Interior real estate with Crop sensor, what lens?

[glen]

I enjoy photography, so it pains me to take crappy pictures and I almost have to in my line of work. On occasion, I have taken my DSLR on some inspections, even though it is a more than needed because when I turn in a report, the file only handles 640 x 480 color pictures. Sure, a DSLR 640 x 480 are much better, but my cell has a wider angle. With a 35mm lens, I can’t get back far enough in many rooms. I am sure Pixelsquish will know exactly what mm I need and the max f-stop. Unfortunately, I see even the least expensive wide angle lenses are $400 plus.

 

[Syborg1211]

When you say crop sensor DSLR, you mean APS-C/DX, right? If that's the case, the tokina 11-16mm is one of the best ultra wides you can get. There are two versions so you have to be careful though. The Pro II version has a built in AF motor for dslr's that do not have an autofocus motor. If you're ok with manual focusing, then go ahead and get the original version as both are the same optically (still awesome). I think the new version of the Sigma 10-20 is also supposed to be good, but I own the Tokina and never had an issue with it.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Anything that gets you in the <20mm range (35mm equivalent; this is considered ultrawide territory) will be good. With an APS-C sensor (1.6x crop in Canon, 1.5x crop in Nikon) you will need something in the 13-14mm range on the wide end, at least. Most commonly available crop ultrawides are something like 12-xx, 11-xx, etc.

F-stop doesn't matter; you won't get better than about f/3.5 in a consumer-level zoom anyway. Just get a tripod for long exposures in dark places (note: almost all residential interiors are dark places, photographically speaking). Also learn a few techniques to hold a camera steady without a tripod by carefully bracing it against something. E.g. holding it with the back of the camera flat against a wall and using your body weight to hold it there and keep it from moving. This can get good results into the 0.5-1.0 second range with an ultrawide. A sturdy mini-tripod can be good for this, too. You can place it on a shelf or other piece of furniture, or you can hold it against the wall and keep it steady with your body weight, instead of on the camera directly (which, depending on the camera, might damage it; I'm used to the sturdy magnesium bodies on Canon's semipro DSLRs).

When doing things like that, it definitely helps to have a remote shutter release and/or a self-timer so that you don't move the camera by mashing the shutter button too hard (it's pretty easy to mash the shutter button too hard when you're coming at it from a weird angle).

 

[Kanalua]

8mm Rokinon/Samyang/Bower?

 

[JohnnyRebel]

The Pro-Optic 8mm f/3.5 fisheye is under $300, manual focus, and is supposed to be an optically excellent at f/5.6.

 

[randomrogue]

Obviously your 35mm isn't going to work since that's a portrait lens on DX.

I use full frame so you'll want to multiply by 1.5 for Nikon and 1.6 for Canon.

12-16mm is ultra-ultra wide and I use it for landscape photography. Buildings will get distorted and you'll have to work hard to make the images not look bizarre. It will make a building from the outside look like a trapezoid. Inside not sure but I can't imagine it being attractive. There was a guy at dpreview who was posting all these indoor 12mm pictures of train stations and shopping malls and honestly they made me nauseous. They're just visually unpleasant unless you can fix the distortion.

I'd guess you'd want somewhere between 18mm and 20mm.

I'd look at the Tokina F2.8 11-16 for DX.

 

[Syborg1211]

Yea I wouldn't do 8mm or fisheye. You don't want any distortion for the reasons randomrogue said. The Tokina 11-16's pretty good on distortion. It's barely noticeable from 11-14 and basically nonexistant from 14-16.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

12-16mm is ultra-ultra wide and I use it for landscape photography. Buildings will get distorted and you'll have to work hard to make the images not look bizarre. It will make a building from the outside look like a trapezoid. Inside not sure but I can't imagine it being attractive. There was a guy at dpreview who was posting all these indoor 12mm pictures of train stations and shopping malls and honestly they made me nauseous. They're just visually unpleasant unless you can fix the distortion.

It is perfectly possible to get normal-looking photos of indoor locations with an ultra-wide. For "artsy" photos, most photographers choose a framing that purposely exaggerates the perspective distortion that an ultrawide can deliver. Because an ultrawide has a wider angle of view, you can stand closer to your subject and still fit all of it in the frame.

The real problem (converging lines) comes from pointing the camera upwards instead of perpendicular. Since most buildings go up from the ground, this is a common problem, but if you can get a shot of a building (interior or exterior) from approximately the middle of its height, you can largely avoid perspective distortion.

In the case of interior photos, you really have no choice: if you want to show the whole room in a single photo, you have to have an ultrawide. A 17mm lens (in 35mm equivalent terms) has a horizontal angle of view of 93 degrees, which means that if you have the camera in a corner then you can show all 4 walls of a room in one shot. Sometimes this is disconcerting, but shifting the camera slightly to show 3 walls gives pleasing results.

Here is a real estate blog post with some example photos using an ultrawide vs. a standard wide-angle lens for some interior shots. There is nothing special about these photos, just properly executed ultrawide usage in a real estate context.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/3562268/photography-which-is-more-ethical-

 

[MrSquished]

i shoot my interiors with a Full Frame Equivalent of 18mm-24mm but if i had 16mm FF equiv i would use that too for a shot here and there. anything wider and it's just too much distortion. i have a 9-18mm lens for my MFT so that's 18-36mm FF equiv (of which i find 99% of my shots are at 18-24mm. of those shots a majority are at 18-20mm).

i find that 18mm is just fine for anytime i need to go as wide as my equipment will let me. and i am not shooting large homes with tons of space to move around. these are condos and apartments in urban areas where spaces are much smaller until you get into the ridiculous high end listings. if i had a couple more mm i would probably use them sometimes but the more i shoot with this 9-18mm the more i find it is more than enough.

it's important to get your verticals as good as possible in camera IMO. the new LR5 has some nice perspective distortion tools, and i find when i get my levels good in camera, the LR5 Perspective distortion tools have really nothing left to do. when it comes in handy is for exterior shots. you will have to aim the camera up to get all the floors of the home or building, thus not being level, and the LR5 PD tools work well here. or you could get a tilt-shift lens, but that's way out of your budget, and mine.

this can be achieved with a simpler leveler. my camera has levelers for vert & horiz built into the Live view or EVF. if yours doesn't you can by a little bubble leveler that goes onto your hotshoe. they probably make one that can work with a tripod as well. spend that extra 30 seconds before you line up the shot to get it level perfectly and you will get the best results.

for my canon 40D i had the sigma 10-20ex. yes it was about 400 bucks. you aren't going to get much for less than that i think. haven't kept up with the dslr world of lenses since switching to MFT.

 

[Kippa]

I use a Canon EOS 7D which has a cropped sensor. The lens that I use is a Canon EF-S 10mm to 22mm which compared to the full frame sensor is equivalent of a 16mm lens (10mm times by 1.6). I have managed get quite a few nice photographs from it. Here are some of my photographs to give you an idea:

http://fav.me/d58j23d
http://fav.me/d5nu6z3
http://fav.me/d5fj8ns
http://fav.me/d65c7lj

All taken on the EF-S 10mm to 22mm lens, set to 10mm.
The 10mm lens is very wide but it isn't a fisheye lens.

 

[glen]

i shoot my interiors with a Full Frame Equivalent of 18mm-24mm but if i had 16mm FF equiv i would use that too for a shot here and there. anything wider and it's just too much distortion. i have a 9-18mm lens for my MFT so that's 18-36mm FF equiv (of which i find 99% of my shots are at 18-24mm. of those shots a majority are at 18-20mm).

i find that 18mm is just fine for anytime i need to go as wide as my equipment will let me. and i am not shooting large homes with tons of space to move around. these are condos and apartments in urban areas where spaces are much smaller until you get into the ridiculous high end listings. if i had a couple more mm i would probably use them sometimes but the more i shoot with this 9-18mm the more i find it is more than enough.

it's important to get your verticals as good as possible in camera IMO. the new LR5 has some nice perspective distortion tools, and i find when i get my levels good in camera, the LR5 Perspective distortion tools have really nothing left to do. when it comes in handy is for exterior shots. you will have to aim the camera up to get all the floors of the home or building, thus not being level, and the LR5 PD tools work well here. or you could get a tilt-shift lens, but that's way out of your budget, and mine.

this can be achieved with a simpler leveler. my camera has levelers for vert & horiz built into the Live view or EVF. if yours doesn't you can by a little bubble leveler that goes onto your hotshoe. they probably make one that can work with a tripod as well. spend that extra 30 seconds before you line up the shot to get it level perfectly and you will get the best results.

for my canon 40D i had the sigma 10-20ex. yes it was about 400 bucks. you aren't going to get much for less than that i think. haven't kept up with the dslr world of lenses since switching to MFT.

Makes me think I should get the Canon 18mm-55mm, and use it at 18mm.

 

[MrSquished]

Makes me think I should get the Canon 18mm-55mm, and use it at 18mm.

what camera do you have?

 

[glen]

what camera do you have?

I just got the new Canon SL1. So good so far. I have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4.
Next weekend I have rented the Canon 85mm f/1.2 to shoot a wedding inside a church with no flash.

 

[glen]

I use a Canon EOS 7D which has a cropped sensor. The lens that I use is a Canon EF-S 10mm to 22mm which compared to the full frame sensor is equivalent of a 16mm lens (10mm times by 1.6). I have managed get quite a few nice photographs from it. Here are some of my photographs to give you an idea:

http://fav.me/d58j23d
http://fav.me/d5nu6z3
http://fav.me/d5fj8ns
http://fav.me/d65c7lj

All taken on the EF-S 10mm to 22mm lens, set to 10mm.
The 10mm lens is very wide but it isn't a fisheye lens.

Wow man! Those are fantastic!

 

[Kippa]

Wow man! Those are fantastic!

Thanks Glen! Some purists believe that cropped sensors like the 7D are inferior to full frame. Ok so full frame camreas can get better shallow depth of field, but so far as quality goes, you can do quite well on a cropped sensor camera like the 7D. If I had the choice again to choose a new camera I would still go for the cropped APS-C based Canon EOS 7D.

 

[MrSquished]

I just got the new Canon SL1. So good so far. I have the Sigma 35mm f/1.4.
Next weekend I have rented the Canon 85mm f/1.2 to shoot a wedding inside a church with no flash.

you have an APS-C cropped dslr, so an 18-55 kit lens will actually be 28.8-140mm equivalent.

you need to get a 10-20 or 10-22 wide angle lens for APS-C cameras. canons is the most expensive of them but sigma and the other third party makers make some good ones too.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Makes me think I should get the Canon 18mm-55mm, and use it at 18mm.

No, you are misunderstanding. He is talking about 18mm in 35mm equivalent terms. To get that on a 1.6x crop sensor, you need a lens with a focal length of around 11mm.

 

[glen]

hmmmmmmm.... So, is one alternative to take a couple of shots and stitch them together? Is there some sort of in camera automation for this?

 

[fralexandr]

you could stitch the photos together (using something like hugin or windows live photo gallery), though I've tried a few times and failed (probably from not having enough overlap, and some bad angles).
You have to take several pictures that overlap, usually covering each spot ~2-3x.
There may be problems with perspective that need tweaking too.

Many newer point and shoots/smartphones can do panorama modes, though most DSLRs almost definitely can't.

It's pretty difficult to find cheap wide angle lenses
the cheapest might be a 14mm rokinon or 13mm vivitar (probably the same lens) at ~$300-350, but that isn't quite wide enough for many shots.

 

[Kippa]

What you could do is rent a lens and test it out for a day just to see if it is actually worth spending all the money on it. Kind of try before you buy.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I don't do real estate but my Tokina 11-16 is amazing for this. In retrospect, I probably should've gotten the Canon 10-22, but oh well?