Super-zooms for Landscape Work

[Hywel]

Hi All,

Does anyone use a super-zoom for landscape work?

I've just given up and ordered the Sony 24-240mm for my A7R II after a day in glorious snow and sunshine... and high winds. Changing lenses led to spindrift and subsequent water marks and other crap on the sensor and rear lens elements which was really tricky to clean in the field. It's fine to be faffing around with lenses on a mild dry summer evening, but I've had enough of it in winter mountain conditions.

I know the maximum quality option is likely to be two bodies- one with 70-200 and one with a wider option (55mm, 28mm for swapping if conditions allow, or maybe my Canon 24-70). But that's expensive, heavy and a bit cumbersome.

The 28-135mm f/4 was my other option but significantly bulkier, heavier, and almost as expensive as a second A7R II body.

I generally only print up to 13" x 19". I'm hoping oversampling with the A7R II, mostly shooting around f/8 - f/11, and a bit of post sharpening and Clarity/Structure will make for acceptable results at that sort of print size.

Does anyone use super-zooms and what are your experiences with them as a lightweight option for hostile environments?

Cheers, Hywel

P.S. these are shot with the 28 / 55 / 70-200 Sony trio. Lovely quality but impractical in the conditions.

[BernardLanguillier]

No experience with super zooms for winter landscape photography here, but... nice images! The 4th one in particular stands out.

Cheers,
Bernard

[eronald]

After seeing these images, I think the o.p. should be telling us what to use ...

Edmund

No experience with super zooms for winter landscape photography here, but... nice images! The 4th one in particular stands out.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Telecaster]

Yeah, good stuff!

Based on using an 18–200mm Nikkor with a D300 (12mp) for a few years, often in crap but photogenic weather, an "f/11 (or so) & be there" approach with the 24–240mm should work well indeed for 13x19" prints from 42mp files. A wide-range zoom definitely simplifies things when working in snowy/windy conditions.

-Dave-

[Ian99]

The Beacons??

[Geods]

Many years ago, I did a two week landscape photo trip around the desert southwest. My cameras were an 8x10-inch with B&W film and a Nikon D2Xs with the 18-200. The results from both cameras were great. Most impressive was the quality from the 12MP APS-C digital camera, and especially so when I stitched images for quality. With higher resolution sensors, I have found that longer zooms ranges simply do not hold up compared to what more professional equipment can provide. My last photo trip was with the Nikon D800E and 24mm f/1.4, 58mm f/1.4 as well as 70-200 f/4. Ideally, I'd shoot with all primes, but volume and weight really start climbing. I think I'm at the sweet spot for present day travel, but will likely add Nikons new compact 300mm to the arsenal...

As far as FF mirrorless goes, when one includes the volume and weight of the additional batteries needed to make it go vs. a DSLR, the advantages are no longer as striking.

[jeffreybehr]

Hywell, I rented and then bought a Sony 24-240 for my newish a7R2 this spring.  It performed very well if not excellently and worked every time.  I think having one for your purposes is a great idea.

[Hywel]

Hi,

Thanks everyone- looking forward to the 24-240 arriving in the post, sounds like I've not made a TOTALLY stupid purchase ;-)

Ian99 - close. A bit further north: The Arans, Southern Snowdonia. The fourth shot is of Cadair Idris peaking in the distance shot from the flanks of Aran Benllyn. That's the sort of shot I really like having 200 mm or so focal lengths with me for. I seem to be much better at spotting that than finding some way of filling the frame with a wide angle!

Geods- I've not had a problem with Sony battery life myself to date, a battery lasts me all day even in the mountains in Winter, hundreds of shots. But I tend to do one or two day trips with interludes at home to dry out, rather than extended trips, and I switch off as soon as I'm finished shooting.

I agree the 28/55/70-200 trio is absolutely my sweet spot for image quality plus flexibility and low weight. It's just that when the conditions are physically hostile, swapping lenses becomes a real problem.

Cheers, Hywel

[dwswager]

Hi All,

Does anyone use a super-zoom for landscape work?

I've just given up and ordered the Sony 24-240mm for my A7R II after a day in glorious snow and sunshine... and high winds. Changing lenses led to spindrift and subsequent water marks and other crap on the sensor and rear lens elements which was really tricky to clean in the field. It's fine to be faffing around with lenses on a mild dry summer evening, but I've had enough of it in winter mountain conditions.

I know the maximum quality option is likely to be two bodies- one with 70-200 and one with a wider option (55mm, 28mm for swapping if conditions allow, or maybe my Canon 24-70). But that's expensive, heavy and a bit cumbersome.

The 28-135mm f/4 was my other option but significantly bulkier, heavier, and almost as expensive as a second A7R II body.

I generally only print up to 13" x 19". I'm hoping oversampling with the A7R II, mostly shooting around f/8 - f/11, and a bit of post sharpening and Clarity/Structure will make for acceptable results at that sort of print size.

Does anyone use super-zooms and what are your experiences with them as a lightweight option for hostile environments?

Cheers, Hywel

P.S. these are shot with the 28 / 55 / 70-200 Sony trio. Lovely quality but impractical in the conditions.

Super zooms can yield very good results, especially in harsh conditions where the conditions reduce can reduce the quality of what it is possible to capture.  I used the 18-200mm DX VRII on the D300 and D7100 before.  It was a good walk around lens as well as a good lens to leave on the camera in case the wife picked it up and wanted to snap something.

While we all want the optimal quality of capture we can get, there are always trade offs to be made and my rule is "the good photo you get is always better than the great photo you didn't!"

The downside to super zooms in harsh conditions is that very few are built for harsh conditions.       If you take proper precautions and you prep before and care for them afterwards, most lenses will work.  Of course, there will always be extreme conditions that exceed the limits of most non ruggedized gear.

[Ian99]

Hywel,
Diolch. This is an area one tends to forget. I have only been there trying to shoot the Mach Loop with minimal success.

Ian

[David Watson]

Spot on!

Just bought one for my forthcoming trip to Iceland next week.

[Hywel]

To answer my own post... just had my first day out with the Sony 24-240mm.

I can see that the edge sharpness isn't quite as stellar as the Sony 28/55/70-200 combo. But it is plenty sharp enough for my purposes.

I shot all day at f/8, relying on the auto shutter and auto ISO, and ETTR with the bias dial to avoid clipping sky highlights where I could.

In winds so strong I was almost blown off my feet once or twice, it was beyond refreshing not to have to change lenses. In fact the camera and lens combo handled the whole day with aplomb, from crappy light and driving rain first thing through to golden hour, all hand-held (no tripod or monopod, just the lens and body IS).

Obviously everyone's needs will differ, but this lens just won itself pride of place on the front of my camera for six months of the year in the mountains.

Cheers, Hywel

Here are a few samples from today. The light and snow weren't as gorgeous as the previous trip, so don't judge them too harshly...

[Chairman Bill]

On my last outing to Dartmoor, I was faced with reasonably strong winds & snow blowing around. I was swapping between a Zeiss 25mm & a Nikon 50mm. Frankly, I wish I'd used a zoom. At one point I resorted to lying down, facing the wind, and sticking camera & lenses inside my rucksack in front of me, to change the lens. I wouldn't want to do that on Crib Goch or the Aonach Eagach ridge.