Wide Angle Lens

[arch8]

I am new to photography and I just bought a Canon Rebel T3i and a Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 ultra wide angle lens. I want to shoot interiors of my listings (I'm a real estate agent), but was expecting a more dramatic angle from this lens (I am shooting at 10mm setting). I read the following on a website that made me think my camera is too basic and if I got a better camera I would get a more dramatic angle from my lens. Is this true?

“On a full-frame camera, a 20mm lens is considered wide-angle because there is no crop factor on the camera; however, on a consumer-level DSLR (this includes ALL DSLRs which cost less than $1,600 body only), there is a built-in crop factor, so a 20mm lens on a crop factor camera won’t be a wide-angle.”

Any info/education would be appreciated. Thanks

 

[timor]

Hi arch8, welcome to the forum.
I don't know, what did you expected from your lens, but 10-20 for APS sensor that's not bad. What would you call "a dramatic angle" ?
I got you something to read to better understand your equipment.
Field of view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ultra wide angle lens - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Angle of view - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How to Use Ultra-Wide Lenses

 

[nathfromslg]

you can always use panorama to combine all of the interior

 

[table1349]

A How-To Guide to Getting Started in Real Estate Photography ? Photography ? Tuts+ Tutorials
Real Estate Interior Photography Secrets

 

[Gavjenks]

A 20mm lens on a full frame camera would be a LESS dramatic angle than a 10mm on a crop frame. Because 10 * 1.6 = 16mm apparent angle, which is wider than 20mm.

And your 10-20 will not fit onto a full frame, since it is a crop frame lens only. Well, actually that one in particular does physically fit without crashing into the mirror (at least it did on my 6D), but half of your image will just be black all around the outside edge.

If you want a more dramatic angle, there are options, though:
1) Get a 180 degree fisheye and "De-fish" it in software. You won't get very high resolution around the edges (can't print at very large sizes), but you will get some image.
2) Do panoramas and stitch them together to a wider effective angle.
3) There are some lenses for full frames that are wider equivalents. Like the 14mm Rokinon full frame rectalinear lens, which is the equivalent of 8.75mm on a crop frame, slightly wider than your 10-20.
4) PInhole photography can get to 180 degrees pretty cheaply, but.. you know, looks like a pinhole photograph.

 

[ruifo]

Have you considered the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X SD IF DX II PRO ?

 

[JoeW]

Folks, I think we're being to lens focused here. Unless we're talking a closet or the inside of a dog house, 16-20mm lens should be sufficient for real estate photographer--I've shot with 20mm and done fine. At 10mm you're talking significant distortion, converging lines, stuff that's tough to avoid without a tilt-shift/perspective control lens (which is muy pricey!). I think the real issue here is probably the angle that the OP is shooting at, not the lens.

With an f4.5, the OP also needs to be shooting on a tripod.

 

[arch8]

thanks for the input. seems like i have a few options. i will have to try some of the tips you guys mentioned. at least it doesn't seem like i have to get a whole new setup.

 

[Gavjenks]

With an f4.5, the OP also needs to be shooting on a tripod.

Uh what? Maybe if the real estate he is shooting happens to be a 1960s underground bomb shelter with a single bare bulb 40 feet away.

In normal daytime lighting indoors in a house with windows, you can easily shoot at f/8-f/11 or so handheld at superwide angles like that no problem, let alone f/4.5. Maybe even more extreme if you're getting into sub-10mm territory.

Have you considered the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X SD IF DX II PRO ?

He already has a wider lens that that...

 

[fokker]

To be fair you'd probably want to be shooting on a tripod anyways...

 

[grafxman]

Your lens should be plenty wide enough. You need to learn how to use it to get the shots you want. A shot such as this one encompassed an entire small room:

IMG_8212 -1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

That's at 11mm.

This shot covered a wall from a few feet away:

IMG_8204 -1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

That's at 16mm.

This vanishing point shot covers a distance of 20-25 feet:

IMG_8191 -1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

That's at 11mm. I think you just need to practice a lot. All those photos were shot hand held with my crop factor 7D camera.

 

[JoeW]

With an f4.5, the OP also needs to be shooting on a tripod.

Uh what? Maybe if the real estate he is shooting happens to be a 1960s underground bomb shelter with a single bare bulb 40 feet away.

In normal daytime lighting indoors in a house with windows, you can easily shoot at f/8-f/11 or so handheld at superwide angles like that no problem, let alone f/4.5. Maybe even more extreme if you're getting into sub-10mm territory.

(snip)

Yes, it does depend upon what type of house or room the OP will be shooting in. I know in my house (2 story Colonial plus a basement) I can't shoot at f8 handheld and get sharp pictures during the middle of the day in at least 8 of the 12 rooms. And since the entire room needs to be sharp for this kind of work, than f11 is probably the minimum the OP will be shooting at...maybe an even bigger DoF. I do know that when I shot real estate and business office space, I was using a tripod for most of my work. I can't imagine shooting commercial work for space at f4.5--that DoF is just way to narrow unless you're looking for an artsy shot of the conference table fading in to blur or it's a very narrow space like a work station or powder room.

 

[Dao]

There were couple videos (I wish I can find the link again) I saw in the past regarding taking interior photos. First of all, those are gear more for professional type photos.

If I remember correctly. one of video shown a interior photo taken with a tripod mounted Canon full frame camera with a TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift lens. The photographer took 6 photos (forgot exactly how many, I think it was 6) and stitch them together. And the result was quite good. With that, the photographer was able to capture a wide scene without much distortion.

And the photos were taken in portrait orientation before they were stitched.

 

[Gavjenks]

Yes, it does depend upon what type of house or room the OP will be shooting in. I know in my house (2 story Colonial plus a basement) I can't shoot at f8 handheld and get sharp pictures during the middle of the day in at least 8 of the 12 rooms. And since the entire room needs to be sharp for this kind of work, than f11 is probably the minimum the OP will be shooting at...maybe an even bigger DoF. I do know that when I shot real estate and business office space, I was using a tripod for most of my work. I can't imagine shooting commercial work for space at f4.5--that DoF is just way to narrow unless you're looking for an artsy shot of the conference table fading in to blur or it's a very narrow space like a work station or powder room.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
f/4.0 (which is what it actually is at the wide end, looking at the OP again), crop frame camera, 10mm, focus at 4.5 feet, and you will get everything sharp from 1.8 feet out to infinity. So no you don't need anything close to f/11. It may be typical in the industry, but that's probably not using 10mm lenses. Even in a huge office space that goes, say, 75 feet back to the far wall, f/4.0 can still get everything in focus at 10mm, even if you're standing arm's length from the nearest cubicle or whatever.

I also think you may not be taking into account just how little blur you get from handshake at 10mm. The general rule of thumb is shutter speed = 1/(focal length) miminum for hand holding. Which means that whatever shutter speed you can get away with in your experience in a dim house at a more typical 24mm or something, you can go over a stop lower with 10mm.

So for example, you said you could do f/8 in 4 out of 12 rooms in your house during the day. Well, if you go down to f/4 (which you can while still staying in focus at 10mm), and use half the shutter speed (which you can due to more corresponding physical space per pixel), then your camera system is going to be 3 stops faster. I very much doubt that the other 8 rooms in your house are 8x+ darker than those first four, which means that 3 stops faster speed you'd get with the 10mm lens at f/4 would allow you to easily photograph your entire house handheld during the day.



I'm not saying that 10mm is what the industry wants or what he should be doing in real estate photography. It might not be at all, I dunno. But if you take as a given that you've decided to shoot at 10mm f/4, then I can conclude that you shouldn't need a tripod. And having owned that exact lens myself, I can say that I never used one with it.

 

[pgriz]

I am thinking that the biggest "Problem" with shooting interior shots with a ultra-wide-angle is the perspective distortion that it gives the image. In a "regular" room (say, 18' x 20' or so) the UWA shot will appear to be showing a long, deep room, long enough for a bowling alley. This can be considered misleading marketing, when people are actually in the room and compare the image with the reality. While it does have the benefit of making rooms look spacious, it can create a false impression. So use the images produced in this manner with some care (and maybe a disclaimer or two).