Interior Real Estate Lens Option

KenjiS wrote in post #8353597
Depends on what you're trying to achieve as well...

Ie, that last pic of mine, i dont see any distortion...

Your post makes no sense. If you're trying to correct edge distortion, you have to lose apart of the image. If there isn't any distortion, you don't have to do any correction, so I don't see what your picture has to do with correcting distortion.

Unless a lens has severe barrel distortion, I don't really see any need to correct an image. Real estate photos always try to make a room seem larger and a driveway seem longer, so a very wide angle lens with little barrel distortion (some wavy distortion would be acceptable IMO). In essence I think something along the lines of the Canon or Sigma 10-20mm on a cropper, or the Sigma 12-24mm on a FF would be an excellent choice.

No love for the Tokina 11-16/2.8? The canon 10-22 I think is great for outdoor landscape UWA, but for interior UWA, I think you have to consider the Tokina. Or maybe I'm just biased because the 11-16 is going to be the next lens I buy

May I suggest to take a look at the Tokina 12-24 f4
The "Old version" runs for 400$ new (There is a new one DXII that is 100$ more for a new coating) and is a very nice lens that many don't consider for being 12mm
But I have to say is a great lens
Look for some reviews and you'll see is a lens to be considered
Just another option
cheers

I've had nothing but great results with my Sigma 10-20mm. I've probably shot 50 houses with it by now. A quick sample:

sboyer wrote in post #8356355
No love for the Tokina 11-16/2.8? The canon 10-22 I think is great for outdoor landscape UWA, but for interior UWA, I think you have to consider the Tokina. Or maybe I'm just biased because the 11-16 is going to be the next lens I buy

You mean because the Tokina is faster? Sounds like the OP is looking to do pro shots vs. quick snaps in a museum where flash photography isn't allowed. If that's the case, he'll have to use a tripod, no way around it, ... and at that point the f/2.8 advantage of the Tokina is irrelevant. He'll be shooting f/8 - f/11 the entire time ...

fly my pretties wrote in post #8355708
Your post makes no sense. If you're trying to correct edge distortion, you have to lose apart of the image. If there isn't any distortion, you don't have to do any correction, so I don't see what your picture has to do with correcting distortion.

Sorry, I shoulda been more clear

The last pic of mine is at 10mm, uncorrected, and can you actually see any distortions on any of the vertical surfaces? Theres not even any post processing applied to that, no sharpening, no levels no anything...

The only reason i am not 100% happy with that shot is because that room needs some better lighting [Even if thats how that room happens to be lit...Theres no lighting fixtures in that part of the room, it relies on the picture window or lamps for its light]

So I decided that there wasn't enough against the Canon 10-22 to pull me away from my inital decision. Hopefully it works out for the best, thanks for the input.

I shoot homes for my wife and myself for marketing Real Estate. I use the Canon 10-22 and have been very successful getting people in the door and close the deal! I am looking to get some sort of diffuser for when I use the flash and start using the tripod more. Almost all of the pics in these albums are hand held. You can view my albums by clicking below. All shots were taken with the 10-22 except the aerial views and bird pics. Click on the slideshow option after opening a particular album for largest view.

http://picasaweb.googl​e.com/marklift

If you insist on using a UWA for the interior work, you should as someone mentioned, keep your lens parrallel to the subject matter. When photographing a room this takes a bit of setup. What you want to do is mount your camera on a tripod, and make sure its sitting level on its horizontal and vertical axises and setup the body to be at a height such that the lens will be as close to midway of the height of the room. (i.e. in a room with an 8ft. ceiling, have the lens at 4ft from the floor). This will cause all the lines to converge equally and give you the best chance to not have lopsided walls.

Conversely, if you wish to make rooms appear larger than they are, shoot from a higher position and angle the camera downward.

pixel_junkie wrote in post #8352551
It isn't mandatory to use a tilt shift lens for architecture. Lens distortion can be corrected in post in a minute. All the pros I've ever worked with, non of them use ts lenses, just ultrawides and correct distortion in PP ...

You're right most of the high guys that are make'n the big $$$ use view cameras.

Kaigler wrote in post #8353016
Thats how I was taught in collge. We never used $1500-$2500 lenses.

That may be, but TS-E lenses are the proper tools for the job. They produce better results for paying clients.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #8426887
You're right most of the high guys that are make'n the big $$$ use view cameras.

Not true I know one professional who uses digital more often than not. View cameras are a royal pain in the ass as well as dealing with film and scanning.

The $$$ is more like $ these days ... sorry to say.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #8426887
You're right most of the high guys that are make'n the big $$$ use view cameras.

Not in my experience. The firm I work for is top 3 in California for health care and education, not exactly a small fish in the pond. I'm talking 200 million dollar hospitals and such. When you make 12-13 million in fees, you hire the top photographer to photograph your projects. All I ever saw is digital. Again, just my personal experience with this. maybe they do it differently in different states.

pixel_junkie wrote in post #8427116
Not in my experience. The firm I work for is top 3 in California for health care and education, not exactly a small fish in the pond. I'm talking 200 million dollar hospitals and such. When you make 12-13 million in fees, you hire the top photographer to photograph your projects. All I ever saw is digital. Again, just my personal experience with this. maybe they do it differently in different states.

I cant believe it either..

View cameras are huge, heavy, clunky and slow, Yes they have outstanding quality but at the same time digital delivers a good chunk of the result in practice with a camera you can hold in your hand...

Also they need a bit of space to setup, their tripods are bigger heavier and clunkier than one for a 35mm system...The film needs special care, then you have to scan it...And a view camera isnt exactly cheap either! Especiallly if you factor in the cost of a good scanner that will handle the film...

Medium format i could buy, But not view cameras....

Sure you use a tripod usually, But hey, if you have to, At least you can handhold a dSLR and do it that way...