Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2015 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.

  
 
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I am needing to shoot some real estate shots both inside and outside. I do not have many wide lenses. Currently in the wide area I have a Bower 14mm 2.8 manual focus and a 24 70 2.8 II. the 24 70 I use for events and portraits when I need wide and the Bower I grabbed one day when there was a price drop for just the few and seldom occasions that I needed an ultra wide. To be honest it has served me well the handfull of times I have used it, but now I think for interiors I want either a 16 35 2.8 II or a 17 mm TSE. I just added a body so I can only do one right away and I have read that I can use my 1.4 III on a 17 tse giving me a 24 mm tse as well.

I am interested in also hearing about other options from Tokina, Sigma, and Tamron. Bodies will be a 1DX and a 5DIII so FF options only please. I do have a 7D but won't be using it for this.







Oct 28, 2015 at 09:23 PM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I'm curious about the reason you don't want to use the 14 you have. Is it because the IQ isn't up to the standard you want?

(Tongue in cheek: What's the matter - you don't like Zeiss?)



Oct 28, 2015 at 09:55 PM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Ernie Aubert wrote:
I'm curious about the reason you don't want to use the 14 you have. Is it because the IQ isn't up to the standard you want?

(Tongue in cheek: What's the matter - you don't like Zeiss?)


Hi, I used what I had last week and found the gap between 14 and 24 was more than I wanted. The 14 was just almost too wide. IQ was excellent. I keep it at infinity and have no problems with focus and I have found that I really don't mind doing the settings all on the lens so not an issue with anything on the 14mm Bower.

If I go with the 17 tse my thoughts are the 14 I have, the 17, adding the 1.4 III and then my 24 70 II. It would give me alot of range. On the other hand I love the flexibility of a zoom so the 16 35 looks appealing. I also don't mind saving money and using another brand. I just am not familiar with all the options and all the codes for the Cropped versions are just beyond me.

I also prefer a 2.8.



Oct 28, 2015 at 10:04 PM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.



Ernie Aubert wrote:
(Tongue in cheek: What's the matter - you don't like Zeiss?)



I would love it if someone gifted me a Zeiss.






Oct 28, 2015 at 10:05 PM
helimat
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Can't beat a tilt shift for interiors.


Oct 28, 2015 at 11:12 PM
jasonpatrick
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I love my 16-35mm f/4 IS - can't beat it for sharpness and IS. You'll have to be careful with your lines and do some correction in post, but it's sharp right into the corners and you can make some great photos at super slow shutter speeds.


Oct 28, 2015 at 11:36 PM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Jason, I thought about that one too, and still a possibility, but as you said it will be alot of straightening lines. Right now I am pulled between the convieniece of the zoom vs convenience of not having to do so much PP. If I end up doing alot of it, maybe both but not for a while.


Oct 29, 2015 at 12:09 AM
Paulthelefty
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


If you are doing real estate, you will do a fair amount of post, no way around it.

I shoot a 50d with the 10-22, but I never go wider than 12mm, which is about 18 FF equivalent. I have customized the Lightroom lens profile to correct for distortion and CA at that focal length. I think for larger homes you can get away with a 20 prime full frame. I would happily shoot with a 12mm or maybe even 14mm prime for all my interiors on APS-C.

I have done a fair amount of research, and the canon 10-22 is the least distorting zoom (and it is also better than most wide primes) I have found. Maybe try/test one with your 7d, you may be surprised at how well it does.

Paul



Oct 29, 2015 at 12:29 AM
Massimo Foti
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I guess you know already what Canon offers in this range.
I would add Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 as an options. Great value for money. Heavy, bulky, doesn't handle flares that well, but great image quality. Very low amount of distortion for a UWA, that's a plus for interiors.



Oct 29, 2015 at 02:39 AM
Guest

Guest
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC looks like the lens to get. The Samyang may get axed in this case.


Oct 29, 2015 at 07:23 AM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Kathy, rather than 16-35 II, get the new 16-35 f4 IS for FF. I've been shooting both exteriors and interiors with 16-35 II for the past 1.5 years on 1.3x crop and I've managed to get the photo almost every time. I'm not that happy with its corner performance though. IMO no much need going wider than 16mm on FF. I've managed to shoot some very tight spaces on 1.3x crop. For exterior, the 16-35 and your 24-70 will work great.

You will definitely have to work on tripod, stopped down for DOF, HDR bracketing and perspective correction.

But first, you should probably try to shoot your own house/appartment with 24-70 on FF and see if you actually need wider lens.



Oct 29, 2015 at 07:37 AM
Dietrich
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


For serious work I would go with the TS-E 17. If you don't want to use a tripod and won't make money with I would prefer the 16-35/4L IS over the 16-35/2.8L II, too, because you are not fixed to around f/11 to get sharp corners at 16mm. In my experience it gives you much more flexibility. That doesn't mean the 16-35/2.8L II won't get the job done.

Edited on Oct 29, 2015 at 07:54 AM · View previous versions



Oct 29, 2015 at 07:49 AM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Tell us more about the circumstances under which you'll be doing real estate photography. Are you an agent? Do you want to get in the business? Are you doing this for fun?

If you want to do real estate photography seriously, you can sink a lot of money in gear. I 17mm TSE is a good place to start, but to do a top notch job you'll need to add lighting gear and another lens or two (24mm TSE).

I think a 16-35 would be a good starting point. It's a good lens to have in your arsenal anyway and would do a good job with real estate. If you want to get serious, then add the 17mm TSE.

BTW, I did my architectural and real estate mostly with 4x5 view cameras. Boy, what a pain!



Oct 29, 2015 at 07:50 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I traded my 16-35/2.8L II for the 16-35/4L IS. I figured that I wouldn't miss the one stop in low light because I could compensate with an aďditional stop of ISO, with my 1DX and 6D. I was right. It's a noticeably better ultra-wide zoom for IQ at the edges and corners, plus the IS makes it more versatile for handheld shooting. The only reason to go f/2.8 would be if you're not able to get high enough shutter speeds at f/4.

OTOH, for interiors I almost always use my TS-E 17/4L. Any excuse for buying one, is a good excuse.



Oct 29, 2015 at 08:46 AM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


dmacmillan wrote:
Tell us more about the circumstances under which you'll be doing real estate photography. Are you an agent? Do you want to get in the business? Are you doing this for fun?

If you want to do real estate photography seriously, you can sink a lot of money in gear. I 17mm TSE is a good place to start, but to do a top notch job you'll need to add lighting gear and another lens or two (24mm TSE).

I think a 16-35 would be a good starting point. It's a good lens to have in your arsenal anyway and would do
...Show more

Circumstances are that i live about 10 miles from a lake. A friend who owns a real estate company just happened to have a client who was a photographer who resided in a lake home and when they got ready to sell, he took his own pics. These particular pics generated a lot of calls for my friends business that even resulted in sales of other properties. As a result he asked me if I would be willing to shoot just 2 or 3 houses for him a month. So, no I am not an agent, and no I won't be doing alot of this but I shot one for him the other day and even though what I had got the job done and he was very happy with it, I wasn't totally. I thought in many instances the 14 was too wide and the 24 mm of my 24 70 just not wide enough. Yes, I thought it would be fun, and I don't really want to do alot more than what he asked. It will mostly be higher end properties or lake properties.

Prior to this, I had already been looking and thinking I should add a wider lens. The lens I had already been considering prior to this was the 16 35 f4. The house the other day was very dark and the shots that I did at 2.8 using the 14mm Bower with off camera flash were fine DOF wise for the resolution they require.

To finish off the profile, I am a retired IT person, who lives in a very small town, and I mean very small. I do just very limited work that I am paid for and I never seek it out, it just happens to find me. What I earn from what little I do agree to do, I spend on gear, plus some of my own. I actually get more requests than I want but this one sounded like fun and I thought I would enjoy it. One of the upcoming projects he wants me to do is a big lodge on the lake with 3 homes and cabins on it.

I don't feel as if I have to totally justify what I spend With traveling and other things I do, I will use the equipment for other things as well as just fun too. I don't intend to go totally crazy. I just want to add one in the next month or so and perhaps one more later if I end up continuing with it. This will depend on how much it impacts his business as well as how much I enjoy it.

I do know what Canon offers but am not really that familiar with the other offerings. Particularly the crop vs FF models. That I find confusing. I find myself wishing they would all just use a standard code like EFS so that it was obvious. I don't want to accidentally buy something that will only work properly on my 7D2, I know some of them are intended for crops but will work on FF just with issues and I don't want that either. Right now, especially after reading the comments above, I am thinking add a 16 35 either 2.8 or f4, or similar very soon, and a 17 tse maybe later. Both of these I could also use for landscapes.







Oct 29, 2015 at 09:30 AM
Kathy White
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


jcolwell wrote:
I traded my 16-35/2.8L II for the 16-35/4L IS. I figured that I wouldn't miss the one stop in low light because I could compensate with an aďditional stop of ISO, with my 1DX and 6D. I was right. It's a noticeably better ultra-wide zoom for IQ at the edges and corners, plus the IS makes it more versatile for handheld shooting. The only reason to go f/2.8 would be if you're not able to get high enough shutter speeds at f/4.

OTOH, for interiors I almost always use my TS-E 17/4L. Any excuse for buying one, is a good excuse.
...Show more

Jim, you just put me back where I started. Not sure which to try for first. But thanks. I appreciate the confusion.



Oct 29, 2015 at 09:34 AM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


16-35/4 IS

You really don't need f/2.8 for interiors. Most shooting is going to want more DOF rather than less, so you're shooting 5.6 or 8 or 11 anyway.

IS ... sometimes you can't set up a tripod to get into certain smaller areas (i.e. bathrooms) and you are at awkward angles / positions holding your camera. The IS is helpful for those challenging small (camera shake) areas, and lower light (challenge to add quality light @ mirrors, position, etc.) needing longer SS speeds (although, newer ISO helps a bit there too).

TS-E is nice ... but 17mm isn't always your friend ... although it is pretty friendly.

For the money diff @ 16-35/4 IS vs. 17mm TS-E ... get the IS, and shoot it until you find yourself @ not having a 17 TS-E. My guess is you'll make plenty of good work and $$$ with your 16-35/4L IS long before you ever get for not having the TS-E

I'm not shooting RE much these days, but I used the Tammy 17-35 / 2.8 when I did. So, when the 16-35/4L IS came out (better corrected, IS, etc.) ... I jumped on it for the long haul should I return to shooting RE, not the 17 TS-E.

The new Tammy 15-30 / 2.8 VC ... it could be a viable contender (on spec) also, but I've got no experience with it yet. It's on my radar as a replacement to the 16-35/4 IS if I should happen to ever change to a different platform (i.e. Nikon or Sony). But, since I've got the 16-35/4 IS ... I'll probably stand pat with it. If I had nothing, those would be the two I'd look at the hardest.

Edited on Oct 29, 2015 at 10:18 AM · View previous versions



Oct 29, 2015 at 09:50 AM
Paulthelefty
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


I think you kinda answered your own question...

"At the resolution they need" is the key... Any of the combinations mentioned are just fine, so it comes down to taste and personal preference.

I respectfully disagree that you need a tilt shift to be "serious," I think that creates an artificial barrier to entry. I would LOVE to have one, and it would be useful in some situations, but for most of the routine real estate work I do it is not necessary.

Now, bracketing and blending is necessary. Flashes, maybe. I get by with just bracketing quite nicely. But I am shooting for agents, not magazines, and no real architecture.

Paul



Oct 29, 2015 at 10:00 AM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Kathy,
Thanks for the info. I'm a former pro who went back and got a Computer Science degree nearly 30 years ago. I'm on the cusp of retirement, planning on working 3 years past 65. IT has allowed me to afford photo toys I wouldn't have bought as a pro!

You are in a great situation, your real estate agent friend has seen the power of good photography and deals in high end properties. You should be able to earn back the cost of a new lens in no time!

I defer to Jim's advice since it is based on experience with the lenses. Even at 16mm, I don't think you want to be shooting @f2.8. My wide angle view camera lens' maximum aperture was f5.6! The 16-35/4L is not that expensive.

I understand that the Zeiss 15mm is an outstanding lens. Its use for you is more limited since it is a prime and manual focus. It also costs 2 1/2 times as much as the 16-35. I doubt that given the use of your photos online or in a brochure that the better optical quality of the Zeiss would be worth it. I realize I'm talking to the owner of a 200mm f2.0L IS, so maybe cost is not a problem ;-).

Have fun. You've found a great use for your retirement time and your photo interest. It's much better than some of my friends who sit at home watching news channels!

PS - I pulled the trigger on the 135 f2L in anticipation of an upcoming trip to Italy. Your photos taken with it helped nudge me into action. It is truly an amazing lens, even with limited use I've fallen in love with the results!



Oct 29, 2015 at 10:07 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Need wide Angle Options - Assistance please.


Kathy White wrote:
Jim, you just put me back where I started. Not sure which to try for first. But thanks. I appreciate the confusion.


Sorry, Kathy. You get what you pay for.

Seriously, I'd get the 16-35/4L IS first. It's a very capable lens that is a great solution for many situations. Paired with your 14/2.8, it will cover most interior requirements without needing to introduce too much perspective distortion (i.e. keep it pointed horizontally). The TS-E 17/4L is a fantastic lens, but it's highly specialized. Unless you have an obvious and immediate need for an ultra wide TS lens (and I don't think you do), then it makes good sense to go for the generalist solution, first.




Oct 29, 2015 at 10:08 AM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.