real estate shoot, help which lens do I use

[jazzodin]

Hi,
I'm new to the forums and have enjoyed reading alot of the posts.I was wondering if anyone can give me some advise on which lens I should use for real estate photos.I've done some shots for a home builder in the past but I wasn't happy with the lens I had to use.I shoot with a nikon D200.I shot the interior with a 18-55 mm 3.5-5.6 VR lens but was not happy with the focal length.Can anyone suggest a lens thats better for the job.

 

[Josh66]

I would think that would be a good focal length range for interior shots...
Did you find it too wide, or not wide enough?

 

[jazzodin]

Not as wide as I would like for some of the bedrooms and other small rooms.Even for some of the bigger rooms I couldn't seem to get as much of the room in the frame that I would have liked.Pictures in magazines seem to get so much more of the ceiling and floor in the frame.

 

[Josh66]

It's going to be hard to find something wider than 18mm without some serious distortion...

 

[shmne]

Sigma's 10mm doesn't distort all that much, but you're talking $1,000 and I don't know how much cash we're working with.

Other then that there really aren't any options considering your 18mm is already pretty damn wide =\

 

[KmH]

Not as wide as I would like for some of the bedrooms and other small rooms.Even for some of the bigger rooms I couldn't seem to get as much of the room in the frame that I would have liked.Pictures in magazines seem to get so much more of the ceiling and floor in the frame.

Those are images made with a specialized $2000 lens.

Your lens costs $175. Actuallu you could probably get by with the Sigma 10mm mentioned above and some photoshop to rein-in the distortion.

 

[Garbz]

Sigma's 10mm doesn't distort all that much, but you're talking $1,000 and I don't know how much cash we're working with.

I don't think he was talking about barrel distortion, which by the way the Sigma is the second worst lens next to the Nikkor 18-200 that I've seen for barrel distortion.

Rather perspective distortion. 10-15mm does some nasty things to subjects close to the lens and the edge of a frame, like a wall. Would make a room almost look like it was made of triangles rather than rectangles .

 

[manaheim]

Sigma's 10mm doesn't distort all that much, but you're talking $1,000 and I don't know how much cash we're working with.

Are you talking about the Sigma 10-20mm? It's $500ish.

The Sigma 10-20mm is the best solution for partial frame cameras for real-estate. It's the widest angle lens available for a partial-frame camera without going fisheye. The distortion levels on it are acceptable and can be corrected reasonably in post-processing.

I use mine extensively in corporate and residential real estate. It's an excellent lense with really solid optical and mechanical qualities. It even holds up quite well against some of the Nikkor "wide" offerings.

 

[shmne]

Yeah I guess it is a 10-20mm, I actually stole it from a friend for only a couple of shots then gave it back. The distortion is more then forgivable.

 

[musicaleCA]

Sigma's 10mm doesn't distort all that much, but you're talking $1,000 and I don't know how much cash we're working with.

I don't think he was talking about barrel distortion, which by the way the Sigma is the second worst lens next to the Nikkor 18-200 that I've seen for barrel distortion.

Rather perspective distortion. 10-15mm does some nasty things to subjects close to the lens and the edge of a frame, like a wall. Would make a room almost look like it was made of triangles rather than rectangles .

The Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM is baaaaaad on barrel distortion. Practically unusable at 17mm. (Once I got past my newbness and figured-out what was going on, I intentionally stopped at 24mm. *sigh*)

Anyone want it?

 

[Jon_Are]

I use the Sigma 10-20mm. I bought it because much of what I've read pointed to it as the lens for real estate.

The distortion is pretty noticeable when you approach the 10, but it's easily corrected in post. In any case, I try to not venture beyond 12-13 too often.

Jon

 

[epatsellis]

My Sigma 14mm 3.5 (older version) is my goto lens when shooting kitchens and baths.

 

[Garbz]

The distortion is pretty noticeable when you approach the 10, but it's easily corrected in post. In any case, I try to not venture beyond 12-13 too often.

Photoshop is a red herring in this case. When you reverse barrel distortion you stretch the image edges, meaning you'd need to crop in. Effectively there' no difference between shooting at 12mm or shooting at 10mm and "fixing" the image giving you an effective 12mm photo in the end anyway

 

[manaheim]

My Sigma 14mm 3.5 (older version) is my goto lens when shooting kitchens and baths.

14mm is WAY too deep on a crop-sensor camera unless you bathrooms are palacial. 10mm barely cuts it! You could probably do some kitchens with a 14, but the images are really going to suffer.

The distortion is pretty noticeable when you approach the 10, but it's easily corrected in post. In any case, I try to not venture beyond 12-13 too often.

Photoshop is a red herring in this case. When you reverse barrel distortion you stretch the image edges, meaning you'd need to crop in. Effectively there' no difference between shooting at 12mm or shooting at 10mm and "fixing" the image giving you an effective 12mm photo in the end anyway

I'm not sure that's exactly correct... you're getting more of the room in the picture with only a VERY slight crop... in my experience photoshop (well, PTLens, since I use that instead) merely re-stretches the pixels back the other way on the outside edges. There is still SOME distortion when done, but not much)

 

[epatsellis]

My Sigma 14mm 3.5 (older version) is my goto lens when shooting kitchens and baths.

14mm is WAY too deep on a crop-sensor camera unless you bathrooms are palacial. 10mm barely cuts it! You could probably do some kitchens with a 14, but the images are really going to suffer.

The distortion is pretty noticeable when you approach the 10, but it's easily corrected in post. In any case, I try to not venture beyond 12-13 too often.

Photoshop is a red herring in this case. When you reverse barrel distortion you stretch the image edges, meaning you'd need to crop in. Effectively there' no difference between shooting at 12mm or shooting at 10mm and "fixing" the image giving you an effective 12mm photo in the end anyway

I'm not sure that's exactly correct... you're getting more of the room in the picture with only a VERY slight crop... in my experience photoshop (well, PTLens, since I use that instead) merely re-stretches the pixels back the other way on the outside edges. There is still SOME distortion when done, but not much)

And who said I use a crop sensor camera? For controlled lighting work, I use a Kodak SLR/N