Architectural Photographers- What do you shoot with?

I am curious the combination of lenses that most architectural photographers shoot with. What percentage prefer the tilt/shift versus standard lenses? Primes? Please consider both EF and EF-S combos for those of us who have not stepped up to the FF camera...

I am leaving this topic fairly vague on purpose, hoping to drum up some different opinions on the the topic.

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

I'll start by saying that I absolutely do not consider myself to be an architectural photographer. I'm more a landscape and sunset guy who happens to take a picture of a building every now and then.

Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Mark-B wrote in post #9479815

Love this shot, one of the many that swayed me towards the 17-55 .

Haven't tried any tilt shifts yet (would love to have one though), so what I've been using so far is 16-35 mk2, 17-55, 60mm macro and my 200mm prime actually!

16-35

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157614982269498/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157614982269498/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157614982269498/

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Joaaso those are truly some remarkable shots, especially 4 & 5.

Personally, I would LOVE own a new 24mmTS-EmkII, however I've already got that FL covered twice, so I cannot justify it right now. Even though it has abilities beyond what can be replicated in PS, it's ability to correct perspective can be done fairly easily. I find that most of my landscape shots get a small perspective tweak anyhow. Joaaso's #5 shot looks to be an excellent example of this.

In other words, for the casual architectural & landscape photographer, I should think I normal UWA would suffice.

For instance, although not the best example:

wow guys, nice shots - im subscribing, no archie yet but sure it will come!

ken2000ac wrote in post #9480830
Joaaso those are truly some remarkable shots, especially 4 & 5.

Personally, I would LOVE own a new 24mmTS-EmkII, however I've already got that FL covered twice, so I cannot justify it right now. Even though it has abilities beyond what can be replicated in PS, it's ability to correct perspective can be done fairly easily. I find that most of my landscape shots get a small perspective tweak anyhow. Joaaso's #5 shot looks to be an excellent example of this.

thanks! If anything I'd have to get my boss to buy a TS-E for the firm (that's where I have access to the 16-35 as well.. on a 5D), but I'm not sure wich I would recommend him then.. I would guess we would need a 17 or 24, but at the same time, we need something longer than 35 as well.. anyway, I dont think our economy has room for new camera gear at the moment:p

about perspective correction; I often don't correct the perspective completely, I just reduce the effect.. cause when it starts to look like an isometric view, it'll look very unnatural also.. but I use PS alot for perspective correction when using these lenses, so a TS-E lens would be nice
----
oh and sorry for the double-post earlier.. I was doing like 4 things at the same time:p

I'm loving this shot Mark-B. The 17-55 f.2.8 seems to be a very popular lens for this use. I am researching my next lens possibilities and had originally considered a Tamron 18-270 because of the flexibility of the range, but it appears like the IQ drops off. I would like a little more reach than a 17-55 offers. I am currently shooting with an 18-55 and it feels limiting for detail type of shots. Any other lens in that category with a little more reach like the 15-85? EF-S.

http://www.msbphoto.co​m/img/v7/p905373886-5.jpg

My favorite lenses for architecture are the 24mm TS-E and the 45mm TS-E. I'm old school and key stoning is not my personal fave. It can work well at times but I prefer having the perspective control available. If I could afford to switch to the TS-E II I would but the economy needs to pick up a little first.

I work in the architecture for 18 years now and the wide shot pics are nice and artsy but in my experience,the good once that are helpful to designers and architects are shots that doesn't have too much of that wide effect that distorts the heights and measurements of the structure itself.

There are compositional advantages to be had when using a shift lens, which are just NOT possible to reproduce with a conventional lens and camera position!

Shot with a conventional 24mm lens on Canon 40D, with camera level to avoid converging verticals...

Architective wrote in post #9482660
I'm loving this shot Mark-B. The 17-55 f.2.8 seems to be a very popular lens for this use. I am researching my next lens possibilities and had originally considered a Tamron 18-270 because of the flexibility of the range, but it appears like the IQ drops off. I would like a little more reach than a 17-55 offers. I am currently shooting with an 18-55 and it feels limiting for detail type of shots. Any other lens in that category with a little more reach like the 15-85? EF-S.

http://www.msbphoto.co​m/img/v7/p905373886-5.jpg

Your image was too large according to the IMAGE POSTING RULES

I quoted another's post. Thanks for noticing.

Any other favorite lenses? I'm probably a while from buying a TS lens, so I need something for the interim. It seems like some of the best images on this page were with the 17-55 f/2.8. How important is the f/2.8 for composed, architectural type shooting?

I've talked myself out of getting an all-around 18-270-esque lens in favor of sharpness. Any other lens favorites comparable with the 17-55?

The "best" images on this page are probably from the 17-55 because more casual photographers are less inclined to purchase such an expensive lens. The f/2.8 is not a necessity. The lens did not make those shots good.

One way or another, you will need a lens starting around 15-17mm, if not wider. You could also look into manual focus shift lenses...there are a few, though I don't know if any qualify as wide on an APS-C camera.