Landscape photography is full of confident, contradictory advice. Two people can disagree completely on the same topic and both sound completely sure of themselves, which makes it hard to know what to actually believe, especially early on.
Coming to you from Ian Worth, this candid video works through some of the most debated topics in landscape photography, and Worth is refreshingly honest about where he stands, where he doesn't, and where he genuinely hasn't made up his mind. The tripod debate is the first stop. Worth acknowledges the case for always using one, particularly for long exposures and bracketed shots, but says he's been going handheld more often as cameras with IBIS have improved. He's even considered ditching his tripod entirely for six months just to see what happens, partly because he finds carrying one genuinely miserable. The editing debate gets equal treatment. Worth draws a useful line between documenting what you saw and creating what it felt like, and argues those are two genuinely different goals that lead to different results.
The prime versus zoom question comes up next, and Worth uses his own kit to make the point. His wide angle is a prime lens, but he leans on zoom lenses for most of his landscape work because you often simply can't move your feet when you're on a trail or a fixed viewpoint. He also pushes back on the idea that famous, heavily photographed locations should be avoided. The argument that iconic spots kill creativity doesn't hold up for him. Light, weather, and timing change everything, and there's a real argument for challenging yourself to find something different in a place that's been shot a thousand times.
The sensor size debate gets one of the more nuanced treatments in the video. Worth shoots APS-C and Micro Four Thirds and has for years, but he doesn't dismiss full frame outright. When he was shooting documentary work in low light for clients, the ISO performance of a full frame body was worth the cost and the weight. For landscape work in good light at base ISO, he finds the gap much smaller. That honest distinction between use cases is more useful than the usual "just buy what you can afford" brush-off. The golden hour rule also comes under scrutiny. Worth's take is that harsh midday light isn't something to avoid so much as something to understand, and that high-contrast images from the middle of the day can be striking in their own right.
Each of these topics could fill its own video, and Worth keeps things moving without flattening the nuance. The full discussion, including his reasoning on a few of the points above and the remaining debates he covers, is worth hearing in full, so check out the video above for the full rundown from Worth.
Join the Fstoppers community for free
-
Post comments and join in the discussions
-
Browse the site ad-free
-
Share your work and get featured in the community
-
Compete in the photo contests for fun and prizes
2 Comments
Tripods: Until recently I used a tripod on every shot, no matter what. No exceptions. Even when a nuisance to carry. The last year or two, I've been making a lot of exceptions. Tight spaces indoors at the botanical garden... leave the tripod in the car. Shots that don't impress me as being one that I would ever sell... handheld is fine. The one photo that I still require a tripod is macro work since the depth of focus is so narrowly thin, and I can't be certain of holding the camera steady enough to guarantee my focus point. Otherwise there's so much more creative freedom from ditching the tripod. I've even learned to like the noise from high ISO in some images when necessary without a tripod.
Editing: RAW images need a lot of editing to look good. JPG images straight from the camera just transfer editing to the camera, but they are still edited. Personal taste dictates the amount of editing. I prefer a reasonably natural look.
Prime vs Zoom: No question for landscape work, zooms get you to a composition that may have been impossible with a prime lens. A cliff that drops off 400 feet makes zooming with your feet hazardous. Trespassing on private property may prohibit a closer view with a prime lens. I shoot the large majority of my landscapes with an F/4 24-120 lens. Nothing exotic, but very practical.
Photographing popular locations: I think it's great... until the locations become so overrun with people that you have to make a reservation to get there. I loved shooting Maroon Bells near my home in Colorado, until so many people started getting there in the middle of the night just to beat the morning crowd, that the experience itself became miserable. The fact that we're all taking pictures of the same thing though does not discourage me from visiting these sites.
Golden hour: Great photos can be made any time of day or night, in any season. Just think differently than the ordinary landscape photo.
Full frame: Whatever camera gears gives you what you need is what's best. If you do no more than show your photos online, the size of the sensor hardly matters at all. And few people seem to print their images, especially at large enough sizes that sensor resolution would matter. The companion argument seems to be about mirrorless technology. Again... whatever works for you. I've been shooting with a Nikon D800E for 14 years and nobody has convinced me that a mirrorless camera would improve my photography. You can buy a great used DSLR for a fraction of the cost of a new mirrorless.
Great subjects all. But with all said everything is just personal or just what you have! My first question as i look a my images is what is really landscape? that also i what ever you may call it.
As far as tripods I found I could do without after going to the Florida Caverns where tripods were not allowed and I had a A7SM1 no IBIS and was using my new at the time Voigtlander HELIAR-HYPER WIDE 10mm F5.6, what I did was use a bungee cord zip tied to my tripod plate on the camera to each side of me as well as shortened the camera strap. I got more in an image than was on any postcard in the giftshop. 2016
In 2017 I got the A7RM2 IBIS and on a trip stop at Antelope Canyon and did a day and night tour. On the day tour I forgot to attach the tripod plate so at the first stop while all were setting up their tripod for long exposures I did a few handheld then a bracketed 3 at +/- 2EV and wow all looked good also i was using the new FE 12-24mm f/4 G lens (no IS/OSS) so I did the whole day tour standing, on my belly/back and between legs of those with tripods the clicking really bothered others who were doing single long exposures, back doing processing all HDR edits were great. Next the night tour, the guide had a LED lantern set to daylight, Yes I brought the tripod but just one capture handheld was like mid day so left it behind (I was the only one on the tour and the guide was also a photographer). Again up and back handheld and bracketing and again on my back, knees what ever to get a capture. It was all lit like the sun was inside. Editing in hotel lobby others looking over my back asked what lens that is really wide capture.
Today with the A7RV (others since the A7RM2) I do most all handheld even late blue hour doing 5 at +/- 2EV. This using FE PZ 16-35mm F4 G (body-integrated) Aperture mode.
I do a lot of milky way and use a tripod but using Aperture mode in lit areas for some how the camera does a great job with capture near and sky, now that would be a good subject of how the camera can do that in Aperture mode doing a long exposure due to lighting in both near and far.
The deal is know your equipment and play to find what can and can not be done. Lastly no where on a print is the metadata and what was used who cares just that you are happy with the image!
A note tripods no longer allowed at Antelope Canyon also beware your tour may be canceled due to rain some distance away. National Geo put cameras all the way through many of the canyons to record the the water and lost all cameras during.