Need Help! 6D or 5D MkIII (or something else) for Real Estate Photography??

I'm doing part time RE Photography for my RE Agent brother. I currently shoot with a T3i and Tokina 11-16 on a Manfrotto 190XPROB tripod with a Vanguard GH-200 head. I don't typically use a flash, but instead bracket shots and utilize the Enfuse plugin for lightroom to blend the images. I've done about 13 shoots in the past year, and while I'm moderately happy with my results (compared to most of what I see on the MLS, and especially compared to the crap my brother was using, i.e. his point and shoot photo's), I realize there is a ton of room for improvement.

I had been contemplating upgrading to the affordable 6D and 17-40 f/4 L, but started to wonder if I'd be better off saving even more money for the 5d MKIII. For Real Estate specifically, is it worth the extra $$ to move up to the 5d MKIII, or would the 6D produce good results? Or am I better off not upgrading bodies at all, and just focusing on my technique, and maybe spending some money on better strobes, etc?

Any advice would be much appreciated!

6d would be just fine for what you are shooting, but then again I am unsure why the rebel can't produce what you want? The tokina 11-16 will give you the same fov that a 17-40 will on a full frame at the wide end of either lens. Have you tried the sigma 8-16 for the apsc bodies, or the canon 10-22?

I don't know anything about the 11-16. I do know that the Canon 10-22 on a crop camera has less distortion and sharper edges/corners than either the 17-40 or 16-35II on a full frame body. You shoot from a tripod, so ISO is not an issue. I don't see anything to be gained by going to a 6D/5D3.

CollegeKid wrote in post #16868722
I don't know anything about the 11-16. I do know that the Canon 10-22 on a crop camera has less distortion and sharper edges/corners than either the 17-40 or 16-35II on a full frame body. You shoot from a tripod, so ISO is not an issue. I don't see anything to be gained by going to a 6D/5D3.

i agree, tripod + whatever body + a very good lens = job will be very well done
You do not need to change your camera for Real estate pictures, better to put your money in a very good lens like an L series and throw away your tokina lens

Are you or will you be getting paid at all? If you plan on moving more in to the RE photo business, then you could justify getting a new camera. If you are just helping your brother out then stick with your current body and save the money for something else. If you have been thinking about changing camera bodies anyway, then this might be the perfect time to justify a new purchase.

Personally, I'd vote for the 6D. It would be great for indoor RE photos and lighter on the wallet.

kawi_200 wrote in post #16868859
Are you or will you be getting paid at all? If you plan on moving more in to the RE photo business, then you could justify getting a new camera. If you are just helping your brother out then stick with your current body and save the money for something else. If you have been thinking about changing camera bodies anyway, then this might be the perfect time to justify a new purchase.

Personally, I'd vote for the 6D. It would be great for indoor RE photos and lighter on the wallet.

Disagree, on several counts. Getting paid means you likely want to provide the best product for the customer. The 6D offers nothing over a T3i in this situation.

The 10-22 is nearly distortion free at all focal lengths. That is important when shooting all the verticals involved in WA and UWA real-estate photography. Both the 17-40 and the 16-35II exhibit more distortion on FF than the 10-22 does on crop.

The 10-22 is sharper in the corners than either of the FF lenses. As most real-estate shots (especially indoors) demand huge DOF, they also demand the sharpest edges and corners available. The 10-22 offers more DOF and corner sharpness than either the 17-40 or 16-35II.

At the print size and resolution of most real-estate advertising, FF offers no advantage. If you are doing double-page spreads for House Beautiful or Architectural Digest, sure, go FF. For the local MLS rag and a web-site, it is overkill.

Purchasing a used 10-22 may improve the OP's results. He is done for about $450, used. I am not sure it offers anything over the 11-16, except range. Buying a 6D, even used, is going to cost $1,400 AND require a lens to go with it. The 17-40 (according to reviews) has some pretty heavy mustache (read: uncorrectable) distortion at 17mm, and it costs more than the 10-22. The 16-35II is better and costs three times the price of a used 10-22. I wouldn't call almost $3,000 'light on the wallet'.

I use both ff and crop cameras. I would do this job with the 10-22.

Mike Kelley (also known in this forum) uses just a T2i and a 18-55mm kit lens to demonstrate a perfect example of what can be done with just a standard lens. I partly agree with CollegeKid here, don't get freaky and buy a 5D Mark III

You are better of improving your skills... The Mike Kelley DVD (available at F-stoppers website) is more beneficial to you than buying expensive gear ($3000+). Real estate photography for an agent is a peace of cake for your T3i. You don't want to use extreme wide angle anyway because it gives a distorted view of the rooms of the house... Not very professional when you advertise rooms bigger than they actually are, you may lure potential customers but they will be disappointed when they see the difference in your advertisement pictures and the real deal.

So buying a 10-22mm Canon to do real estate shots isn't wise since you use 15mm+ on crop camera's anyways for these kind of photography.

Stick with your gear and improve your skills, you might want to invest in lighting (umbrella's and speedlights)

CJ230K wrote in post #16868633
I'm doing part time RE Photography for my RE Agent brother. I currently shoot with a T3i and Tokina 11-16 on a Manfrotto 190XPROB tripod with a Vanguard GH-200 head. I don't typically use a flash, but instead bracket shots and utilize the Enfuse plugin for lightroom to blend the images. I've done about 13 shoots in the past year, and while I'm moderately happy with my results (compared to most of what I see on the MLS, and especially compared to the crap my brother was using, i.e. his point and shoot photo's), I realize there is a ton of room for improvement.

I had been contemplating upgrading to the affordable 6D and 17-40 f/4 L, but started to wonder if I'd be better off saving even more money for the 5d MKIII. For Real Estate specifically, is it worth the extra $$ to move up to the 5d MKIII, or would the 6D produce good results? Or am I better off not upgrading bodies at all, and just focusing on my technique, and maybe spending some money on better strobes, etc?

Any advice would be much appreciated!

Heya,

You do not need a new camera, at all. It honestly will add nothing. Remember, these real estate images are not being printed as 20x30 inch prints. They're just going to be used in web images (limited resolution) and, at best, magazine/brochure print (again, small actual size). The full frame advantage would be to go wide angle, but you already have 11mm, which is perfectly ultrawide on a crop. The other advantage is ISO performance, but again, you don't need it, you have the tripod advantage--do long exposure if you have to--but more importantly, you should be lighting up the rooms, not taking pictures of dark shadow-rich rooms and trying to do some kind of HDR with it. If you want to do HDR (which is fine), do it with full lit rooms. They will pop way more.

Lighting is how you make real estate pop. Get some lighting (basic speedlites) with wireless off-camera setups. Some Yongnuo 560 III's and some triggers. Cheap and super effective. Start filling the place will light by bouncing off the ceiling.

I would get 2 speed lights, those YN 560 III's and some wireless triggers and some basic light stands with hot shoe mounts for off-camera flash. Maybe some basic white umbrellas just to help soften it a bit when you bounce. Learn to mix exposure with flash. This is how you get amazing lighting of natural light (windows) and the flash to fill the room. That's two exposures, so you meter them both in. You adjust the camera for metering to the natural light. Then adjust the flashes to their own power levels for exposure after that. Mix that, and you get beautiful warm images, that are fully lit. Remember, you're stopping down the lens to F8 or F11, maybe more if you want, for depth of field and focus, and that Tokina is very sharp, so you can get very creative with lights and natural light mixing. Do that, and then go ahead and learn to do HDR with that. You'll see the kind of images that you're used to seeing in super fancy realestate images, where they're all warm, super colorful, completely lit, etc. That's how they do it.

Lighting is how you make this work. Not a new camera.

If you really want a full frame camera for this, I would instead suggest a used 5D classic ($550). Why? More lens options basically. The Tokina 11-16 is fantastic. But if for any reason you wanted to have more ultrawide options, a full frame simply has more choice there. A 14mm Rokinon for example on Full Frame, is crazy wide. But again, you don't need any of this. You're way better off spending money on lighting here.

Very best,

Wow! I posted this and went to bed figuring I'd get minimal response! Woke up to a ton of great advice! First, thanks to everyone for your replies.

To answer one question about getting paid; Yes, he is paying me around $100 a shoot. This is less than the full time Pro's charge in our market by somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 - 100% based on my research, so it's kind of a win-win for both of us. He's getting much better results than he was on his own, and I'm getting a chance to gain experience and learn by trial and error with a client who's not as demanding as someone who's expecting top quality results. I've basically saved all the $ I've made, reinvesting in a better tripod head and tripod, so I'm sitting on around $1,000 that I'm trying to determine the best way to re-invest to hopefully get better, and eventually grow my business.

I believe I can eventually expand my business beyond just my brother, because I'm seeing a LOT of crappy pictures on the local websites. Here is just one example of what I see... a million $ + home, and the verticals aren't vertical, it's clearly shot w/ a point and shoot w/ direct flash... it just makes me sick!!! http://rflora.reeceand​nichols.com …W-ROCKWOOD-Court-94128460

I know my composition needs work, and I definitely want to explore multiple off camera flashes. I was just reading last night about using one, maybe two, off camera flashes, in conjunction with bracketing exposures and using the Enfuse plug-in to blend. I have been using Enfuse with just available light, and I've gotten mixed results... some look great, others look muddy and lack contrast. I've also read in addition to Mike Kelly's DVD, that Scott Hargis puts out some great info as well. I will have to look into both of those.

So basically, what I'm gathering from above is I should focus on my technique and probably upgrade my lighting and learn how to do that efficiently before I go dropping a ton of money on a new full frame body.

Here's my next question: I currently have one TTL Yongnuo 468-II and one manual Neewer TT560 flash (and a couple cheap flash stands and umbrellas). Would a YN560 or YN565EX TTL play nice with either/both of my existing flashes? I'd also be interested to know if the YN622 flash trigger/receiver/trans​mitter is a worthwhile investment (I’m thinking it’s a must if I plan to get the flashes off camera).

Lastly, to address my lust for a full frame body... I figured that's a natural progression for anyone who's moderately into photography. I started out getting into photography only a few years ago (end of 2011/early 2012) because I wanted to mostly document my kids growing up. I only got into the RE photography business because my brother randomly asked if I could do a better job than he did, I then realized I could, and I've since grown to love it. From there, I kind of looked at the extra money I was making as a way to be able to afford a nice full frame body without my wife threatening to murder me for dropping that much money!! Aside from RE photography, I still love to take pictures of my kids, and was looking for something that would be a good all-around tool. Both kids are young, and are already in many different sports/dance/activitie​s/etc, and I’m sure there will be even more in the coming years. I know the 6D is supposed to have excellent low light performance so that is one reason I had it on my radar (school plays, dance recitals, etc), however, it is lacking in the focus department with barely more focus points than my t3i. This is where my dream of owning the 5D MKIII comes in. I know it would be excellent for sports (T-Ball/Baseball, Soccer, etc, etc), and I’m sure my ego would greatly expand owning that bad boy with a couple lenses with that red ring around them!

I suppose I will just continue to save my money and work on technique. With better results comes more business, and with more business comes more money… eventually leading to the things I WANT but don’t currently need!

Thank you all again for taking the time to respond! Your thoughts/opinions are much appreciated!

CJ230K wrote in post #16869262
Wow! I posted this and went to bed figuring I'd get minimal response! Woke up to a ton of great advice! First, thanks to everyone for your replies.

To answer one question about getting paid; Yes, he is paying me around $100 a shoot. This is less than the full time Pro's charge in our market by somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 - 100% based on my research, so it's kind of a win-win for both of us. He's getting much better results than he was on his own, and I'm getting a chance to gain experience and learn by trial and error with a client who's not as demanding as someone who's expecting top quality results. I've basically saved all the $ I've made, reinvesting in a better tripod head and tripod, so I'm sitting on around $1,000 that I'm trying to determine the best way to re-invest to hopefully get better, and eventually grow my business.

I believe I can eventually expand my business beyond just my brother, because I'm seeing a LOT of crappy pictures on the local websites. Here is just one example of what I see... a million $ + home, and the verticals aren't vertical, it's clearly shot w/ a point and shoot w/ direct flash... it just makes me sick!!! http://rflora.reeceand​nichols.com …W-ROCKWOOD-Court-94128460

I know my composition needs work, and I definitely want to explore multiple off camera flashes. I was just reading last night about using one, maybe two, off camera flashes, in conjunction with bracketing exposures and using the Enfuse plug-in to blend. I have been using Enfuse with just available light, and I've gotten mixed results... some look great, others look muddy and lack contrast. I've also read in addition to Mike Kelly's DVD, that Scott Hargis puts out some great info as well. I will have to look into both of those.

So basically, what I'm gathering from above is I should focus on my technique and probably upgrade my lighting and learn how to do that efficiently before I go dropping a ton of money on a new full frame body.

Here's my next question: I currently have one TTL Yongnuo 468-II and one manual Neewer TT560 flash (and a couple cheap flash stands and umbrellas). Would a YN560 or YN565EX TTL play nice with either/both of my existing flashes? I'd also be interested to know if the YN622 flash trigger/receiver/trans​mitter is a worthwhile investment (I’m thinking it’s a must if I plan to get the flashes off camera).

Lastly, to address my lust for a full frame body... I figured that's a natural progression for anyone who's moderately into photography. I started out getting into photography only a few years ago (end of 2011/early 2012) because I wanted to mostly document my kids growing up. I only got into the RE photography business because my brother randomly asked if I could do a better job than he did, I then realized I could, and I've since grown to love it. From there, I kind of looked at the extra money I was making as a way to be able to afford a nice full frame body without my wife threatening to murder me for dropping that much money!! Aside from RE photography, I still love to take pictures of my kids, and was looking for something that would be a good all-around tool. Both kids are young, and are already in many different sports/dance/activitie​s/etc, and I’m sure there will be even more in the coming years. I know the 6D is supposed to have excellent low light performance so that is one reason I had it on my radar (school plays, dance recitals, etc), however, it is lacking in the focus department with barely more focus points than my t3i. This is where my dream of owning the 5D MKIII comes in. I know it would be excellent for sports (T-Ball/Baseball, Soccer, etc, etc), and I’m sure my ego would greatly expand owning that bad boy with a couple lenses with that red ring around them!

I suppose I will just continue to save my money and work on technique. With better results comes more business, and with more business comes more money… eventually leading to the things I WANT but don’t currently need!

Thank you all again for taking the time to respond! Your thoughts/opinions are much appreciated!

I share that dream as well haha buying the 5D Mark III with L lenses is my goal too, saving up to buy one in the next couple of years haha. However it's mostly for my ego and the feeling of having that great camera

I see you have some good speed lights already, really look up Mike Kelley (mikekelley on this forum) and look at his posts. I think your greatest gain is following his game (hey I can rhyme )

CJ230K wrote in post #16869262
This is where my dream of owning the 5D MKIII comes in. I know it would be excellent for sports (T-Ball/Baseball, Soccer, etc, etc), and I’m sure my ego would greatly expand owning that bad boy with a couple lenses with that red ring around them!

I suppose I will just continue to save my money and work on technique. With better results comes more business, and with more business comes more money… eventually leading to the things I WANT but don’t currently need!

Thank you all again for taking the time to respond! Your thoughts/opinions are much appreciated!

Heya,

Trust me, your ego will shrink and you'll sit in a dark room and consider Leica and Carl Zeiss equipment, when you realize that having a 5D3 and L-lenses won't make your photography better on it's own. It all sounds great, but these things can take images worse than a P&S or cellphone in a set of hands that have no real skill or experience. Focus on learning photography instead. Once you are a master of exposure, it won't matter what camera you're using. You'll see stunning stuff come from "garbage" or "junk" equipment. Your ego won't be too happy when someone with a lowly Rebel and kit lens and a couple of budget flashes can produce way better images than you can with a 5D3 and a 17mm TSE L lens and some expensive stuff. It's a skill. Not just a "better gear, better images" thing.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16869768
Trust me, your ego will shrink and you'll sit in a dark room and consider Leica and Carl Zeiss equipment, when you realize that having a 5D3 and L-lenses won't make your photography better on it's own.

It's a skill. Not just a "better gear, better images" thing.

Very best,

RE Photography aside... would you recommend the 5D MKIII, 6D, 7D, or something else for family/dance/kids sports, etc photography?

When using the T3i handheld in low light, bumping the ISO up past 800 leaves something to be desired (too noisy for me), even w/ my Sigma 1.4 or Nifty Fifty wide open, and when trying to capture action shots (I know I know... T-ball isn't exactly that action packed)... the lowly 3.4 fps doesn't do it for me.

Heya,

I can shoot sports just fine with a piece of junk rebel. But I'd rather use a 6D. A 5D3 would be better for the autofocus, but I don't shoot intensely fast sports on a regular basis. If I did, I'd probably want the 5D3 maybe. Personally I'd rather have the sensor of the 6D and the ISO handling of the 6D.

The reality is, you can shoot action with a cheap rebel and a cheap EF-S lens. Especially T-ball.

Again though, if low light is an overall theme with you, the 6D is great there and has excellent focus capture in low light too.

Very best,

CJ230K wrote in post #16869866
RE Photography aside... would you recommend the 5D MKIII, 6D, 7D, or something else for family/dance/kids sports, etc photography?

When using the T3i handheld in low light, bumping the ISO up past 800 leaves something to be desired (too noisy for me), even w/ my Sigma 1.4 or Nifty Fifty wide open, and when trying to capture action shots (I know I know... T-ball isn't exactly that action packed)... the lowly 3.4 fps doesn't do it for me.

You should be able to shoot ISO 3200 without an issue, but it will require you to shoot raw, and utilize some nice tools like LR or any of the leading noise reduction tools like Noiseware, NoiseNinja, etc. JPGs out of the camera are pretty poor in today's standards.

There is just as much importance to your post processing skills as there are to your shooting skills. It was so in the film days, and probably even more important now, IMO. Take 2 experts, one that shoots OOC and submits it and one that takes a raw shot and knows how to post process properly, including recomposure, etc, and that shot will always look better.

3200 Straight out of DPP to JPG, no other NR than what the camera settings tells DPP to produce for the JPG, just to help you gauge against your T3i.

http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …765597&k=xvgq3x​d&lb=1&s=O

Thank you MalVeaux!

TeamSpeed. Noted. I do shoot RAW about 95% of the time, but my post processing needs work (I use the LR noise reduction function, but maybe I'm just a closet pixel peeper...). I will look into Noise Ninja and the likes. I'll also check your link when I'm at home. Corporate firewall prohibits me from going there now :-\.

Here's another question for any lighting experts (sorry to make this thread jump all around!). If I have the YN468II and a Neewer Manual flash... would I be fine using both of those off camera, and purchasing something like the YN622 wireless triggers? I was thinking I could have one trigger on the camera, one on the YN468II, and then set the Neewer as a slave w/o a tranceiver to fire when the YN468II fires. I'm debating spending another $139 on a YN565EX II, but not sure if that's necessary with my current two flashes. Again, I'm a complete newb when it comes to off camera flash, so I apologize if these are ignorant questions!