Too many choices.....head hurts.

So I am a professional hobbyist with the camera and a finish carpenter by trade. I want a wide angle prime to take pictures of my work in fairly tight spaces. I had a Sig 10-20 that I tried out but wasnt happy with it. Most of the pictures I took of the interiors were short of being sharp. They might have been good for Facebook but not for a portfolio......could have been me but who knows. I didnt want to be stuck with a lens I didnt like.

That very well could be the lense to have but I was thinking a prime that would still get the wide angle and sharper image. I dont do any PP nor do i have the software.

I was thinking something in the 12-15 range but I am just throwing darts here. Tight interior spaces would be like standing in a doorway and getting most of the room in the shot or at least 2 walls of a newly renovated kitchen. For what its worth I don't have lighting equipment so its going to be with available light.

Again. It may have been me on the Sig.

I shoot with a 20D

you should start with Lightroom before ditching that lens. It would be a good idea to get a tripod as well. As is, you're probably not getting the most of your lens. PP is an essential part of photography, especially what you do.

I think you're likely to find that any shots for a portfolio aren't going to be as great as what you see "out there" without doing some additional work in post processing on them. I haven't shot JPEG with either of my cameras, though, so I'm not intimately familiar with how the current bodies do for output right off the card.

I'd definitely look into something like Lightroom or one of the other software packages that would give you some tone curve and sharpening adjustments, at the very least. I don't know of any reason that lens shouldn't be able to produce images good enough for what you're doing with a little TLC on the shots after you've taken them.

If you dont mind, you can host some samples of raws that you're not happy with, and I can see if PP can work with the files or not. I've owned the 10-20 and it's ok for what it does from what I recall.

If you want the best quality, use a tripod, AV mode and set ISO 100 and F8 and either use a shutter release cable or self timer.

You are a 'professional hobbyist' <--not sure what that means btw, and you use a 20D?

Like others have said, pp is crucial. Also a sample pic won't hurt.

You need PP. And great lighting. Without those two things, you might as well not bother if you have high expectations. Great lighting may be achieved naturally, but more often than not, it won't be there when you need it.
You can't expect much if you aren't controlling the light and post processing your images.

But yes, post some of the shots you are not happy with and we'll see if its a problem with the lens.

Also, a good UWA prime is the rokinon 14mm 2.8, but that has quite complex distortion I believe, which may or may not be a problem for the type of work you do.

A wide angle prime isn't strictly required, you could do an indoor panorama as well This gives you more pixels to work with but would require a tripod and one preferably with a pan head.

Shoot RAW and more post processing.

kin2son wrote in post #14328264
You are a 'professional hobbyist' <--not sure what that means btw, and you use a 20D?

Like others have said, pp is crucial. Also a sample pic won't hurt.

There is large ammounts of sarcasm within that title. Its a hobby. I do it alot but I have never really even thought of getting into PP or taking it up as a profession though I was on my way to doing that with my film bodies I never really pursued it. I figured there must be a lens that is capable of using available light.

Yes I use a 20D is that wrong? Do I NEED something else? I bought it new when it was the high end amateur body to get. Its been good to me except for when i left it alone for a couple years.

I do have a Tripod but its not the best. Its older and not ball head either. That will probably be in the investment along with the lens. What I have had has worked for me but it seems like the next step is learning PP.

Charlie I can do that. May not be tonight but I can get something on here.

OnTheMend wrote in post #14328975
There is large ammounts of sarcasm within that title. Its a hobby. I do it alot but I have never really even thought of getting into PP or taking it up as a profession though I was on my way to doing that with my film bodies I never really pursued it. I figured there must be a lens that is capable of using available light.

Yes I use a 20D is that wrong? Do I NEED something else? I bought it new when it was the high end amateur body to get. Its been good to me except for when i left it alone for a couple years.

The problem is you're looking to get most of the room in focus in the shot, I assume. So using a wider aperture lens may not really be of value. Yes, you'll be able to get faster shutter speeds if you shoot wide open. But if you're shooting at f1.4 you might not really get the image you want anyways.

Assuming you do want most/all of the room in focus and sharp, you're looking at shooting in the f8 - f16 range. If the light is not that good and you don't have artificial light to supplement, then you're going to need to be on a tripod so you can do a long exposure appropriate for your aperture speed.

Now if you are willing to spend some decent money, then maybe look at getting a 5D II and a used Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 (would be similar to a 15-37.5mm range on your 20D) or a Canon 20mm f2.8 (similar to 12.5mm on your 20D). I recently switched from a 50D to the 5D II, and the difference in high-ISO performance is night and day. On my 50D noise was noticeable at ISO 800 and above. I've used ISO 6400 and still managed to have acceptable noise and very usable images. If the 5D II cost more than your budget allows, then think about the original 5D. Either 5D should allow you to increase your ISO in order to decrease your shutter speed a little.

Get 5d2 with samyang 14mm 2.8

Tripod with tighter aperture to get bigger DOF

tempest68 wrote in post #14329406
The problem is you're looking to get most of the room in focus in the shot, I assume. So using a wider aperture lens may not really be of value. Yes, you'll be able to get faster shutter speeds if you shoot wide open. But if you're shooting at f1.4 you might not really get the image you want anyways.

Assuming you do want most/all of the room in focus and sharp, you're looking at shooting in the f8 - f16 range. If the light is not that good and you don't have artificial light to supplement, then you're going to need to be on a tripod so you can do a long exposure appropriate for your aperture speed.

Now if you are willing to spend some decent money, then maybe look at getting a 5D II and a used Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 (would be similar to a 15-37.5mm range on your 20D) or a Canon 20mm f2.8 (similar to 12.5mm on your 20D). I recently switched from a 50D to the 5D II, and the difference in high-ISO performance is night and day. On my 50D noise was noticeable at ISO 800 and above. I've used ISO 6400 and still managed to have acceptable noise and very usable images. If the 5D II cost more than your budget allows, then think about the original 5D. Either 5D should allow you to increase your ISO in order to decrease your shutter speed a little.

Believe me. Its already crossed my mind. Its not really a budget issue its more of a need issue if you know what i mean. What are the advantages of going to a 5D II beside pixels and better ISO sensitivity? Is there another crop body that I can get closer results to? I was looking at possibly 50 or 60D bodies but for a few more bucks I can get a used 5D II.............I know the 20D is a capable camera but maybe its not capable for the low light stuff. I know my way around a camera but just have not payed attention the last few years to what was coming out so I lost touch with that side of it.

I do have some shots at my house with the lens. I checked it right out of the box for focus issues and it came out sharp at 20mm f3.5 1/15. I took an outside shot at f8 1/250 10mm and the whole image seemed soft. I was trying to load them on here but they are limited to size even if I go through a host site.

I will snap a few in raw and post them.......

While your 20D is getting old, it's still quite capable of capturing some amazing images... Yes, if you play with a newer camera, you'll notice your 20D doesn't quite measure up to them but that doesn't make it a paperweight.

OMG you have a 69 SS Camero. Well, you don't have cruise control, HID lights, backup sensors or a backup camera, it isn't fuel injected, it doesn't have much horsepower, it's uncomfortable and doesn't have heated seats or digital climate control, you can't change the radio from the steering wheel, it gets 10mpg, it handles horribly and there is no computer suspension, you only have 3 speeds on your windshield wipers, no dvd player for the kids, no ABS or traction control, and you only have a 3 speed automatic???? What the hell ...

How in the world can you even manage to drive?

That would be like a car forum's version of POTN.

OnTheMend wrote in post #14330764
[/COLOR]

Believe me. Its already crossed my mind. Its not really a budget issue its more of a need issue if you know what i mean. What are the advantages of going to a 5D II beside pixels and better ISO sensitivity? Is there another crop body that I can get closer results to? I was looking at possibly 50 or 60D bodies but for a few more bucks I can get a used 5D II.............I know the 20D is a capable camera but maybe its not capable for the low light stuff. I know my way around a camera but just have not payed attention the last few years to what was coming out so I lost touch with that side of it.

I do have some shots at my house with the lens. I checked it right out of the box for focus issues and it came out sharp at 20mm f3.5 1/15. I took an outside shot at f8 1/250 10mm and the whole image seemed soft. I was trying to load them on here but they are limited to size even if I go through a host site.

I will snap a few in raw and post them.......

The high ISO performance was the biggest advantage that made me switch from the 50D. In lower light settings I found I needed flash to get a useable shot. With the 5D II I've tried out using available light at ISO 3200 and 6400 and found that they are useable. I still prefer flash, but it's nice to crank up the ISO and not worry as much as I did with the 50D.