have the Sigma 17-70mm too, which is a very good lens on comparison.

For me, I have been very happy with the 10-20 range and the 17-70 range for a fulll set. If I upgrade the 17-70 it might be for the new version or the 17-40mm.

the 17-40 L is actually quite poor on full frame due to crappy sharpness and smeared details on the edge and corners of photos - a high MP sensor such as the 5D2 will showcase this more than less demanding sensors, I was never happy with it on FF, but its good on a crop sensor due to the bad IQ on corners being taken out.

people always forget the Sigma 12-24 which is the widest you can go on full frame for rectilinear lens meaning no barrel distortion as evident in the 17-40 or 16-35. Stopped down it is a lot sharper than the 17-40 and rivals many other highly regarded landscape lenses.

serious landscape shooters for fine arts and commercial will be using the 14mm L prime or 17mm TSE honestly.......

[Analog6]

Nikon 12-24

Oh, hang on canon.....hmmmmm....pass

I hope that was helpful

I thought we were asked not to do this sort of pointless comment - naughty kiwi!

When I was shooting with my Canon gear (full frame) I used the 16-35l MkII, and before that on the 1.3 crop camera had success with the 10-22. But from time to time you may want a tele such as the 70-200 - every scene and what you want to get out of it is different. Buy the best glass you can afford, but I can guarantee no matter how many lenses you have there will be times when you won't have just what you want for the occasion!

[Bercy]

I think the 17-40L is a pretty good choice.

[pmack]

surely barrel distortion is not a major concern with landscapes...

[Dachimas]

I have the 17-40 and have owned (and have re-bought) the 10-22 Canon and have been very happy with both. If I could have only 1, I would take the 10-22...I always hear good reports about the Sigma version of this lens. I use a 40d too btw...

[JM Tran]

surely barrel distortion is not a major concern with landscapes...

oh not at all, we all love curved horizons and elongated buildings.....

[pmack]

oh not at all, we all love curved horizons and elongated buildings.....

horizons ARE curved last time i checked, and buildings not exactly the major component of landscapes.....

[JM Tran]

horizons ARE curved last time i checked, and buildings not exactly the major component of landscapes.....

sooooooo you would prefer say, a beach shot with the horizon sloping down to oneside? or bowed outwards? Do u shoot with a fish eye for everything perchance? Or are u simply trolling........because I will report u if u are......

yeah, the earth and horizons are round and curved, if u fly or stand high enough. Ever seen a professional or fine art landscape photo where there is a lot of barrel distortion, unless it was done on purpose?

[Kym]

Mod note: Cool it people!!

[ricktas]

I remind members if you have an issue with another members post. Please report it using the report icon (now a small triange) to the right of the thanks button. Responding with personal comments etc, could see you dragged into any action we take if a member breaches the site rules.

[ricktas]

sooooooo you would prefer say, a beach shot with the horizon sloping down to oneside? or bowed outwards? Do u shoot with a fish eye for everything perchance? Or are u simply trolling........because I will report u if u are......

yeah, the earth and horizons are round and curved, if u fly or stand high enough. Ever seen a professional or fine art landscape photo where there is a lot of barrel distortion, unless it was done on purpose?

Report if you like, but this post could well be deemed as baiting..so be prepared to be on the receiving end of any action we deem appropriate. I suggest you both step back and cool off.

[Xenedis]

Just wondering if I could have some recommendations of what the best landscape lens is or what do you recommend?

Personally, I use the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.

I like an ultra-wide view.

While f/2.8 is not necessary for landscapes, I've also used this lens for band shoots and other indoor photography, where the wider aperture is definitely useful.

The Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM is a very viable alternative, and considerably cheaper.

I should note that I've been shooting with full-frame DSLRs since 2006. If you're shooting with an APS-C DSLR, I wouldn't recommend either of these lenses if a very wide view is what you want; a very good alternative is the Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM.

[pmack]

no problems mods

sooooooo you would prefer say, a beach shot with the horizon sloping down to oneside? or bowed outwards? Do u shoot with a fish eye for everything perchance? Or are u simply trolling........because I will report u if u are......

yeah, the earth and horizons are round and curved, if u fly or stand high enough. Ever seen a professional or fine art landscape photo where there is a lot of barrel distortion, unless it was done on purpose?

I've not used the 17-40, so am not familliar with how much distortion it has, but would be surprised if it's as noticeable as you say.
I shoot a lot with the 10-22, but plan to move to full frame soon so was going to replace the 10-22 with the 17-40, but by the sounds of it this would be a downgrade, which seems a little strange considering the 17-40 is an L lens. (although i'm aware that the 10-22 is generally accepted to have "L" quality.
And no i'm not trolling, just trying to make my point that landscape is more forgiving than say buildings/architecture/street.

[CherylB]

I don't have a Canon WA lens, but I have the Sigma 10-20mm and I am very happy with it for my Canon 40D. Most reports I've seen for this lens give it a good rating.

[LJG]

The Sigma 10-20 and the Tokina 11-16 generally have rave revues and people love them. Personally I use a 10-22 Canon and it is now my favourite lens. You really can't go wrong with it on a crop frame (Canon) camera.