Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
I think I 'need' the Olympus 9-18mm wide angle zoom for taking pictures of the Alps. So show me what you can do with wide angles.
All taken at effectivetly 18-26mm a couple of weeks ago.
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I think I 'need' the Olympus 9-18mm wide angle zoom for taking pictures of the Alps. So show me what you can do with wide angles.
Hmm, same here.. although I 'want' the Panny 7-14mm..
You have expensive tastes..
GFJ - like those pics, esp the resort one. Never really used to consider wide angle because it made everything too small, but I think I wasn't think in the right terms...
Where are the pics taken btw?
Love my 10-22mm Canon wideange, one of my most used lenses in fact!
Never really used to consider wide angle because it made everything too small
Wideangle seems to work best when you can include an interesting foreground, or you can use it to get really close to something whilst still keeping a lot of the surrounding stuff in the frame (like the below ice pic, the chunk of ice was only around 50cm across perhaps, I was about 30cm away from it, using a tripod)
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Like.. like the bottom one the most - where is it? And can you not correct that curved horizon? Or did you not want to?
I could correct the curved horizon, just never got around to it! It's Lake Atitlan in Guatemala, beautiful place, here's another wide angle (cropped obviously!) from there:
[img] 
[/img]
EDIT: looks better fullsize, seems a bit dark on here...[url= http://simongraham.zenfolio.com/p233909350/e1053a23b ]Here's a link...[/url]
Pics were taken in Verbier, Switzerland. The balcony view is 4 shots stitched together done with Tokina 11-16 at 11mm and Canon 40d.
Heres a couple more stiched panos using the 11-16 taken in Alps d'Huez in Jan.
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I've got to admitt I've gone off using my wide angle that much other than for landscapes. I used to use it all the time for biking stuff but I find I use a 70-200 F2.8 or 100 F2 much more. Heres some older wide angle biking stuff:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
Polarising filter on those snowy shots? Or simply stopped down?
wideangles tend to not work well with a polariser, you get a different effect across the frame (ie one side of the frame will get that classic polariser effect whilst the other side will look normal/unpolarised). You get really deep colours with wideangle shots anyway (at least, I do with my 10-22mm Canon), so often no need for a polariser...
This was taken while in the USA, I rented a lens Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which was fantastic. I just couldn't justify spending that much money on one at the moment for the use I am getting from the Camera (Nikon D90).
[img] 
[/img]
12mm...
[center]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img][/center]
20mm (FF). Probably a bit cropped though.
[img] 
[/img]
I've got a 14mm, and a 20-35mm, but I don't really have a use for much below 28mm.
Thanks for this thread, good reminder to get out and take some wide angle shots, forgot what nice results they can produce.
Will dig my Canon 10-22mm out at the weekend and hopefully take a decent shot or two.
Very easy to just get lazy and stick with one or two lenses, could have done with it the other day for a landscape shot and lowest I could go was 17mm on a crop sensor.
[url= http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1048/874487197_db18074b46.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/53067724@N00/874487197/ ]millie2[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/53067724@N00/ ]Jon Wyatt[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3153/2682223704_8cf684c728.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/53067724@N00/2682223704/ ]audi[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/53067724@N00/ ]Jon Wyatt[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3598/3604244697_27e9b73597.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/53067724@N00/3604244697/ ]Hilton[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/53067724@N00/ ]Jon Wyatt[/url], on Flickr
No polariser. I did play about with a cheap one once but it made the sky look weird with such a wide lens and the cheapo one ruined the image sharpness massively.
Samuri - that last pic?
Hilton hotel in Manchester on Deansgate.
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2504/4001373021_28638268ab.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/5lab/4001373021/ ]Goofy Giraffe[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/5lab/ ]5lab[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3498/4003858383_f8c97fba91.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/5lab/4003858383/ ]Elephants Crossing[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/5lab/ ]5lab[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3018/2969332132_59f33c6787.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/5lab/2969332132/ ]IMG_6669[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/5lab/ ]5lab[/url], on Flickr
[url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4141/4946538567_19aae13cae.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/5lab/4946538567/ ]Scotland 2010 2010-08-22 176[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/5lab/ ]5lab[/url], on Flickr
Why's the sky like that? Did you do something to it or is it a feature of the lens/settings used?
like what? Stretched? its just a symptom of a very wide, non-fish-eye lens, with a lot of sky in-shot. There's no post processing at all on any of my pics
😉 He means me.
I had a grad filter on.
edit: And thinking about it, I might have tweaked it a bit.
I'm talking about Samuri's pic of the hotel. All dark and forboding swirly blackness...
EDIT: saw your reply, I see. A grad filter being a ND gradient filter, dark a the top and light at the bottom..?