Is an 18mm Prime Useful in Alaska?

I already have an 18-70mm telephoto but I was wondering if the 18mm prime would be useful for landscapes? I know that the 18mm is nice for closeup work.

I already have an 18-70mm telephoto but I was wondering if the 18mm prime would be useful for landscapes? I know that the 18mm is nice for closeup work.

Since 18-70 is typically a kit zoom that came with the camera, a sharp 18mm prime at f/2.8 or faster would be nice for Alaska. You will find it to be a very diverse landscape that looks good wide or even with a telephoto, depending on where you are.

But... (there's always one)

Since you already have the 18mm range covered, you may want to consider something in the 10mm-12mm range for a very wide view. I use my 12mm f/2.0 Rokinon extensively for shots on the ship as well as for landscapes.

Dave

To agree with Pierces, a wide prime is very nice for Alaska. But assuming you're using a crop body camera, 18mm really isn't very wide. I'd look in the 10-12mm range.

Disclaimer: I absolutely love gear. I buy too much of it, I know too much about it (I can quote filter sizes for much of the Canon L lineup, etc.), and I often take too much of it to Alaska.

That said, if you have an 18-70, you have an 18mm prime, and you're asking if you should take it, the answer is no IMHO. Either the lens has an amazing look to it that is so good that you have no reason to even ask us, or it doesn't and that's the reason to leave it home. The only exception is if it's extraordinarily fast (and far faster than your 18-70 at 18, which is probably f/3.5) AND you know how to work with the not-extremely-thin-but-still-distinct DoF of an 18/1.4 or 18/2 AND you know that the ship's interior is the kind of stuff you could shoot fairly well in those conditions.

My next Alaska cruise will most likely be (assume full-frame) 16-35/4IS, 100-400, 600/4 (rented) with a 1.4x TC, all for outdoor work (excursions, glaciers, whales). For indoors, perhaps 35/1.4, 50/1.2, 85/1.2, and a Profoto B2 kit with some modifiers, as I want to do some lit portrait work of my wife in Ruby/Emerald/Crown Princess' Adagio Bar and some other places (and hopefully find someone else to push the button for shots of the two of us).

After seeing Dave's photos with the Rokinon 12mm , I bought one and on a ship it is great, now I use it alot for landscapes can't beat it

John

Thank you all for the replies. It is a long story that prompted my question.

I had been waiting for the Sony A68 to be released but as it turns out, it will be too late for this cruise. So I did the next best thing and sprung for a Sony A77 II. It will replace an older Sony Alpha with a board that had been fried due to static electricity. My fault, by accident, about three years ago. The positive was not needing CompactFlash media anymore. In the meantime, I have been using two bridge cameras.

With anticipating scenery to equal my trip to the South Island of New Zealand, I wanted to add a new lens for this cruise to go with the new body. I was concerned that a 12mm might have too much fisheye. But after all the helpful comments here, I think I may go that route.

I was concerned that a 12mm might have too much fisheye. But after all the helpful comments here, I think I may go that route.

Fisheye lenses have fisheye. Rectilinear lenses do not*.

* There may be some distortion that is "barrel" in nature, starting towards fisheye, but not much (hopefully). Zoom lenses tend to have it moreso than primes. Here's a shot of the Ruby Princess through the Canon 11-24 at 11mm: That railing on the right would be massively misshapen if this was a fisheye.

I already have an 18-70mm telephoto but I was wondering if the 18mm prime would be useful for landscapes? I know that the 18mm is nice for closeup work.

What format? Micro 4/3, Nikon DX, APS-C, 35mm FF?

On anything less than FF, 18mm isn't all that wide IMHO.

Edit: I see you mention the Sony A77. APS-C. 18mm on that body gives a 66.27 degree by 46.86 degree field of view (PhotoPills app). To imagine that, consider a wall 10 meters away; you will be able to image 13 meters width and 8.67m height.

Fisheye lenses have fisheye. Rectilinear lenses do not

Still, one must be careful with ultra wide lenses. Angles will converge quickly as you go off-plane from them. Classic example is photographing a building and aiming up to frame it.

See here: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/wide-angle-lenses.htm