Hi All
I currently own a D300 and D700 both with a 500 VR and a 200-400 VR attached..
I want to expand my horizons and start shooting landscapes, after all I am photographing birds in such amazing places, and when I dont get any birds, I shame myself for not capturing what I see..

1. Can any of you pros recommend a good landscape photography lens? My budget is about $2500.

2. Which body is better to shoot with? a full frame sensor or cropped? I assume not the latter..

thanks so much for your advice and feedback..

James Vellozzi

It really depends on what you want to capture. I've been known to use a 70-200 for landscapes or a 12-24. The Tokina 12-24 is a great bang for the buck lens for DX, IIRC, a while back they were going less than $500 new. I really like the 24-70 f2.8 Nikkor, it would go either FX or DX for a little extra reach but it really isn't that wide. The Nikkor 14-24 will go FX but is a budget buster. For your budget, you could get the Tokina 12-24 and the Nikkor 24-70 leaving the 70-200 for a different day.

What I use for landscapes is an older Nikon 28-70 f-2.8 AF-S or for longer reach, a Nikon 80-200 f-2.8 AF. This isn't as wide as some people like for landscapes, but I find that it covers the range I generally like to shoot for my taste. As far as FX or DX, FX gives you a wider view, of course, so your don't need as wide of a lens to make up for the crop factor of a DX lens. The D700 is a great camera for my purposes and I am not impressed enough with the new D800 to want to change(I can't see that I would gain anything by using one). I would love to have the new D4, though. The Nikon 14-24mm is highly rated by many people and would be great to have if you need a wider lens. A zoom is really an asset because sometimes you can't move closer physically to the scene.

The 24-70 is my bread and butter lens.

I also have a D300 and a D700. I use the D700 far more often for landscapes than I do the D300. For lenses I use the 24-70 most frequently for landscapes. I also use the 70-200 and the 14-24, but less frequently. The 14-24 is a fabulous lens but the 24-70 is my bread and butter landscape lens so that is what I would recommend for starters. I prefer the flexibility of good zoom lenses and these are all fine zooms.

I use a D 300 and Nikon 10-24mm + Singh-Ray Warming polarizer:

http://www.pbase.com/hootpix/image/138574356

Chuck Kling

www.pbase.com/hootpix

I shoot the D2x (DX format). I shoot 95% landscapes and use the 12-24 for most of my landscapes. If I had the D700 or any other FX format I would definitely buy the Nikkor 14-24.

24-70 no doubts

The poll I just started might be useful in this thread
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=212989

Wow - that seems awfully specific. What about, say, when you're shooting apples and oranges?

Cheers

Carl

14-24 and my trusty old 20-35 f2.8.

I have the D700 and an old D200 as a backup. I use the D700 exclusively for landscapes and I use the 24-70 the most frequently--by a wide margin. I also own and use the 14-24 when I want to go wider than 24 mm and a 70-200 when I want to go longer...and the 80-400 when I want to go a lot longer (which happens more often than you might guess). But if I had to select one lens for FX landscapes it would definitely be the 24-70/2.8.

I tend to agree with most of the comments already posted, but for myself I treat it a little differently. I primarily use my D3S (FX) for everything including landscapes. This Winter I'm photographing a fair amount from the snowmobile, so I chose the 24-120mm F4 VR lens for it's versatility to travel with. I have pretty much started shooting stitched panoramas instead of single shot images. I like to photograph the moon as much as possible in my Mt. Katahdin images, and I want to keep the moon as large as possible in them, so I shoot at least 70mm (and larger) to keep the moon at least normal eye-sized (not possible with a wide angle lens!) I don't want to see a little dot for a moon! Wide angle lenses optically actually push the subject further away, and do not technically widen your view. This is what causes the moon to appear smaller in the final wide angle images. I take several overlapped images, sometimes horizontal, sometimes vertical (and sometimes two or three up and down in addition to across. And within that large pano file, there's always "normal" sized cropped images, if I prefer that format.

I have a D700 and D300s. I use the D700 almost exclusively for my landscape shots. My main lenses are the 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8.
It all depends on the scene, however I generally prefer telephoto images to isolate parts of a scene.
During a recent trip to the South Island of New Zealand I shot the vast majority with the D700 and 70-200. My wife shoots Canon and was using the 24-105 on a 1D4 so I decided rather than get similar shots I would try for something different. It is amazing the possibilities you can find if you deliberately limit your focal length.

Thanks everyone for your input.. the first thread asked, "Depends on what you want to shoot"
Well to answer that, I want to shoot landscapes.. mtns, lakes, wildflower meadows, streams in fall.. etc.. I
It seems the lens E.J. suggested is my best bet for a starting lens? yes? I tend to be very indecisive so someone just tell me what to do.. hehe.. thanks so much
James

Ok, well in that case, go treat yourself to a 24-70/2.8 Mine never leaves either the D700 or D300. As mentioned by others here, it's a good landscape lens. cheers... dj

thanks D J...

Well I have a 24 mm lens with a red ring, and I'm getting another with a custom orange ring; of course.

Glenn

My two workhorses are my 24-105 and my 70-200. The former gets the majority of time on my camera.

I dropped my 16-35 on concrete a while ago. I thought it was toast.