advertisement


Question on wide angle lenses

garyi

leave blank
I just had a wide angle lens delivered which I got for a tenner. I wanted to get some pictures of our area. A wide angle would appear to fit the bill for landscapes.

However the one I have got does not seems to get anymore into the picture than a standard zoom lens I have.

Am I showing more stupidity, I assumed a wide angle lens was to get more into the picture as it were?
 
what is the focal length in mm. You mention a zoom lens , well if the zoom lens was say 35 to 120mm focal length and the wide angel lens was 35mm then the zoom lens set at its widest angel is the same as your wide angel lens , yes. Normal 1 to 1 view uses a 50mm lens (for a 35mm camera) , so anything under that is wide angel anything above that is telephoto lens. I think you a mixing up the term Zoom with telephoto.
 
Thanks Zener, the zoom lens is 28-85 and the wide angle is 28, so I see my mistake haha.
 
The standard lense will still probably be better at F16 though if using transparencys
 
garyi said:
Thanks Zener, the zoom lens is 28-85 and the wide angle is 28, so I see my mistake haha.

GaryI

I have recently bought two wide angle lenses for my Canon EOS from a man in Atlanta, a 13 and 8mm, the 8mm is completeley mad!

Do a google for Kiev Camera, based in Atlanta, sadly they were a bit more than a tenner, but still good value for money at much less that 150 quid each.

They have a bizarre M42 screw mount, presumably for submarine and zenith attachments, but they did do adapters for Canon\Nikon and mebees Minolta.

I can't get to there site to check at the minute due to work restricition nonsense, but a search on the above will bear fruit!

Cheers

S
 
hiya all,

i think dba means that normally a lens will be sharpest at one aperture normally around f8 - f11. wide open is normally not too hot and fully stopped down the same. sports lenses and fast f1.0, f1.2's etc are designed to work wide open so these give the best results when used in that range.

cheers

john
 
Yep,thats what I meant.Gary,you won't notice on normal film but you would on a slide if you intend to blow it up.
 
A "Standard" lens is one that gives (roughly) the same field of view as human vision. On a 35mm film camera that is 50mm. On a digicam its more like 32mm depending on your multiplier.

I think dba actually meant prime lens not standard lens. A prime lens is a lens of fixed focal length like your 28mm. i.e. a lens that is not a zoom lens.

Prime lenses, assuming other things are equal, will give better pictures comparted to zooms. Most zoom lenses give very average pictures as they trade quality for convenience. High quality zoom lenses are, like macros, very expensive -- are you sensing a theme yet Gary? :)

On a brighter note, standard lenses are cheap and offer great 'bang per buck'. This is why I think you should go out and get a Nikkor 50/1.8 (AF or manual) as they are only £90 new and easy to find at about £50 second hand. This is a fine lens and will make for a excellent fast, short telephoto 65mm lens on your digicam. You will learn an awful lot if you just take lots of pictures with this one lens.

Matthew
 
Matthew thanks for that, my next question here was going to be why are fixed focal length lenses (prime) so much more expensive on ebay, some are going for silly money. So in essence a zoom is convenient but flawed because of this.

Although I am confident I have the answer, what does a photographer do if he chooses not to use zoom lenses? Is it a case of constant swapping, or making the most of what you have?

I have to say the lens I recently got a Nikkor 28-85mm with Macro seems to be very nice for the money, its old but AF. However the metering is all screwed, in anything other than Manual the images a burnt.

I just won a 100-300mm Zoom on ebay with AF which should prove fun, I have this manual focus one, but I have concluded I can't focus! We get a lot of birds in the garden which this lens should be good for.

Regarding the lens you think I should get, one of these I guess:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/New-Canon-50m...oryZ4687QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I'll think about, I have rather spent a lot of money right now hehe.
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Gary,

my next question here was going to be why are fixed focal length lenses (prime) so much more expensive on ebay,
Probably supply and demand as well as many primes being specialist and, therefore, expensive lenses.



Although I am confident I have the answer, what does a photographer do if he chooses not to use zoom lenses? Is it a case of constant swapping, or making the most of what you have?
Both, but I'd imagine that most good photographers stick to just a lens or two or three. Vuk, for example, does 100% of his photography with three focal lengths (28mm, 50mm, 90mm). In fact, he probably does 90% with just the 50.



I have to say the lens I recently got a Nikkor 28-85mm with Macro seems to be very nice for the money, its old but AF. However the metering is all screwed, in anything other than Manual the images a burnt.
Have you set the aperture ring to the smallest aperture -- that is, the biggest number?



I just won a 100-300mm Zoom on ebay with AF which should prove fun, I have this manual focus one, but I have concluded I can't focus! We get a lot of birds in the garden which this lens should be good for.
Good luck. Manual focusing a D50 is an exercise in frustration.


Regarding the lens you think I should get, one of these I guess:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/New-Canon-50mm...QQcmdZViewItem
Not if you want it to fit a Nikon body.

Joe
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Gary,

Have a look at this article on the standard lens:

http://www.vothphoto.com/spotlight/articles/forgotten_lens/forgotten-lens.htm

Especially the bit of digital SLR photography:

What If I Have A Digital SLR?
As of the time of this writing, most digital SLRs that accept interchangeable lenses have sensors that are smaller than a traditional 35mm film frame. Images made with these cameras are cropped from the center of what would be a full frame image if shot on film. This produces a "focal length multiplier," typically 1.5x or 1.6x. For example, a 50mm normal lens on a Canon EOS-10D camera renders an image equivalent to an 85mm lens on a film body.

On these cameras, the focal length that best equates to a "normal" perspective is the 35mm, becoming an effective 52-56mm lens on a typical digital body. Most vendors produce a reasonably fast 35mm f/2.0 autofocus lens that can be used quite well as a normal lens. Canon, Nikon, Leica and a few others even make high speed 35mm f/1.4 optics (at correspondingly high prices!).

Joe
 
Sorry I linked to the wrong thing entirely haha.

My feeling is prime lenses would be more for professionals as they would have a specific aim, (street shots, portraits etc) where as a zoom would suit someone like me who is just attempting to learn and take shots ranging from interesting bugs to landscapes all on one dog walk.

The super zoom I have just won is AF, the super zoom I currently own is manual Although very easy to focus reasonably.

As a matter of interest how do better cameras allow you to manually focus better, would this be down to the view finder?

One other question. After my flurry of lens swaps I now find a spot appears in the top left of every image, depending on which lens and which settings the spot may be pin sharp or blurry but it does happen in the same place with three different lenses.

I suspect some dust on the sensor, but a really close and careful look seems to indicate that the sensor is totally clean. Could there be another cause or should I return the camera to Jessops?

BTW I signed up to Photonet and Dpreview forums but it would appear camera forums have a rule that they must be hard to read and navigate, so I gave up.
 
That was an excellent article thanks Joe.

This 'Wide Angle' 28mm lens I have got might equate near to 46mm on the D50, so I might have done well?

I'll keep an eye out for an AF one though.
 
Gary,

As a matter of interest how do better cameras allow you to manually focus better, would this be down to the view finder?
The viewfinder is one place to cut production costs, which is a huge issue in a market where an additional 20 bucks may make or break many sales.



One other question. After my flurry of lens swaps I now find a spot appears in the top left of every image, depending on which lens and which settings the spot may be pin sharp or blurry but it does happen in the same place with three different lenses.
You have dust on your sensor. At this point, Derek will be flushed from the reeds to tell you you should have bought an Olympus, which has an ultrasonic sensor shaker thingy to dislodge dust.



I suspect some dust on the sensor, but a really close and careful look seems to indicate that the sensor is totally clean. Could there be another cause or should I return the camera to Jessops?
I'm 99% sure it's dust or dirt. Be careful cleaning it, though, as you can make the situation much worse. If you're worried about doing this yourself, go to Jessops and ask them for help.



BTW I signed up to Photonet and Dpreview forums but it would appear camera forums have a rule that they must be hard to read and navigate, so I gave up.
Probably just as well. Everything you need to know can be asked here, but without the associated photography forum sarcasm and arrogance. No, wait. You get that here, too, but it's friendly sarcasm and arrogance.



This 'Wide Angle' 28mm lens I have got might equate near to 46mm on the D50, so I might have done well?
The 28mm acts like a 42mm would on a 35mm film camera, so it's pretty close to a standard lens. You'd prolly be better off with the 35mm f/2 AF-Nikkor, but play with the 28 for a while.

Joe
 
I have learnt some things very very quickly tonight.

AF 35 ish mm lenses are ****ing expensive. Faster ones are silly money.

There is no cheap option for Nikon.

Wide angles i.e. 20mm and below are puke inducingly expensive.

My 28mm ones are very common, and the one I have is not particularly fast, but this is not an issue, I have far to much to learn.

I would love for a bit of nice weather, my house is purposefully low lit, and playing is difficult haha.

I will go into Jessops on Saturday, as madly keen as I am with things (I have a tendency to get a screwdriver out in impatience) I realise that touching that sensor is not a good idea.
 
A small amount of playing with this 28mm lens is that I can get focus up very close on objects, its not like macro but DOF is good.

Also there is less of an issue with camera shake, in low light I can get close ups just taking shots of the digital clock etc shows me very quickly that I can get superior shots and crisper images with this lens in low light and I can still get focused up from just 10 or so inches away, not a chance of doing this on the zooms except in Macro which changes the whole perspective.

Its quite interesting this photography lark. What with a kiddy on the way I might have something to take pictures of hehe.
 
Joe I missed your question on the aperture setting for the AF lens, it has a lock that needs to be engaged before it will work on the camera, so everything is as it should be. In doors with flash its fine and reasonably close shots say in the garden work fine, but landscapes and the like the images are usually unusable, if I knock it down to -2 -3 on the stops it looks better, but I have been using it in manual.
 
Gary

You don't really need a fast wide angle because most landscapes are taken in daylight;)
 


advertisement


Back
Top