Does this sound like a good plan? - With sample pics

[cgipson1]

ok cool, that helps.

Wow, these wide angles can get pricey! Amazon.com: Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens: NIKON: Electronics

I dont know, if I go 14mm, I am sure I will have some major distortion. So I need to make sure I am good at fixing that is PS as well.

Want to see an architectural shot at 24, on a D800 FX?



Shot with the 14-24

Here is a 100 percent zoom of some detail

 

[Patrice]

Parker,

That 3rd photo was taken with a rectilinear wide angle lens, the camera position was about midway between floor and ceiling and kept level. The balance between indoor and outdoor lighting was done by metering the outdoor scene (overexposed by about a stop or so) and illuminating the room with artificial light to reach a pleasant balance. The even illumination of the space can de done with multiple off camera flashes carefully placed to provide the light while not being seem in the image. The huge depth of field is not achieved by a f/2.8 aperture, you'll need to close down the lens quite a bit to get the whole of the space in reasonable focus.

Skilful processing was used to correct for any curvilinear lens distortions so as to have nice straight lines.

 

[cgipson1]

So what are you using for wide angle now? The 14-24 2.8 in your sig? You have a link on amazon to that? I cant seem to find it.

I might upgrade to FX, so from what you guys are saying, I should get FX glass now.

Amazon.com: Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED AF-S Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens: NIKON: Camera & Photo

 

[Ballistics]

That 3rd shot is taken @ 10mm.

 

[Ballistics]

Looks like there's a little HDR going on too.

 

[Parker219]

Patrice, Ballistics, or anyone can you both post a link to what lens you think he used for that 3rd shot?

Charlie, love the example.

 

[Ballistics]

I just got the Exif data. That was shot with a canon T3i @ 10mm. And he bracketed and used photomatix.

HDR was a lucky guess, but I was able to view the basic exif online.

 

[Parker219]

Charlie, did you have to correct the distortion in your first sample pic?

 

[Ballistics]

This dummy dropped the dpi to 72 but kept it in it's full resolution lol. I'm waiting for the stupid thing to load so I can post the info.

 

[Ballistics]

Camera:	Canon EOS REBEL T3i
Lens:	10-24mm Shot at 10 mm
Exposure:	Auto bracket exposure, Aperture-priority AE, 0.3 sec, f/7.1, ISO 200
Flash:	Off, Did not fire
Date:	February 28, 2013 3:33:10PM (timezone not specified) (22 days, 1 hour, 56 minutes, 25 seconds ago, assuming image timezone of US Pacific)
File:	3,450 × 5,178 JPEG (17.9 megapixels) 10,759,222 bytes (10.3 megabytes) Image compression: 80%
Color Encoding:	Embedded color profile: “sRGB”

 

[Parker219]

^ Also explain why that is dumb....just in case...um...some one else doesn't know why. Lol

 

[Ballistics]

And he shot in Jpeg and in auto bracket.

 

[Ballistics]

^ Also explain why that is dumb....just in case...um...some one else doesn't know why. Lol

Usually, you convert your image to 72 ppi to prevent someone downloading it and expanding it to print, use for themselves, etc.
But if you leave it at it's complete 17MP resolution, they don't need to expand, they have the complete resolution to do what they want. .

 

[Parker219]

^ So the processing helped make those shots what they are?

 

[Ballistics]

^ So the processing helped make those shots what they are?

Yeah, I'm guessing he auto bracketed 3 shots, combined it in matix and called it a day. There's nothing in here that a newbie couldn't pull off by their 2nd house.