How and what do you photograph with a super wide lens? I find it so difficult.

[ntenny]

Thanks NT. How do you avoid the wide angle unflattering warping/widening of subjects in these portraits?

Throw out the ones that look unflattering. Seriously, I guess I frame more of the subject than I might in a conventional portrait; a headshot will show distortion where a half-body shot won’t. Sometimes a shot that emphasizes a small subject in a big world works, and the subject has to stay away from the frame edges. I don’t really have a recipe, though, just some general approaches that work when they work.

-NT

 

[titrisol]

Those have a steep learning curve, I bought a 10-20 for APS cameras and I find mysel fusing it more in the upper range than in the lwer range.
Sirius Glass makes a great point, I need to try it

 

[xkaes]

As mentioned, super-wides are great for getting close foreground objects and distant background objects in the same scene -- and in focus. Ansel Adams did this all the time. This is not his or mine, just an example:

 

[Pieter12]

As mentioned, super-wides are great for getting close foreground objects and distant background objects in the same scene -- and in focus. Ansel Adams did this all the time. This is not his or mine, just an example:

View attachment 362829

I would have liked this shot if the entire image were in focus--one of the advantages of a wide-angle lens.

Very wide angle lenses are an acquired taste and talent. I prefer shots that do not scream "wide angle" but just look natural. Lee Friedlander's photos are like that for me.

 

[Ian Grant]

65mm f8 Super Angulon on my Wist 45DX

Same lens, I've owned it since around 1988/9, but probably only used it a handful of times, but when I do the images are impossible to capture with a long FL lens.

Around 1993 I was loaned a Leica M 21mm lens, and finder, I already had a Tamron 19mm for my Pentax cameras which was a nice lens, but they were like chalk and cheese.

Ian

 

[xkaes]

I prefer shots that do not scream "wide angle" but just look natural.

I guess you don't like panoramas then. They scream "wide-angle" (even though they don't have to be taken with a wide-angle lens) and they look natural -- at least to me.

 

[Mark J]

The other way to look at this is not to force yourself to find subjects for a super-wide lens.
You'd be better going out and using what works for you and for the subjects you are interested in.
Many great photographers never used wides - John Blakemore only ever shot with a 180mm on 4x5".
Brett Weston rarely shot with anything wider than a standard.
Personally I find anything wider than a 20 ( on 35mm ) is too much about the lens and not enough about the subject.
Wides between 20 and 28mm equiv. can however be very good and look natural if you are in the mountains, in steep terrain.

Edit : yes, panaromas ... as above !

 

[Mick Fagan]

I've been using 18mm on 35mm cameras for 35 or so years, I remember trying out the extremes and not being happy, only after I started using the wide as a complement and where it was suitable, did I start to fully understand how much I liked wide coverage.

The same thing with 4x5" cameras, I've been using a 65mm on 4x5" for 10-13 years. When we travel, for some reason the 65mm seems to be the correct lens for quite a few situations and it looks normal, not abnormal.

The seaside picture was taken about 3 weeks ago, I wished to take a picture that encompassed a holiday feeling. This was with the 65mm on my 4x5" camera, it is very wide, but you don't get a feeling that this is a very wide angle lens at work; but it is.

The fence remains in the Bronco Yard of an old outback station, does look slightly like a wide angle lens application, which it is, but it isn't screaming "I've used an ultra wide angle lens used here". At least I don't think it does; I took this 9 years ago.

The last image is a circular wheat silo in a rural town and yes, it is an architectural image, but it isn't screaming ultra wide angle; it looks reasonably normal.

I picked up a 24mm wide angle for 35mm photography in 1982 en route to Europe. Obviously I mostly used it in an urban/city environment, but was pleasantly surprised when more than a handful of landscape slides that looked very normal, as opposed to looking as though a wide(ish) lens was used.

It will take time, but eventually you'll arrive somewhere and realise that this is a subject suitable for your wide angle lens and you'll know how to implement the lens characteristics for the best outcome.

 

[Pieter12]

I guess you don't like panoramas then. They scream "wide-angle" (even though they don't have to be taken with a wide-angle lens) and they look natural -- at least to me.

View attachment 362841

I do like panoramas. By screaming "wide angle," I mean extreme distortion. I make panoramas all the time by cropping a full frame shot with a moderate wide angle (28mm) to 6:17. Usually not landscapes, though.

 

[xkaes]

Edit : yes, panaromas ... as above !

That B&W panorama above could have been from a 28mm lens or a 280mm. Any wide-angle doesn't have to show any distortion. It depends on how it's used. Here's a shot I took in Zion NP with a 65mm lens on a 4x5 (no filtration). The lens was the only way to get it all in, but it looks completely natural.

 

[Pieter12]

That panorama could have been from a 28mm lens or a 280mm. Any wide-angle doesn't have to show any distortion. It depends on how it's used.

So could most.

 

[MattKing]

I use wide angle lenses to show an expansive subject from a relatively close point of perspective.
It is important to use them to emphasize a particular relationship between the elements of a scene, rather than just to try to fit everything in.
In this shot, which used a fairly moderate wide angle, the shape of the car and the impact of the colour and shine are emphasized - at least partially because of the wider lens and the close working distance and resulting perspective that resulted.

You could choose to include almost the same information using a longer lens and the associated larger subject to camera distance, but the resulting much flatter perspective would rob the image of much of its sense of shape and depth.
The self portrait would also be even smaller

 

[Chuck1]

I'd be curious to see the camera itself, if you wouldn't mind posting some pics

 

[CMoore]

For reference, i just do "Street Photography"

I have a 20 and a few 24s, but i Never/Rarely take them.
28 for 35mm is as wide as i ever go.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

This was shot with an Olympus 7-14mm f2,8 Pro lens. Its for Micro Four Thirds, so it is like a 14-28mm lens on 35mm film. I think this was shot at 7mm. I wanted to see all the people behind the counter, and the restaurant is a very narrow space. I don't use the lens very often; most of my work in that format (m4/3) is done with the 12-40mm f2.8 Olympus Pro lens (24-80mm), but it is useful for working in small spaces. I occasionally use it for exterior architecture too, but not often.

This is Coney Island Hot Dogs. Founded in 1914, and in continuous operation in the same location since then, it the oldest restaurant in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Here's another where a very wide lens was needed. I shot this on micro four thirds with the 12-40mm f2.8 Olympus Pro lens at 12mm, which is like a 24mm on 35mm film. This is a hardware store in the small town of Albion, Indiana. The cat, Hank, lives there and supervises the workers and lets customers pet him in exchange for kitty treats. The young woman is an employee showing me how totally addicted that Hank is to the catnip-infused cat treats she is giving him!

I used the wide lens because I wanted to show a lot of the store in the background so you could get a feel for where the action is taking place. Using the wide lens and standing close to the woman and the cat gave me that.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

My advice is: Embrace a trace of yourself being in the picture as part of the composition. Here are my two favorite pics I've taken with my SWC:

 

[jodad]

I'd be curious to see the camera itself, if you wouldn't mind posting some pics

Sure

 

[jodad]

I spent last couple days filling up a 35mm roll of foma 100 that I’d put into the 6x8 back. Pictures came out a bit flat plus it was an overcast and foggy day. I’ll post some pictures a bit later.

 

[markjwyatt]

I love my Voigtlander SC Skopar 21mm f4 on the Contax iiia. I feel like I walk into the shot sometimes. Here are some shots with it.

Flickr Search — “voigtlander SC Skopar 21mm f4”

www.flickr.com

 

[Steven Lee]

Any help/advice/suggestions much appreciated. And please don’t suggest selling it on seriously.

I cannot offer any advice or suggestions, other than share that I am in the same boat. IMO only very few talented photographers can shoot with wide angle lenses. The rest of us are stuck producing wide-angled garbage or repeating the same 2-3 templates like "one large object in the foreground with a grand view behind it" or "intentionally exaggerated perspective".

I have this page bookmarked. Every time I get hit with an SWC GAS attack, I open it and the pressure goes away.

[EDIT] I guess I can offer some advice: have a quick way to remind yourself of mediocrity commonly produced by wide angle lenses to make yourself feel better.

 

[Kino]

Well, you CAN have fun with the lens, even if you don't show your work to anyone!

Personally, I am trying to burn through all the usual "fun house" images to just get it out of my system and try to move beyond to something more constructive.

Come on, shoot the "dog with the huge nose"! It's fun...

 

[CMoore]

Well, you CAN have fun with the lens, even if you don't show your work to anyone!

Personally, I am trying to burn through all the usual "fun house" images to just get it out of my system and try to move beyond to something more constructive.

Come on, shoot the "dog with the huge nose"! It's fun...

Good Grief.............. just when we had this thread in a nice, downward spiral..... Here comes one of those "Glass Half Full" guys to spread joy and hope.

 

[MattKing]

This comes to mind:

 

[Sirius Glass]

I cannot offer any advice or suggestions, other than share that I am in the same boat. IMO only very few talented photographers can shoot with wide angle lenses. The rest of us are stuck producing wide-angled garbage or repeating the same 2-3 templates like "one large object in the foreground with a grand view behind it" or "intentionally exaggerated perspective".

I have this page bookmarked. Every time I get hit with an SWC GAS attack, I open it and the pressure goes away.

[EDIT] I guess I can offer some advice: have a quick way to remind yourself of mediocrity commonly produced by wide angle lenses to make yourself feel better.

Because the SWC is rectilinearly correct, it is much easily to take photographs without the distortion when one takes care to use it with the spirit level. Practice makes perfect.