How to use an Ultra-Wide lens?

heartyfisher

I have the 12-24 F4 Nikkor.. Its a great lens .. But .. I cant get into it .. I see some
nice photos taken with these kind of lenses but when i am in the field nothing
seems to gel for me the results are dull and boring.

What makes a good ultra wide photographer?
1) what views are you looking for?.
2) what mind set ?
3) what emotions are you trying to convey?
4) what stories are you trying to tell?
5) What am I missing !
6) what things do you include how do you exclude all that stuff that the ultrwide captures and keeps in focus?

Golf007sd

The 12-24 was the 4th lens I purchased with my D7000. I must admit, much like yourself, this lens did not do it for me. So I set my target on the 14-24. Once I saw it's performance, it was like night and day.

With respect to your questions, I think deep down you know the answers to most of those question. You have seen wide angle shots so ask yourself: what do you see that attracts you when you see a shot used by it? What do you feel? What is the "awe" factor for you? Now that you see what attracts you...go find a setting and hit the shutter button.

Elvishefer

For me, an ultra wide is all about selective distortion and not about getting the 'big picture'.

I prefer 'close and up' or weird angles (camera high, subject low and in a corner of the frame, for example), when I shoot ultra-wide.

I think an ultra-wide is the most fun when it challenges the normal perception of reality, but unlike a fish eye that makes things somewhat hard to digest, ultra-wide shots can be normal 'enough' to easily get under a viewer's skin.

An excellent ultra-wide shot can either unsettle a viewer through distortion or awe a user through abnormal perspective.

Either can catch a viewer off guard, and so used sparingly and appropriately, can be a very powerful tool.

Other schools of thought frown on the crazy aspect of ultra-wides (some of my architectural photos would make these people cringe), but for me, there's no other way to go.

An ultra-wide should be fun to use, allowing the photographer to let loose creatively.

Golf007sd

An ultra-wide should be fun to use, allowing the photographer to let loose creatively.

+1 Almost all my HDR images are done using ultra-wide lenses.

spraynpray

I was of the disappointed mindset when I first got an ultra wide but then I stopped using it to try to get everything in and started using it up close and found it all came together.

Killerbob

I like my 10-24mm on my D7000, almost as much as I love my 14-24mm on the D800 now. As you can see by this picture, of the many points why, is especially that I am able to capture the grandness of it all. Beach, mountain, field, shoots all gain in this range.


D7000 | Nikon 10-24mm @ 10mm | 1/320 | f/10 | ISO 200

Msmoto

Some thoughts as I use the wide lenses....

24mm on full frame:
At auto show...from about eight feet overhead....correct partially in post....
Landscapes....I always want the center vertical accurate and perfectly vertical or severally off for special effect. A slightly non plumb center vertical is disturbing.
Architectural....buildings do not tilt....correct at least to point of visually pleasing.....OR keep the back of the camera vertical
Portraits... must be used with caution, avoid distortions of faces/heads unless one is really upset at someone.

16-35mm on full frame...same as above

Fisheye
Almost anything goes here as long as the end is visually pleasing...

Here is a fisheye of a yearbook staff which was a requested photo....most of the faces are reasonable in spite of the wild perspective.


And, by very careful control of the camera angle...there is no correction in post if one screws up...

dissent

I certainly agree with the comments so far. Sometimes I think you do just need the width.

Yetibuddha

For me, much of the advantage of the wide angel, I have the 20 mm F2.8 and have used the 16-35, is not necessarily getting it all in but rather trying to get the photo viewer into the image. It took a while for me to learn this.

PB_PM

The biggest advantage of having a wide angle lens is being able to be close to the subject, while still capturing it within the context of the overall scene.

kathmandu

HI,

Have any of you ultra-wide folks tried an old 18mm f2.8 or 3.5 on FX with opinion of results? Love that 10-24 focal length on DX. Now moving to FX (D600) don't want the 14-24 (price/weight/awkward polarizing options), want to be able to easily polarize, keep cost down and quality as up as much as possible for mostly real estate work and I'm clueless if the old 18mm's are a viable option for these new cameras quality-wise? 15mm works out to match my fav 10mm focal length, so 18 is a little less than I'm used to and 20mm, though a great suggestion, is even less wide for my needs. Other suggestions welcome (non-oem's for instance)

PB_PM

Tokina is really the only third party manufacture to tackle wide angle full frame lenses as of late. They make a 17-35mm F4 and 16-28mm F2.8, both are available for under $900.

Vipmediastar_JZ

I look for the low angles and weird ones too while keeping perspective. I also like to fill the frame. Switching to full frame and filling is still a work in progress.
I really like these shots but when I upgraded to full frame it was either the 24-70 or 16-35
Maybe in the future I'll get another ultra wide angle since I picked the 24-70.
The shot below is with sigma 10-24/20 on d7000

Rx4Photo

For me, using an Ultra-Wide such as the Nikkor 14-24mm (on full frame) is as much as for telling a story as it is for conveying a sense of another dimension. True it doesn't always work for what you envision but when it does, oh boy!! I often show my photos at work and a picture taken with the UW almost always gets "wow, how'd you take that?". Reason is because it makes the mind see in a way that it normally doesn't. It's a truly creative tool. Learning "how" to shoot ultra-wide is the key. Shooting from a low position or from just behind an object renders some of the most unique photos. Also shooting a scene where there is something directly overhead and including the floor in the photo can drop a few jaws. Just continue to practice those wide angle shots and you'll come away with some great photos.

Here at14mm and I'm laying flat on my belly on the ground.


Here at 15mm on a tripod.


A recent PAD submission at 14mm. Here I simply held the camera low close to the deck, not looking thru the viewfinder.

Golf007sd

@PitchBlack: Get the 14-24...you will be amazed by it. There is a reason why many Canon shooter get this lens so they can shot with it. It is a very versatile lens...there is no question you (and your GF) will find it's usage very much rewarding. In short, scratch that itch.....

Some sample images:

HDR's:




Non-HDR:

NikonMick

Hi there Hearty,

The Nikkor 12-24/f4 was the first lens I bought after ditching my kit lenses and then started acquiring good quality, secondhand, Nikon glass.

I love this lens, as I've stated before.

Here are a few of the pix that I've uploaded to my Flickr feed that were taken with the Nikon 12-24. You may see some elements of composition that help you in you desire to learn about using this lens.

In particular I'd say in response to your final query "how do you exclude all that stuff that the ultrwide captures?" - learn to look around the edges of your viewfinder frame.

Cheers

Mick

1. Cycle race start, panning, slow shutter, SB-400 flash, 12-24/f4 lens @12mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/7762824812/in/photostream/

2. Olive & peach prunings, tripod, 12-24/f4 lens @12mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/7722265110/in/photostream/

3. Small room, monopod, 12-24/f4 lens @12mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/6834722634/in/photostream/

4. Archaic French car, handheld, 12-24/f4 lens @12mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/6281707721/in/photostream/

5. Peugeot 404, handheld, 12-24/f4 lens @12mm

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/6281707859/in/photostream/

bland

I like my 10-24 DX but I find I'll only use one of it's shots when shooting concerts. It's neat to have one of these but it's like it is not about the subject you're shooting but the special effect of the lens instead.

Beso

@heartyfisher - I think only you can answer your question of "What makes a good ultra wide photographer?" because it involves so much subjectivity. The posts above indicate a wide variety of opinions and preferences.

I can tell you what I look for in an ultra-wide angle lens and how I use it but that does nothing to answer your question. To me photography is an art form with the camera being the tool for expression. The best images in my opinion are those captured by a photographer because that person saw or imagined something that triggered an emotive reaction and he/she was able to memorialize that on film or paper. We have all seen images that are very good technically but lack any pizazz. The memorable ones are those that kept bringing us back, kept us staring for long periods of time, allowed us to become immersed in the image, or stirred an emotion.

Find a variety of ultra-wide angle images you like, and then detail what it is about each of them that you like and you will have your answer. My guess is you will find some common themes, even among widely diversified images, that will become apparent if you take the time to do this exercise.

Golf007sd

@Beso +1

Vipmediastar_JZ

Like Beso said. You want to keep coming back to a shot. My shot below was 9 bracket HDR with D300 and 10-24 DX.
I would like to recreate that shot with D800 and 16-35. I have tried with the 24-70 but I got nothing close to it.
I have sold several prints of this photo and one sits in large office with an orange/red wall and the contrast is awesome for viewing.

(after it was uploaded to flickr I made some adjustments and it looks a bit diffrent and especially printed)

kyoshinikon

I use mine for sports. It allows me to show the environment with the action. Sometimes I find my 10.5mm and 14-24mm to not be wide enough.




In fact my prime shooter is my 14-24mm... I seldom use my midranges as they don't usually see the world the way I do

Msmoto

@kyoshinikon

We must see things in a similar fashion... @-)

heartyfisher

Thanks for all the helpful advice do far!

Dusted off my 12-24 this weekend.. and tried some ideas posted here.. sigh may be i am just not made for Ultra wides ... :-( .. still had some reasonable shots but mostly %$#@&; .. oh well.. maybe I just need more practice.. but that feels like work :-(

I will put up some photos soon. should I put up the crap ones too ??

Golf007sd

@heartyfisher: By all means. As always, the comments, good or bad, are our attempts in trying to be helpful...not degrading. Tell us what you like or dislike about the image...let this chips fall where they may.

Cheers

Msmoto

In using wide lenses there are a couple thoughts which might be helpful.

With people, be cautious so as to not distort the body parts in an unattractive manner. Here is a fisheye with the sensor plane parallel to the plane defined by the arms, head...no huge distortion:



Another, but note the vertical in the center line is vertical...important IMO to avoid a disturbing visual effect:



And, a 24mm on full frame, positioned so as to have the elements balanced and the verticals very close to vertical in the center

Vipmediastar_JZ

@heartyfisher yes put them up. Therefore we can see what you see. Also that's how I learn by CC.
With ultrawide the pics tend to be a visual leader. In other other words find an angle that will lead the eye to the subject of interest. Like a road or like @msmoto pics above. The race cars photo shows the top and underside of a car showing to me what both looks like in just one photo while also being a nicely composed photo and I appreciate both worlds.