The Only 2 ESSENTIAL LENSES for Landscape Photography

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

What are your Essential Lenses?

[@KevinNordstrom]

Canon RF 15-35 2.8 and Canon RF 70-200 2.8 are my only lenses

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

@@seantufnell Nice- I like that, a single lens setup!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

@@KevinNordstrom Great two lenses to go with I'd say!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Keith C it’s such a great lens but pricey! How nice is the Zeiss 55 - that’s the sharpest lens I’ve ever used!

[@andrewreece5582]

Canon 16-35 F4 IS, Canon 24-70 F4 IS. Collectively saved $2,000 by not buying 2.8s and I've literally never wished I had that extra stop.

[@neilmccaughan5149]

I like Mark's videos. He's thoughtful, practical AND DOESN'T SHOUT.

[@sethcashman1011]

Agreed. The “shout” comment made me think of one person right away.

[@marcel9568]

One with a lot of hair?

[@sethcashman1011]

@@marcel9568 hahaha! Not saying anything. 😂

[@neilmccaughan5149]

@@marcel9568 Is that what it is?

[@i_n_c_r_y_p_t_o]

I agree, although it's funny to me that you shouted to say that lol. :)

[@davidclifton123]

A well spoken case for your lens choices. Also, I am so glad to finally hear a well respected photographer admit lenses are expensive. On most channels I watch it seems dropping $2,000 is something that is done everyday. Thanks for admitting the reality for most of us.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

You betcha - glad you enjoyed it!

[@BenjoC8632]

Clifton Photo I hear ya! I’m also a Sony shooter and for landscapes CERTAINLY use my 16-35mm the most. I have the Zeiss though as the GM is a little out of my budget...GREAT lens tho!

[@nelsonclub7722]

Mark Denney. We listen, we watch, and we learn, but most of all we love it.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Awesome!! Thanks so much for this!

[@richardhutson4371]

I'm an old man living in San Francisco and don't get out to do landscape photography very often but I do enjoy your videos and always learn something that helps me take better photos in the city ... thanks for doing what you do !

[@theonemanopinion2764]

Tamron 28-200mm on the Sony side ticks a lot of boxes for me! I have a 50mm prime and a 200-600mm for everything else.

[@MK-hz2bn]

I have a 16-35 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8 Sony and I love them. I do real estate photography and have just decided to do landscape too for my enjoyment. It’s been a long time since I’ve done the photography I wanted to do.

[@tashihishey34]

I've trained my eyes to visualize a 20mm and a 300mm field of view. With a prime lens I have an easier fix on lighting as changing focal lengths on zooms change everything. Most primes have more light gathering capacity too creating smoother out of focus feathering. A prime is sharper, lighter, has better colour science, less expensive and adds to the creative process of setting up the scene. Without the luxury of a zoom, a prime places me in the discomfort zone and that's the sweet spot where my learning happens. Process, not product. How can I do it better next time? I shoot with a Nikon 20mm f1.8G and a Nikon 300mm f2.8.

[@raytbrown2]

I completely agree with the POV - on both fronts, visual and mental. And BTW: That is a really nice 300m lens you have there! (It almost costs more than my Vespa). I am Jelly - seriously. That said, I shoot mirrorless, nowadays. As such, I cannot wait until I can afford the OLY 300mm - except that it'll be 600mm relative and I'll need a different POV.

[@gaarakabuto1]

Early on a was forced for many reason to shoot in 75mm lens and that was a weird focal length to work on. Many shots of mine that I consider them to be some of my best, I can guarantee that would have been some basic pictures if I had the option to zoom in or zoom out. Prime lenses are great to learn photography and composition but eventually they become much more than that. I recently tried a zoom lens and it simply isn't for me no more, the final picture came lacklusting for post editing compared to a prime and I just got myself thinking how much more I could have got from a prime.

[@rich88789]

Mark you are hands down the best KZbin trainer on photography. You don’t hype any products, You’re very detailed and simple to follow and you don’t yell at us 😂 Thanks again, great video!

[@oliviarenee3]

Mark, I recently subscribed to your channel and I am so happy I found you on KZbin. I love how simple your videos are, no music, no crazy editing/jump cuts, etc. Even the background where you record looks inviting! I've been going back to watch all of your videos, what you share is very informative and as the video ends, I feel ready to use what information I have learned. As a landscape photographer myself, I enjoy your content and I look forward to learning something from your channel as often as I can. Thank you!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much for the amazing comment - made my day!!

[@VictorPyle]

I just wanted to say thanks for all of the great photography info. I have watched a lot of photography videos by a lot of people and you are the only one I have subscribed to. I enjoy all types of outdoor photography. I love birds, other wildlife, a little macro, and wildflowers. I think landscape is my best. Maybe that's why I enjoy your videos so much. Thanks.

[@toddy4x4photography]

I have the same camera and 16-35mm combo. I also only run 2 lenses but my second is a 70-300mm. Apart from the obvious price difference the main benefit of the 70-300 over the 100-400mm is weight and size. A lot easier to throw in the pack for hiking.

[@jonjon1217]

Your use of vertical images for landscape photos is a fantastic idea. I'm sure that is been done before but I haven't seen many photographers rely so heavily on it. What a wonderful suggestion. Thank you for sharing

[@inthewoodswithbigfoot3941]

Thanks! As a new photographer, I don't want to waste money on what I don't need. I currently only have a kit lense, but it is doing quite well to teach me the basics. I'm able to dabble in micro, astro, landscape, fog, wildlife, and lightening photography. Great advice!

[@inthewoodswithbigfoot3941]

@FnnElm Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS, but I have added the Canon 75-300 II and the Sigma 150-600 C.

[@hishamosman4341]

I'm in the same boat bro. I also believe the fun factor is important. You only improve by making mistakes

[@MarkWick]

I can sure relate to your comments about how important the sky is. I was in Yosemite for three days, and never saw a single cloud. The only two photos from those three days I ever offered for sale were one taken with a full frame fish eye lens which made a pebble in the foreground appear as large as half-dome, and a silhouette of a squirrel on the open side of Four-mile Trail.

[@josephcole3187]

Completely agree Mark and i'm already there ..17-35 & 150-600 is what im down to for landscape, however i could argue that one other lens could be added for intimate details and that would be a macro lens or at least extension tubes with a 50mm.

[@Time.Space.Heal.]

New photographer here. I just bought a Sony A7iv with a Sony 24-105 f/4 I watch 100s of reviews on gear and tutorials but decided to subscribe to this channel. Calm. Easy. Inspirational. ✌🏻

[@alantuttphotography]

You gave a perfect example of why the old adage "zoom with your feet" isn't always useful. Besides, sometimes you want a specific perspective from a single point, regardless of the ability to move to a different spot. For me, zoom lenses are my primary tools. Primes only where necessary.

[@thetravelingteacher2327]

My "complete", but bit heavy set for landscape photography: Full sensor body, crop sensor body, sturdy tripod, flash with diffuser for macro, 16-35 f4, 24-70 f4 (0.7x macro), 100-400, extension tubes for macro, 1.4x teleconverter, circular polarizer and ND filters (77mm filter size compatible to all 3 lenses mentioned earlier)

[@mikehines14]

My two are the Sony 24-105 f4 and the 100-400GM. I absolutely LOVE the 100-400, I don't know why more people don't use it!

[@TheKentaurion]

Why not more people use the FE 100-400 GM? Obviously the price! Even used, it's expensive (about 2000 €). Most tech is cheaper in the U.S, but I guess it's still about 1800$. For the common people that's a lot.

[@chrisso7744]

Great vid. I have way too many lenses (maybe 15+) but I like the mantra that you should only carry two lenses at any time so you can concentrate on the images and not get distracted by the gear. I note you threw a teleconverter comment in - and agree that a good teleconverter gives more options relatively easily. Often I'll make a choice at the beginning of the shoot and just accept that what I'm carrying for the day is one more limitation in the creative process: if it means I miss a shot that might have been then so be it. Currently I generally get about with a 50mm f1.4 and a 70-200mm f2.8 and I chuck a 2x teleconverter in the bag that is compatible with the 70-200. That gives me a big range of maximum apertures and focal lengths to work with depending on conditions. One variable I've started playing with is chucking an APS-C body in the bag along with the full frame. This gives even more framing options with a modest addition to weight.

[@mostlymessingabout]

Prime lens protagonists: just step closer Cliff photographers: i wish i had a zoom

[@TrailsToTuryia]

Mark, one important consideration you didn't discuss is the incredible opportunity to do a huge crop with plenty of pixels to spare with that full-frame 40+MP sensor! All the more true for the Fuji Med Format monster. And this can be done in the field with a zoom on the image playback of the shot you just captured. Thus one can make a wide angle shot into a WAY longer focal-length image with no concern of IQ loss/pixel shortage! Maybe not as pure as zooming and snapping the shot, but I certainly don't consider it cheating either; as you still are using your eye and intuition to pull out interesting areas the same way you do when you zoom pre-snap. For me, this strategy has been amazing for traveling abroad lightly, as most of us non-pro photographers are packed to the gills with other stuff. And it just makes me feel I'm really taking full advantage of the awesome power, performance, and high price of my full-frame/MP sensor. So much so that I feel my 35mm prime is like a 35 - 200 in a way! Your thoughts?

[@AlokSomani]

Agreed with your choices, though I have a prime on my wide end because there isn't a good wide zoom that touches into ultra-wide for my system. I know primes are generally better as well, but I will say it is a PITA to keep switching lenses, especially because I'll usually want a few different types of shots from any one spot.

[@Fordry]

MFT here. G9ii with the Oly 8-25(16-50) f4 and the Panny 45-175(90-350). Close to your range overall. Very small, very light in comparison, mainly the telephoto, G9ii not so much. Definitely enjoying them.

[@stanobert3475]

Tamron makes an excellent 100-400mm lens which won't break the bank for those on a budget and it is compact for its class.

[@dons.9842]

Just bought one recently. Agree 100%.

[@ladislavzahnas7618]

Or Sigma if you have sony mount. Cost just a bit more than tamron and weights like 25g more.

[@ericvaughan11]

👍 That long lens is must have. I recently got back from workshop with Marc Adamus and I used my RF 100-500mm almost as much as I did my wide angle.

[@brentonniccolo5734]

My go-to lenses in my bag are always the 24mm 1.4 & 70-200 2.8 which I can use for portraits too. I know you said you don't gravitate towards the really wide shots but I'd love to see what you'd do with the new 12-24mm GM although that $3k price tag is a bit out of my price range

[@djack4125]

I carry the Canon 100-500mm for landscapes. Light weight, sharp, and is also a capable close-up lens for flowers etc. The Canon 16-35 is my go-to landscape lens.

[@HelenaOfDetroit]

I shot for years with a Canon60D and used the 10-16mm and 55-250mm kit lenses. I have great shots. But the resolution wasn't as good as I wanted. I just upgraded my equipment to Sony and the two lenses you mentioned are the two I bought because they were the same to what I was already shooting. Glad to know I'm not the only landscape photography who understands this. Keep up the good work.

[@walkingdaveoutdoors]

That was Perfect for playing with the idea of photography, I recently pick-up a Canon RP, But the question was what lenses I should get. This narrowed it down very nicely for what I want to do. Thank you 👍

[@kansascityrc]

I picked up the sigma 150-600 for wildlife photos, recently I used it for landscape shots and it blew my mind of the detail of places I couldn't see normally.

[@janos71]

yes, i experienced the same thing. it is not the easiest to carry around though.

[@ransackedroom]

The delivery, openness, and honestly the gentleness of these videos make them enjoyable as well as informative. Do spare a thought for those of us who can only afford $1000 per year on this hobby, though (just as I try to be mindful of those who can't afford even that),

[@theladubfovi909]

Probably my most-used lens is the 17-55mm Nikkor ... built like a tank, and incredibly sharp for a zoom. For city visits, when I want to be “free” and catch almost anything, I find the 18-200mm to be really flexible and versatile. Since purchasing a Foto-vest, taking a few primes along is much easier, if I want to indulge a bit☺️

[@srsanz]

Agreed. I have the same lens. Super versatile and amazingly sharp images.

[@benjaminlundeen8515]

Mark this is one of the better videos I have seen. I feel like right in the living room with you. I have started doing landscape of rivers, fields and barns. This video showed me exactly what kind of photos zooming in each lense gets. I own a 18-55mm and 55-200 mm. Alot of my shots are at 160-190. I noticed if go 200 more blurry. Really like again how you showed same scene and multiple pictures on zoom distances. Definitely made my mind to get a 16-35 to start. Was looking at a 50mm but a wide angle believe way for me.

[@mirasga]

A macro lens would be an interesting 3rd lens to bring along.

[@forsterl.stewart414]

Agreed and then some. You can never bring enough. Because the very thing you didn't bring... you'll need.

[@FlosBlog]

Wait? 100-400 is not macro?

[@TedsFishroom]

Thank you! I recently went through a similar thought process and culled my lens quiver down to two. I chose the Sigma 20mm 1.8 Art and the Nikkor 28-300. I went with the prime 20mm because I really like the image quality and large aperture (especially for astrophotography), and I found that when using a zoom wide angle (14-24mm) I was either right around 20mm (18-21ish) or all the way out to 24 and wishing for more. The 28-300 leaves me with just an 8mm gap between the two lenses. I really liked this video because it shows me that my reasoning is shared by others!

[@peterblackthorne1262]

Really good advise Mark. Because of my age and some other physical issues the weight and size of my gear became a real priority to me. I switched to using micro four thirds gear around 7 years ago and find that it suits my needs perfectly. The lens that pretty much lives on my camera Is a 12-100 f/4 , but I also carry a 7-14 f/2.8 wide angle. That gives me a FF equivalent from 14-200mm. Both lenses are Olympus pro lenses. However I do also have a non pro 75-300 that I sometimes carry if I think that I will need some extra reach. That gives me a FF equivalent of 150-600 mm. It's not the fastest lens but I rarely shoot below f/5.6 so it works for me.

[@busyflyin]

Mark, I really enjoy your videos and your work. I chuckled a bit when you were talking about being steady with the 100-400, and using a 10 timer to assure a sharp photo. Us guys shooting birds in flight don’t have that luxury! Thanks for all of your work!

[@AlexisOGrekos]

Exactly my thoughts Mark. I can't get why landscape photographers only promote wide angle lenses, there are a whole lot of possibilities missed if you don't have that extra zoom, because many times the good part of your wide angle photo is like 1 mega pixel if you crop it. Also, with a telephoto lens there is no excuse for you to not compose perfectly a photo. If you mess it up you know that it was your fault and not the excuse that "i didn't have enough zoom for the best composition".

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Glad you enjoyed the video!

[@TarrelScot]

What a useful and thought-provoking video! I was a bit confused at the beginning when you were talking about a 10-24. I guess that was for a crop-sensor camera? I t has caused me to think again about ditching my Fuji 14mm f/2.8 and swapping it for the 10-24 (15-35 equivalent). I like your observation at the end; "I only have one choice; do I go wide or do I go long". I suppose the added advantage of this is fewer lens changes in the field and therefore less risk of sensor contamination. I do find I'm swapping between my 14mm and the 18-55 quite a bit. Useful info also about exploiting distortion. Hadn't thought about that. I have a broken 50-230mm Fuji lens in the cupboard which is dead sharp and lightweight. That's definitely now going off to Fuji for repair! (75-350 equiv).

[@jackl28]

Recently upgraded to Canon 5D Mk4.. and lost the ability to use most of my old crop sensor lenses. But my essential lens is my Canon 70-200 f/4

[@stevensakic4342]

Thank you. I use 24-70 mm. f 2.8 and 100-400mm f5.6 which simplifies weight carrying a big and heavy backpack ..

[@patrickzeelen1870]

The last few months I was unsure what lenses I will take with the Sony a7R III, thanks to your video I now know 100% which one I will take, thanks a lot Mark 👍

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Glad the video was helpful Patrick!

[@jaytea11tan6]

Really liked this video. I’m in process of changing to Sony. Getting crop camera. A6600. With 16-55f2.8 lens and already have 70-350. Sold most of my other gear and like you I had a ton of lenses. Too heavy now. Your views confirmed I’m doing the right thing. Thanks

[@kswas2784]

You should make that into a t-shirt: Go wide or go long! :)

[@Boreganic]

Lmao I’d buy 😂

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Hahahah! I'm glad you think so!

[@feraszorba]

That's what she said

[@ashpirid]

Hahaha I'll buy it too hahahah

[@RyanLennoxBradley]

Would match my photography t shirt collection (1 Jared Palin I Shoot RAW Australian bushfire edition T shirt) also, I'm Australian and shipping would be like $50 AUD

[@thegorn]

I prefer the 70-200 f/4 macro as it’s much lighter and better obviously for macro, and takes 1.4x and 2.0x TC for long shots. Also prefer the 16-35 f/4 power zoom lens for lightness. So yeah our ideas are similar, but I go for the lighter options. For Astro I go the 14mm prime, and for birding, the 200-600. They are the only lenses I need for outdoor work. Got the 24-70 f2.8 for portrait and events.

[@jaywilliamsphoto]

For the longest time I was always shooting with my 16-35mm and I became very tired of it, I wasn’t diversifying and wide angle shots were/are becoming a bit cliche; so I left it at home and only took my 24-105. It helped me so much creatively. Since I got my my 100-400mm I’ve been buzzing with creativity and it definitely helped me get my eye in. Now though, I’m more confident with myself in different environments and carry all 3. All my gear is a little heavy to lug around, but I’m a mule and once I get going I’m ok hahaha.

[@12stockweb]

I love my 24-105 and the 100-400! I also have an 18mm Zeiss prime that is super light and gives me a little extra reach when I need it. Also gives me a beautiful sun star. 😍

[@OifelOifel]

I find that Lumiars Skyreplacement can do wonders if the weather is not cooperating. Since you can also use your own sky photos you can vary it a lot.

[@davidross5930]

Thanks for this video Mark. I've practically done the same thing. I left photography for years when the digital stuff came out/in? But missing photography, I bought a very expensive camera and ,progressively,very expensive lenses, adding to my frustration because I wasn't learning the 'tricks of the trade' in digital. So I did what you've just shown in the video-I picked a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 and now I'm learning & loving the choice I made. Wide OR long,so easy. Stay safe & well-regards,Dave

[@tomlew55]

Great video, you do beautiful work. After dragging DSLRs and multiple lenses around, I tried "travelling light" with MFT. I found that I had to make sure I used the proper focal length to capture an image and ended up with a bag full of lenses. With my Z7 I'm much more able to crop without losing detail. I find I can shoot most any landscape with the 24-70 and some neutral density filters. Being an old guy, carrying a light camera with one lens, a few filters in a shoulder bag and a tripod makes life much easier than lugging multiple cameras and lenses around. Besides, 90% of my photos with the Z7 are within the 24-50mm range. Works for me.

[@amandeep9930]

"If I took that extra step that would be a whole new issue" 😂😂😂😂

[@gerryhardman9060]

I would have kept the 10-24 because from 15-24 it’s full frame and it can also be a good lens for a APS-C camera which would give you the 15mm equivalent a smaller and lighter camera with extra reach for the 100-400. Excellent video though with good suggestions. Regards Gerry.

[@urselfandtom]

Love this video, Mark! I've narrowed myself down to a 70-200, 24-70, and a 14mm prime I use for astro, so I don't always need to take it when I'm doing sunrise/sunset/day shoots. But I still have a bunch of primes I've been trying to decide if I should sell. Your video is really pushing me towards the sell end of the decision scale. Thanks!

[@movakalin5333]

I use only 24-105F4 Sony. And sometimes when shooting portrait 85 F1.8. It’s also a question of budget. As a hobby shooter I don’t want to spent more money. I am super happy with my setup and the Print-outs in a4 look amazing.

[@gprice1903]

Thanks, I'm inspired to lighten my load. I've been trying to be brave enough to do it. :-) Always good info, thanks Mark.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much!

[@davidligon6088]

I know this was quite some time ago. But still useful. I currently use these two lenses with a 24-105. I have decided to move to the 20-70 G, the 70-200 Macro G II, and a 1.4 TC for a much lighter kit. I am a bit concerned about the IQ of the 70-200 with the TC, so I’ll keep the 100-400.

[@toshiisomura5758]

That’s cool to see that my lens combo is same as yours but on a budget. I have 11-22 and 70-200 and just one 32 prime for portraits but it’s on apsc so basically becomes 18-35 and 112-320.

[@neilpiper9889]

Press photographers in the UK are issued with 2 cameras 2 speedlites and a 24 70 f2.8 and a 70 200 2.8 zoom. Covers everything. Canon or Nikon. The general purpose kit.

[@davidspiering2333]

So funny you posted this video, I am switching from Nikon to Sony and these exact two lenses are what I was trading all my gear to get along with an A7R IV. I love that I can finally use a standard filter system with the 16-35 as using the nikon 14-24 was frustrating taking multiple exposures and blending in post. Great video and I couldn't agree more with your choices!

[@stevetqp9152]

Hi David. May I ask your reason for going from Nikon to Sony? (I'm strongly considering going from Fuji to NIkon, i.e., the Z7 + 14-30 f/4 for landscape and large prints. If you want to chat, please email steve[at]totalqualityphoto.com. Thanks!

[@joelwolski]

Essential? It all depends on where I'm standing. Like you said about "zooming with your feet" having limitations, but for me, I'll go from intimate landscapes, to macro details, to medium views, to grand landscapes, to astro all in a single day; sometimes all within a mile of each other. I can see from your gallery that you shoot a lot of BIG landscapes which makes sense why you would want to include as much as possible (wide angle) or isolate out the "clutter" (telephoto). I don't shoot big landscapes so the vast majority of my images are within that 35-100mm focal range that you've excluded from your kit.

[@timelesscreations777]

Canon 15-35mm f2.8 vii is my go to for landscapes, but I also use Canon 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, and Canon Primes 100mm f2.8 Macro, 85mm f1.8, 35mm f2, 50mm f1.2, and Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm for that far out stuff..those are my keepers

[@RichardBO9]

Very informative! I’m curious how often you actually use less than f/4 on you wide lens?

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Only when shooting astro which isn’t too often.

[@peters1526]

Hello Mark, of course this video has it's half-year age, but i "finally" found it. I agree to reduce gear in every sort of motives. I answered a bit more specific in your question below. But I want to thank for your calm and very pleasant appearance. It differs very much from many others... And, additionally, its fine for me (german guy) to practice my english.. ;-)

[@therealjackfisher]

I only have one lens and it contains almost every lens on the planet. Its nikon p900 :D

[@GlobalThirtyseven]

Digital zoom vs optical zoom is no contest. Optical zoom wins always.

[@realflow100]

@@GlobalThirtyseven it is optical zoom though.

[@GoA7250]

I have a P7700 with a CPL and lens hood, and it rocks.

[@nanettehayakawa7628]

I don't own a telephoto lens - mostly rent one from a local Lens Rental place so you made a great case for purchasing one. I had Mark Denney as a guide in Iceland on a landscape photographytour that I took and he's very helpful, points things out that I normally wouldn't notice, terrific teacher. Thanks for this information quite valuable to me and my photography adventures. !!!

[@bd1630]

5:52 “It really wasn’t that big but I was just a few inches away from it” - That’s what she said

[@nelsonclub7722]

I bought a Hasselblad H6D100 a few weeks ago and after unpacking it, and before the lens and back was on my wife said to me "IOh thought it was going to be much bigger than that considering how much you paid" and I said to her "Yes, I hear that a lot!!" - it was few hours later before she realized what she/I had said.

[@matthewwood3000]

F U N N Y

[@pascalhibon7928]

My most used lenses are the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f4 (Nikon shooter). When I'm out for a shoot I usually have three lenses in my bag: the two I already mentioned and a 20 mm f1.8 prime. I rarely use my 16-35 anymore. I think the lens choice also depends a lot on what kind of area one is shooting landscapes (next to ones style of course). Here in Belgium I'm often around the 40 to 55 mm range. Another important thing: I'm confident that a photographer also learns to "look" at scenes with the lenses he or she packed. I mean, it doesn't make any sense to look at a scene and say: hm, I wish I had this or that lens with me. Instead, it is better to focus on the possibilities for the lenses you have access to at that particular time.

[@mikegindling4236]

Sigma is coming out with a 100-400 for the Sony e mount. My next purchase.

[@joanneny8638]

Wonderful you’ve motivated me to pick my camera up again. Got both lenses will not give up my 24-70 or 70-200 though. Love them all. Also holding on to my nifty 50 and 85 mm for some portrait work.

[@armeniocavaco]

Fuji Guy here: 8-16, 16-80 and 100-400 all covered :)

[@michaelmcdonald3345]

For my Canon 90D I have a 50mm f/1.4, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 24-70 f/2.8 ii IS and 70-200mm f/4 IS. I've reached my budget so I hope the 24-70 is wide enough. We'll see. Great videos, by the way. Thanks.

[@klg200]

I have one lens for all: 40mm xD

[@dencaputo2850]

I agree with your recommendation with one exception. I would add a 50 or 60mm macro lens to catch closeups of wildflowers, insects etc.

[@russellschundler6559]

I have also adopted new gear for my landscape work. My camera is a Nikon Z7 and my 2 lenses for landscape photography are the 14-30mm and 24-200mm. Both lenses are extremely sharp end-to-end and offer nearly no noticeable distortion. I didn’t really need the “heavy glass” that I might have needed for sports or wildlife photography. The dynamic range in new cameras was another reason to upgrade the camera. For night photography, I have 2 prime lenses ... the 20mm f/1.8 and the 50mm f/1.8. That leaves me with a light bag with lots of room ... for a DJI Mavic 2 Pro drone.

[@csc-photo]

Currently with my Z6 I'm down to my 24-70 f/4 Z, and 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 AF-P - love them both. I love the minimalist-gear approach but I still have my eye on Nikon's 20 f/1.8 Z, for landscape & astro. So sharp edge to edge even wide open. Awesome content on your channel, thanks!

[@mchume65]

I have a Pentax K70 and I do mostly landscapes. You got me thinking about getting a DA 18-250mm. I already have a 18-55mm and a 55-300mm and I find myself changing back and forth, which I don't like to do.

[@danielson_9211]

I went with the canon rf 15-35 and the 100-500, bought the 24-70 for that extra reach inside museums and such, general walk around lens.

[@nikonmark37814]

Great video, I'm a Canon shooter and use the 17-40 for landscapes. I also have the 100-400 that I almost never use but I'll start using it as a landscape lens and see I like it.

[@jameschilton3556]

Totally agree with you. I just use a 24-70 and 100-400 now. The 100-400 is almost always on the body and if I need something wider, I just do a pano.

[@tothewoodsnet6714]

As a new photographer (landscape and wildlife) who has been living on KZbin lately, this is easily one of the most informative videos I've seen and it's timed perfectly for my stage of development. My current lens is a Sigma Contemporary 18-300 HSM. I like it because it combines many of the features you mentioned (though at a hobbyist level...and price). With my previous kit lenses, I found myself skipping photo opportunities because I didn't feel like stopping to change lenses. Now, if I'm sitting outside thinking of a landscape composure and an animal comes into view, I'm already prepared to zoom in and start snapping. Or vice versa--if I'm zoomed in and the light changes suddenly (which happens often in Colorado), I can quickly get to wide angle for a more encompassing landscape shot. But I kind of stumbled onto that system. As my skills develop and I upgrade the equipment to match, I will keep this video in mind, because it seems to match my developing style very well. Thanks for providing such great content.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Happy to do it and many thanks for checking it out!

[@גרשוןגילת]

Watching the video made me rethink the choice of lenses for landscape photography

[@Someone-lc6dc]

Hi Mark. I've got a bit of a dilemma... My current line-up is: Sony G 20mm, Zeiss 55, Viltrox 85 f/1.8 (which I actually use for street) and the new 70-200 f/4. I'm wondering whether I should add a 35mm prime (the GM from Sony is such a sweet lens) or... a zoom from Tamron (28-75 g2, which is great, too) Any thoughts? I shoot mainly landscapes, street, and candid portraits.

[@haomingyang3245]

Thanks for sharing. How often will you use the 300mm to 400mm FL? I am leaning towards 70-200 GM ii with a 1.4x teleconverter that will cover up to 280mm (with little compromise on image quality ), and with crop mode to 420mm. Because to me 70-200 is more versatile for portrait, street, event photography. 16-35 is one of my favorite and you can use normal filter unlike the 12-24 or 14-24. Maybe add a 14mm gm in the future.

[@TomaszTwojFotograf]

I also heva made this kind of decision - durring my swith from SOny A77 to A7R3 - now I have 2 lenses 16-35 + 24-240, instead of 9 other lanses I have before.

[@miamited69]

Using a Sony A77. My current lens's are a sigma 28-105 f3.8, Sony 18-70 macro f3.5, Minolta 35-200 f4.5, Sony 75-300 f4.5. Which would you recommend I mainly use for landscape? Love your videos and have watched several already and look forward to more.

[@Delphisteve]

Hey Mark,,, I used to own an 800mm 5.6 and I wasn't getting sharp images so I started different methods of shooting by using on a tripod of course but also used an electronic cable release.. Still, my photos weren't sharp. I used mirror lock-up and still, my photos lacked sharpness. I even went so far as to use two tripods and shot the moon. Still lacked sharpness. It wasn't till I put pressure on the lens focusing ring with one hand and my eye agains't the eyecup pushing agains't it with my head did I get TACK sharp images.. The thing is, there is residual vibrations going on as a result of even the slightest wind or just the shear size and weight of the equipment.. Give it a try.. Regards Steve

[@randygerber1565]

For landscape I use my 100-400mm more than any other lens, A distance second in my 24-70. Only occasionally do I need the 14-24. I haven't touched my 70-200 since I got the 100-400.

[@mochatheartist]

Thank you SO much for this video. I'm considering getting into photography and the thing that sets your video apart from so many others, is you use EXAMPLES. Along with that you give practical and easily understood reasons for what you're describing so even someone without experience can comprehend. This was so helpful.

[@Niteskate1]

This does help quite a bit it will motivate me to explore the compression aspect more. I have a Canon EOS 60D and carry a wide angle zoom and a telephoto zoom. I will get out more and see what kind of results I can get.

[@svtk5104]

Very good work have you done - the photos are good. The only comment I wanted to make is that many people are lusting after the comfort, which is good of course. But it has a price. I shoot only with primes, mostly manual, which are not so practical, but the quality of the image is better. And they are very very carefully chosen. Photography is at the end not very easy thing to do - you are not only clicking on a shutter button randomly. You engage in some creativity process and work hard anyway. You can add 10% more comfort, but the percents of quality are little bit more. I personally preffer to work a little bit harder, but to squeeze every single possible drop of perfection. And for these prices you can even buy a prime from leica.

[@1701odin]

I've thought about picking up that 100-400, but I also am intrigued by the 200-600 to have a lineup of 12-24, 24-70, 70-200, 200-600. I use my 24-70 probably the most, and the 12-24 next (I do love ultra wide angle). The 70-200 I don't end up using as much for landscape because like you mention it just doesn't quite have the reach I need. It's great for portraits though. Have you used the 200-600? It's not a GM, but of course it's cheaper.

[@manny75586]

1. I had anxiety thinking about un-acquiring gear haha 2. Super-tele is a very neglected focal range. Too many people think it is for sports and birds only. I dont use it a ton but there are definitely enough opportunities to warrant having one.

[@Narsuitus]

My essential lenses for landscape photography are: 1. 65mm on Fuji 6x9cm medium format rangefinder 2. 90mm Fuji lens on 4x5 inch large format view camera 3. 28mm on full-frame camera 4. 16-55mm Fuji on APS-C digital mirrorless 5. 14mm on micro 4/3 camera

[@lisawells8226]

I love my Tamron 17-28 and my Sony 100-400mm. We recently traveled to Alaska and I actually used the Sony for a long hike that we took. With a minimum focus distance of about 3 feet, it is an extremely sharp, versatile lens. I got wonderful pics of the flora/fauna, wonderful landscape pics and some killer close ups of some coastal brown bears. I also have a Sony 24-105 and a Zeiss 85mm prime. I feel like my lens collection is pretty complete.

[@davidlewis5929]

Only have 4 lens 24-105G, 90G, 100-400GM and 200-600G plus the 1.4x. Most of the time I am doing wildlife for a couple hours so the 100-400 or 200-600 are the only lens I will take. If I traveling I will bring the 24-105 and 100-400 which I figure gives me nice focal length coverage, if I need wider I'll stitch some shots together.

[@anirudha81singh]

Mark, Although this is 2024, however I have been wanting to ask this question that why do we promote 24-70 focal length so much instead of the 35-150 f2-2.8 by tamron. with 2 lens theory we can still have a 16-35 f/2.8 as the wide zoom. With bodies like z8 and a7rv we can use APS-C mode and get a focal length of 225 with the tamron lens. Would you still recommend 24-70 in that case ???

[@kzuk9237]

Glad KZbin brought you up on my feed. Just watched this, now an old video, but very helpful and man, can I relate to this topic! Just recently got very wet trying to zoom with my feet!!

[@trinasculley4989]

Thanks, Mark. I use a 10-24 and a 16-300. I would like a little more distance ability. Might look at upgrading to a 400.

[@SimplifiedsoftwareNetTheBest]

If the sky is boring have you considered dropping a new sky in to the picture in post possessing? Luminar does it automatically - I have compiled over 500 sky’s. Is it a picture or is it art? Does any type of post processing turn a picture into art. Focus stacking, exposure stacking, all the photoshop manipulation tools - art or real photography?