What's new
L-MOUNT Forum

Register a free account now!

If you are registered, you get access to the members only section, can participate in the buy & sell second hand forum and last but not least you can reserve your preferred username before someone else takes it.

How to use a wide-angle correctly ?

RuleOfThirds said:
I know, I'm also a stills guy, have actually filmed one scene with the S5ii, just using the red-button :cool:. And countless of very short movies when I pushed it by accident.
Click to expand...
You can reassign the recordbutton to something else, or even 'Nothing'.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
hmm so to be able to get nice wide pictures, I have to get the 14-28 AND a S1r
Click to expand...
Well, neither is expensive these days. My S1R cost me two thirds the price of a new S5ii. And the 14-28 can be got grey market in the UK for a little under £500.
 
pdk42 said:
Well, neither is expensive these days. My S1R cost me two thirds the price of a new S5ii. And the 14-28 can be got grey market in the UK for a little under £500.
Click to expand...
I was looking for a used one indeed. I have time... today I got a deal to swap my Sigma 45/2.8 with an as new S 50/1.8 for 25€ including postage
 
RuleOfThirds said:
I was looking for a used one indeed. I have time... today I got a deal to swap my Sigma 45/2.8 with an as new S 50/1.8 for 25€ including postage
Click to expand...
The 50/1.8 is a super lens.
 
Quite off my own topic

35 vs 45 was not that different in focal length and didn’t care for aperture ring/size as much as I thought. Prefer the 1.8 and consistency between the primes more.

Tried the 50 first in the shop where I was for my warranty claim of the 20-60. Liked it a lot. But they offered too little for my Sigma.

Had an XF33/1.4 for Fuji before.And Pana Leica 25/1.4 before that, and a Nikon DX 35/1.8 before that one
 
At some point I will get a wide angle. Probably the 14-28…. Or 16-35 pro if there is a nice deal. I think it is a bit more versatile. Or am I underestimating the difference between 14 and 16.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
At some point I will get a wide angle. Probably the 14-28…. Or 16-35 pro if there is a nice deal. I think it is a bit more versatile. Or am I underestimating the difference between 14 and 16.
Click to expand...
You know I'm mostly in video, but with both 2mm in the wide end is a lot more than in the long end...
 
Nevyn72 said:
You know I'm mostly in video, but with both 2mm in the wide end is a lot more than in the long end...
Click to expand...
I know. The mm is not that good of a reference. Angle of view would be. But… that is not the standard nowadays.
 
I suppose this is a bit of a summary, but what I've found when shooting architecture with an UW focal length, the following helps if you want to eliminate perspective distortion:

1. Make sure the camera is horizontal - not pointing up or down. Use the level tool (or an actual level if you are using a tripod) if that helps you.
2. Make sure that you are also pointing straight at the front of the building or back wall. Not skewed left-to right. This avoids horizontal stretching at one side or another of the image. This rule, plus the above rule, means that you want the axis of the lens perpendicular to the building/back wall.
3. If you can't quite get (2) correct, move yourself left or right a bit. Even a small movement can make a big difference.
4. This all adds up to the possibility that you have to shoot wider than you originally thought & then crop in post.
5. Finally, don't be afraid to play with the amount of lens-specific optical distortion applied in post. While this is unlikely to help with architecture, it can help with big rock formations & things like that, as it can effectively open up the field-of-view that you may have lost when cropping, and the effects can be hard to detect when the subject is more organic in nature.

You can of course "embrace the distortion" if you want, but even then (particularly then, actually) I prefer to center myself left-to-right in most situations.

As an example, I spent some time recently trying to capture the graceful lines of the Colorado Riverway Bridge (which is a pedestrian/cycling bridge) in Moab, Utah. It was tricky.

First example is just ugly. Clearly, the camera is twisted on it's axis (not level) which is super-obvious when you look at the steel members in the lower left & right of the image, but also the arches of said members as they curve away from you:
P1576411.jpg
  • Panasonic - DC-S1R
  • 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN | Art 019
  • 17.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/125 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • -1.7
  • ISO 100


The second is better, but I'm not precisely centered. This was literally a matter of inches.
P1576408.jpg
  • Panasonic - DC-S1R
  • 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN | Art 019
  • 15.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/80 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • -1.7
  • ISO 100


This next shot is pretty good, but still not perfect.. Took my time on getting the lens axis level and straight. When composing, I was looking at the steel members in the FG in the lower left and right in the frame, trying to get them to look the same. This really let me see if I needed to do any small adjustments before I fired the trigger.

I could spend hours photographing this bridge, shooting it from various angles, watching the conditions change, etc. I actually went back three times on different days during our week-long trip to Moab.
P1576414 3.jpg
  • Panasonic - DC-S1R
  • 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN | Art 019
  • 16.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/250 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • -1.7
  • ISO 100
 
GeorgeHudetz said:
I suppose this is a bit of a summary, but what I've found when shooting architecture with an UW focal length, the following helps if you want to eliminate perspective distortion:

1. Make sure the camera is horizontal - not pointing up or down. Use the level tool (or an actual level if you are using a tripod) if that helps you.
2. Make sure that you are also pointing straight at the front of the building or back wall. Not skewed left-to right. This avoids horizontal stretching at one side or another of the image. This rule, plus the above rule, means that you want the axis of the lens perpendicular to the building/back wall.
3. If you can't quite get (2) correct, move yourself left or right a bit. Even a small movement can make a big difference.
4. This all adds up to the possibility that you have to shoot wider than you originally thought & then crop in post.
5. Finally, don't be afraid to play with the amount of lens-specific optical distortion applied in post. While this is unlikely to help with architecture, it can help with big rock formations & things like that, as it can effectively open up the field-of-view that you may have lost when cropping, and the effects can be hard to detect when the subject is more organic in nature.

You can of course "embrace the distortion" if you want, but even then (particularly then, actually) I prefer to center myself left-to-right in most situations.

As an example, I spent some time recently trying to capture the graceful lines of the Colorado Riverway Bridge (which is a pedestrian/cycling bridge) in Moab, Utah. It was tricky.

First example is just ugly. Clearly, the camera is twisted on it's axis (not level) which is super-obvious when you look at the steel members in the lower left & right of the image, but also the arches of said members as they curve away from you:
View attachment 6612

The second is better, but I'm not precisely centered. This was literally a matter of inches.
View attachment 6611

This next shot is pretty good, but still not perfect.. Took my time on getting the lens axis level and straight. When composing, I was looking at the steel members in the FG in the lower left and right in the frame, trying to get them to look the same. This really let me see if I needed to do any small adjustments before I fired the trigger.

I could spend hours photographing this bridge, shooting it from various angles, watching the conditions change, etc. I actually went back three times on different days during our week-long trip to Moab.
View attachment 6613
Click to expand...
Very nice shot and good and helpful explanation! Thanks!
I’m getting more the hang of it. Really like my 16-35 which I used about 50% of my shots and the other half with the 24-105 during my last road trip.
 
RuleOfThirds said:
Very nice shot and good and helpful explanation! Thanks!
I’m getting more the hang of it. Really like my 16-35 which I used about 50% of my shots and the other half with the 24-105 during my last road trip.
Click to expand...
The 16-35 is a fine lens - a classic focal length combo that, in the right situation, can be the only lens you need. Have fun!
 
GeorgeHudetz said:
I suppose this is a bit of a summary, but what I've found when shooting architecture with an UW focal length, the following helps if you want to eliminate perspective distortion:

1. Make sure the camera is horizontal - not pointing up or down. Use the level tool (or an actual level if you are using a tripod) if that helps you.
2. Make sure that you are also pointing straight at the front of the building or back wall. Not skewed left-to right. This avoids horizontal stretching at one side or another of the image. This rule, plus the above rule, means that you want the axis of the lens perpendicular to the building/back wall.
3. If you can't quite get (2) correct, move yourself left or right a bit. Even a small movement can make a big difference.
4. This all adds up to the possibility that you have to shoot wider than you originally thought & then crop in post.
5. Finally, don't be afraid to play with the amount of lens-specific optical distortion applied in post. While this is unlikely to help with architecture, it can help with big rock formations & things like that, as it can effectively open up the field-of-view that you may have lost when cropping, and the effects can be hard to detect when the subject is more organic in nature.
Click to expand...
Thanks George, all helpful points.

I've found that if I can't get things entirely lined up when taking the photo, your point #4 about shooting wider also provides some space in post to do perspective correction without losing part of what you are shooting off the edge of the image.
 
GeorgeHudetz said:
I spent some time recently trying to capture the graceful lines of the Colorado Riverway Bridge (which is a pedestrian/cycling bridge) in Moab, Utah.
Click to expand...
Very nice George, thanks for the pictures. That bridge is new in my timeframe, and I've never seen it. In years gone by I used to spend lots of time in and around Moab, but that was before the bridge was built, around 2008. Looks like a good reason to get there again.
 
CharlesH said:
Very nice George, thanks for the pictures. That bridge is new in my timeframe, and I've never seen it. In years gone by I used to spend lots of time in and around Moab, but that was before the bridge was built, around 2008. Looks like a good reason to get there again.
Click to expand...
Thank you. As for a trip back, as you know there is a lot to see there, but I suspect you will be somewhat saddened by the greater number of people there. It's not terrible, but the hotels are creeping up 191 towards Arches, and Arches itself now has timed entry. But the stunning natural beauty is still there and still abundant. So yeah, go back! It's amazing.

Here is what it looks like if you look up the Colorado River while standing on that bridge.

P1576404.jpg
  • Panasonic - DC-S1R
  • 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN | Art 019
  • 14.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/250 sec
  • Pattern
  • Auto exposure
  • -0.7
  • ISO 100
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top