What lens do Estate Agents generally use for their interior shots

I went through exactly the same thing a few years ago. I am part of a large family but they are scattered all over the place so it fell to me to get thing sorted and yes it is a very emotional time.

As to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 L V2, I bought mine nearly 2 months ago and am loving it!

I do a lot of real estate photography and currently use a 5DIII + 16-35 F/4 IS (plus a few external radio controlled flashes). Although I recently started using my 6D for the better shadow DR.

For just a one occasion shoot I think 24mm would be fine especially if the composition is right.

Make sure your verticals are that, vertical Light up the room so it's bright enough to be able to look outside the windows (try to match exposures of the inside and outside), etc.

You can find a bunch of sample shots on my website (in signature)

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17576999
Unless you think it would make you feel better, I would shelve the idea of even taking a new set of pictures of the house. Take care of yourself and your family first, the other stuff will happen in due time.

Actually, I like going back and looking at photos of the places we've lived, and my parents as well. Brings good memories.

I am a full time real Estate photographer. I photograph 5 or 6 buildings a day, 5 days a week. And I use the 6D in combination with a 17-40L (for all the normal interior and exterior shots) and the Sigma 8mm for the 360 photo's. I use the 6D Wifi for the mast photo's.

When I do work for myself I use my own 16-35L IS for the real estate work. I like the 16-35 better. The 17-40L is not my own lens, but from the company I work for, so that's why I use the 17-40L.

I would buy the 16-35L IS if you can afford it. If it is a little too pricey I would pick the 17-40L. There is absolutely NO NEED for a 11-24 or so. 17mm is already too wide. I mostly use my lens at 18/19 or 20mm.

Bonbridge wrote in post #17578039
I am a full time real Estate photographer. I photograph 5 or 6 buildings a day, 5 days a week. And I use the 6D in combination with a 17-40L (for all the normal interior and exterior shots) and the Sigma 8mm for the 360 photo's. I use the 6D Wifi for the mast photo's.

When I do work for myself I use my own 16-35L IS for the real estate work. I like the 16-35 better. The 17-40L is not my own lens, but from the company I work for, so that's why I use the 17-40L.

I would buy the 16-35L IS if you can afford it. If it is a little too pricey I would pick the 17-40L. There is absolutely NO NEED for a 11-24 or so. 17mm is already too wide. I mostly use my lens at 18/19 or 20mm.

I really enjoyed it when I did it but the pay was not great. I would have liked to continue as a part time gig but I just could not make it work. I had to travel, set up, shoot, travel home, PP which included 21 quality stills and 3 x 360 degree panos. As best as I tried I could not get that within a time frame to make it worth it.

I learned a lot. I did not want to spend $500 on a pano head so I adapted my Novoflex macro rail for parallax. I tested a bunch of stitching software and found Autopano Pro was very fast, easy and the most reliable. Even then of there was a glitch you started eating lots of time. This was 3 years ago and a lot has changed since then.

Sounds crazy - but You have to pay inheritance tax to get probate, and you cant sell till you get probate.
And lenders dont do short term mortgages on houses going through probate!!!

Thanks for all the kind sentiments very much appreciated.
Sitting down with the Agent tomorrow, as the Saturday open day generated 6 offers over the OIEO price, 4 on the day.
So maybe their photos did the trick.

As they say .... Rather a nice upside to balance the huge 24x7 Care costs to keep mum at home until the end.

Alveric wrote in post #17570546
No, it ain't.

Your starting point should be 24mm and go shorter from there.

And your stopping point should be ~17mm: interior spaces just look unreal and deceitfully larger with shorter focal lengths.

Mind, from the rubbishy photos I constantly see of properties, I'm positive most agents just use a kit lens at its widest, stand on a chair and aim low.

But isn't that the point? Sell, sell, sell and all that?

stevewf1 wrote in post #17597487
But isn't that the point? Sell, sell, sell and all that?

By being dishonest?

I'm not sure I would call it being dishonest. If so, using your iPhone to take the pictures with horrible lighting would be dishonest because the chandelier actually puts out more light than what the picture depicts. For most instances, I believe the pictures are used as a tool to get prospective buyers in the door.

shaunmcfd wrote in post #17597873
I'm not sure I would call it being dishonest. If so, using your iPhone to take the pictures with horrible lighting would be dishonest because the chandelier actually puts out more light than what the picture depicts. For most instances, I believe the pictures are used as a tool to get prospective buyers in the door.

That's different: that's just taking a snapshot: everyone can see it for what it is, no real expectations there (other than hardly anyone be interested due to the poor quality of the photo).

Now, making something appear what it is not crosses a line. Making a drawing room appear spacious enough to fit large furniture in and then, when the prospective buyers drop by they see that it's in actuality quite small can land you in trouble. Whilst most people will just feel disappointed, cheated, and lied to, and then leave, others can take it to the next level and sue you for misrepresentation. Or at the very least they'll tell everyone on their social network about their experience and your craftiness. So, in the end, you didn't sell sell sell.

Alveric wrote in post #17597894
That's different: that's just taking a snapshot: everyone can see it for what it is, no real expectations there (other than hardly anyone be interested due to the poor quality of the photo).

Now, making something appear what it is not crosses a line. Making a drawing room appear spacious enough to fit large furniture in and then, when the prospective buyers drop by they see that it's in actuality quite small can land you in trouble. Whilst most people will just feel disappointed, cheated, and lied to, and then leave, others can take it to the next level and sue you for misrepresentation. Or at the very least they'll tell everyone on their social network about their experience and your craftiness. So, in the end, you didn't sell sell sell.

Has anyone successfully filed suit for a real estate picture being taken in a small room with a wide angle lens?

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17598479
Has anyone successfully filed suit for a real estate picture being taken in a small room with a wide angle lens?

I think Alveric was just trolling. No one would seriously say that using certain focal lengths will get you sued.

LonelyBoy wrote in post #17598479
Has anyone successfully filed suit for a real estate picture being taken in a small room with a wide angle lens?

i have read about a few houses selling sight unseen by the buyer. what happens then?

alveric isn't trolling. he is giving an opinion. Either that, or he's had a crappy day. or both.



while i may or may not agree that one could file suit, i do think that anything less than 20mm runs the risk of being deceitful depending on the room.

Alveric wrote in post #17597844
By being dishonest?

It's not called "dishonest", it's called "marketing".

Example... How many Big Macs have you gotten that look just like what you saw in an advertisement?