1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

lenses for wide pics

Discussion in 'Talking Pictures' started by 0llie bage, Jan 26, 2017.

  1. 0llie bage

    0llie bage New Member

    i have a cannon camera and are very new at taking pics.i need a lense to take wide pics please could anyone tell me which one i need thank you .
  2. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    I am afraid you will have to give us a little more detail. In particular what sort of Canon you have (?compact, crop sensor or full frame??) and an indication of your budget as the prices will vary enormously.
  3. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Hi, there are lots of answers depending in what camera you have and what it is you mean by wide.

    Let's assume you have a crop-sensor camera and a standard 18-55 mm lens. I would count a focal length of 15 mm "wide" on this camera and 10 mm "ultra-wide". As you go shorter in focal length you have to be much more careful how you frame your shots because you can get distortion and excessive converging verrticals (keystoning) if the camera is not held level. Ultra-wide lenses are suited to photographing something fairly close "foreground interest" in a wider setting. Anything close will look big and anything far away very small. In general use you can get a lot of ground (and your feet sometimes) in shot and end up having to crop the picture.

    If by wide you mean panorama shots then the best way to get these is to make several photographs each overlapping and then use software to join them together to make a single picture that is wider than it is tall. This gives better results than using a wide lens and cropping the top and bottom. Canon have (or had, I haven't looked lately) a free program called photostitch that does this for you. Although the best panoramas are made using a tripod and head that rotates the camera around its nodal point so there is no change in viewpoint while you turn there is no reason not to get reasonable results hand-held if you are careful. For very wide panoramas it is best to set the exposure manually so that the camera does not change exposure while you turn.
    Michelle Nelson likes this.
  4. Ffolrord

    Ffolrord Well-Known Member

    Get free Microsoft ICE software and stitch together some vertical shots taken at around 30mm. I too assume you have APSC and a kit lens.

    An example:

  5. velocette

    velocette Well-Known Member

    I can recommend the Canon EF-S 10-18 a lens I use a lot for street and general work and very good value for money even at today's prices. If you want the ultimate quality then you'll need to pay considerably more but for it's cost it's represents good value and a lot of fun.
    Michelle Nelson likes this.
  6. This is something I recently have started looking into, I live near some hills so a good walk gives some breathtaking views and my current lense just doesn't fit enough in haha.
  7. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    Beware of wide-angles though - they can often end up fitting in more than you need. It's all to easy to end up with a picture that's mostly empty foreground with the more interesting scenery squashed up an tiny right in the background. You'd be surprised how many successful landscapes are taken with longer lenses - David Clapp does quite a few...
  8. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    This is great advice. Wide angles are at their best in confined spaces or where you need to play with perspective. The simplicity of glueing images together allows you to show what you saw rather than what the camera captured which isn't always the same thing. Here's an extreme value where I wanted to get the feel of the big jet flying past the moon. The only way I could do it was to take the two pictures one after the other and combine them...

    Last edited: Feb 21, 2017
    Michelle Nelson and Learning like this.
  9. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    I like that picture as it is but would have liked it even more if the jet had been closer to the centre and had been heading to a moon on the left.
  10. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    That's no moon.
    PhotoEcosse likes this.
  11. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Oh yes it is and apart from my panning with the jet, that's exactly what was there.
  12. PhotoEcosse

    PhotoEcosse Well-Known Member

    I don't think you can say that, Tony.

    All you can say is that it is not the Earth's moon taken from the Earth.

    The thought that went through my head at first glance at the photo was "what an obvious fake". The thought that took over after reading Andrew's response was "if you are going to produce a picture that looks like a fake, you might as well fake it so that it looks like a good fake."

    I am not sure what went wrong with it although I would never doubt Andrew's statement.
  13. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    No Star Wars fans then?
  14. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    The only fakery about it is that I intended to get the whole thing on a single frame but was just too slow to catch the plane in the shot, so I panned left and took the shot with the plane on it. Then I used PE to merge the vapour trails on both frames - no other messing about. As to the moon looking like a fake, I can only think it's because this was taken around 5 pm on a summer day so the contrast is way lower than some people are used to.
    PhotoEcosse likes this.
  15. Roger Hicks

    Roger Hicks Well-Known Member

    How wide? And of what?


  16. Fishboy

    Fishboy Well-Known Member

    If it helps, I got the reference.

    Don't you just love it when you make a joke and everybody takes you seriously and the conversation goes off in a new direction?

    That never happens to me...oh no...never...

    Cheers, Jeff
    EightBitTony likes this.
  17. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I guessed it was a Starwars reference from the later post. Then again, it seemed like the rest of this little diversion to be pretty daft.
  18. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Just for interest sake, we had another blue sky moon today so here it is taken with the same camera (Sony HX90) at maximum focal length (123mm = 720mm equivalent). This is the whole frame reduced to 850P across. Not sure why it looks bluer than the previous effort...

    Michelle Nelson likes this.

Share This Page