Lens for real estate photography

Workingdog · 03-05-2012, 10:25 AM

What would be a good lens choice for doing home interiors that won't cost an arm and a leg? The 18mm end of my Sigma 18-50 just doesn't get as wide as I'd like. Or are the low cost and ultra wide requirements mutually exclusive?

**boriscleto** · 03-05-2012, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Workingdog

Or are the low cost and ultra wide requirements mutually exclusive?

We have a winner!

You would probably be better off investing in some panoramic stitching software.

Docrwm · 03-05-2012, 10:29 AM

<$500 Tamron 10-24, best combination of lower cost, good warranty, nice range, and better QA than Sigma.

adpo · 03-05-2012, 10:31 AM

if you don't mind dealing with distortion and manual focus, check out the samyang/rokinon/bower/vivitar 14mm f/2.8. It's stupidly sharp and quite wide

Na Horuk · 03-05-2012, 10:46 AM

Yes, maybe the Samyang, but you would probably want to use software to fix the distortion. Also, maybe you could get an old manual lens (in m42 mount), but those rarely go wider than 18mm anyway. Or look into the Pentax 15mm f4, if its not too expensive.

Docrwm · 03-05-2012, 11:25 AM

Does LR3 have the lens info on the Samyang 14?

RioRico · 03-05-2012, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

<$500 Tamron 10-24, best combination of lower cost, good warranty, nice range, and better QA than Sigma.

What he said. Exactly right. I've recently shot my second residence, a tiny old adobe of 800 square feet, and the Tamron 10-24 even works in rooms only 6 feet wide. I've also used it in larger interiors and exteriors. Stop down a little for maximum DOF.

Workingdog · 03-05-2012, 12:47 PM

Thanks folks. I'll have a look at the Tammy.

imtheguy · 03-05-2012, 01:17 PM

Dont know if this helps but its a shot i took last month at 10mm with the Pentax 10-17mm. I believe its advertised as 180degree span on diagonal. Point level with the horizon and it stays straight with only the off-center window frames distorting. I could square it up but then it would be no wider than my rectiliner da15mm lens. This room is about 10' in diameter.

If you cant work with a fisheye, I would think the bang for the buck might be the da16-45 if 16mm is wide enough. Very affordable and lots of used copies around. Noticebly wider than 18mm.

Swift1 · 03-05-2012, 01:18 PM

I've used the DA 16-45 for shooting the interiors of some of the houses I've built and it worked pretty good actually. It's no 10mm or 14mm but it is pretty affordable.
Here's a few of mine from the 16-45mm

alphanerd · 03-05-2012, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Yes, maybe the Samyang, but you would probably want to use software to fix the distortion. Also, maybe you could get an old manual lens (in m42 mount), but those rarely go wider than 18mm anyway. Or look into the Pentax 15mm f4, if its not too expensive.

I have a 15mm f4, which I love, but for real estate photography, I want something wider. This is spoken as someone looking at houses.

RioRico · 03-05-2012, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by imtheguy

Dont know if this helps but its a shot i took last month at 10mm with the Pentax 10-17mm. I believe its advertised as 180degree span on diagonal.

The DA10-17 (the lens that drove me to Pentax) is great, but rather specialized, and IMHO isn't really appropriate for most real-estate photography. It's fine for geodesic domes and yurts, and for artsy shots, but I'd be leery of listings illustrated solely by fisheye shots.

GaryH · 03-05-2012, 03:30 PM

I used the fisheye to take interior pictures of our house in San Antonio. The "professional guy" came out and used a Sigma 10-20mm to do a virtual tour of the house. Ended up using my pictures for the stills and his for the virtual tour.
The 10-17 worked great but if I were doing real estate photos every day, I would look at either the Sigma or the Tamron.

GaryH · 03-05-2012, 03:39 PM

Here are a few from the real estate ad.
This is what you get with the 10-17mm

spyderweber · 03-05-2012, 06:12 PM

I have both the Tamron 10-24 and Sigma 8-16 that I use for real estate. I have to say I really like the Tamron, except that I have to turn off the auto-focus because mine essentially worthless. Manual focusing isn't a big deal to me though. The distortion isn't as bad as the 10-17 shown above. Lightroom has a profile to correct the distortion as a RAW file, so that isn't a big deal either. I like that the Sigma gets down to 8 mm, and the auto focus actually works most of the time, but when used on a Pentax, anything shot between 8 and 10 mm is not recorded in the correct place in the EXIF data to be able to apply the lens correction profile in Lightroom. It requires extra steps to correct the distortion. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, but considering the cost and extra effort involved with going below 10mm, I like the Tamron.

03-05-2012, 10:25 AM	#1
Workingdog Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: York, PA Photos: Gallery Posts: 736	Lens for real estate photography What would be a good lens choice for doing home interiors that won't cost an arm and a leg? The 18mm end of my Sigma 18-50 just doesn't get as wide as I'd like. Or are the low cost and ultra wide requirements mutually exclusive?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
real estate photography help?	Unregistered User	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	32	09-11-2011 01:19 PM
Misc Real-estate Photography	Unregistered User	Photo Critique	13	02-25-2011 10:29 PM
Has anyone done real estate photography before?	jennverr	Photographic Technique	19	02-02-2011 07:17 AM
What is the best ultra wide lens for real estate photography?	HermanLee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	11-07-2010 11:54 AM
Real Estate Photography	spun	Photographic Industry and Professionals	16	08-12-2009 09:43 AM

03-05-2012, 10:29 AM	#2
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Workingdog Or are the low cost and ultra wide requirements mutually exclusive? We have a winner! You would probably be better off investing in some panoramic stitching software.

03-05-2012, 10:29 AM	#3
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	<$500 Tamron 10-24, best combination of lower cost, good warranty, nice range, and better QA than Sigma.

03-05-2012, 10:31 AM	#4
adpo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 888	if you don't mind dealing with distortion and manual focus, check out the samyang/rokinon/bower/vivitar 14mm f/2.8. It's stupidly sharp and quite wide

03-05-2012, 10:46 AM	#5
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Yes, maybe the Samyang, but you would probably want to use software to fix the distortion. Also, maybe you could get an old manual lens (in m42 mount), but those rarely go wider than 18mm anyway. Or look into the Pentax 15mm f4, if its not too expensive.

03-05-2012, 11:25 AM	#6
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Does LR3 have the lens info on the Samyang 14?

03-05-2012, 12:18 PM	#7
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Docrwm <$500 Tamron 10-24, best combination of lower cost, good warranty, nice range, and better QA than Sigma. What he said. Exactly right. I've recently shot my second residence, a tiny old adobe of 800 square feet, and the Tamron 10-24 even works in rooms only 6 feet wide. I've also used it in larger interiors and exteriors. Stop down a little for maximum DOF.

03-05-2012, 12:47 PM	#8
Workingdog Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: York, PA Photos: Gallery Posts: 736 Original Poster	Thanks folks. I'll have a look at the Tammy.

03-05-2012, 01:17 PM	#9
imtheguy Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Virginia Beach Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,950	Dont know if this helps but its a shot i took last month at 10mm with the Pentax 10-17mm. I believe its advertised as 180degree span on diagonal. Point level with the horizon and it stays straight with only the off-center window frames distorting. I could square it up but then it would be no wider than my rectiliner da15mm lens. This room is about 10' in diameter. If you cant work with a fisheye, I would think the bang for the buck might be the da16-45 if 16mm is wide enough. Very affordable and lots of used copies around. Noticebly wider than 18mm.

03-05-2012, 01:18 PM	#10
Swift1 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Oregon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,079	I've used the DA 16-45 for shooting the interiors of some of the houses I've built and it worked pretty good actually. It's no 10mm or 14mm but it is pretty affordable. Here's a few of mine from the 16-45mm

03-05-2012, 01:20 PM	#11
alphanerd Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 119	Originally posted by Na Horuk Yes, maybe the Samyang, but you would probably want to use software to fix the distortion. Also, maybe you could get an old manual lens (in m42 mount), but those rarely go wider than 18mm anyway. Or look into the Pentax 15mm f4, if its not too expensive. I have a 15mm f4, which I love, but for real estate photography, I want something wider. This is spoken as someone looking at houses.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-05-2012, 01:29 PM	#12
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by imtheguy Dont know if this helps but its a shot i took last month at 10mm with the Pentax 10-17mm. I believe its advertised as 180degree span on diagonal. The DA10-17 (the lens that drove me to Pentax) is great, but rather specialized, and IMHO isn't really appropriate for most real-estate photography. It's fine for geodesic domes and yurts, and for artsy shots, but I'd be leery of listings illustrated solely by fisheye shots.

03-05-2012, 03:30 PM	#13
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	I used the fisheye to take interior pictures of our house in San Antonio. The "professional guy" came out and used a Sigma 10-20mm to do a virtual tour of the house. Ended up using my pictures for the stills and his for the virtual tour. The 10-17 worked great but if I were doing real estate photos every day, I would look at either the Sigma or the Tamron.

03-05-2012, 06:12 PM	#15
spyderweber New Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Denver Photos: Gallery Posts: 20	I have both the Tamron 10-24 and Sigma 8-16 that I use for real estate. I have to say I really like the Tamron, except that I have to turn off the auto-focus because mine essentially worthless. Manual focusing isn't a big deal to me though. The distortion isn't as bad as the 10-17 shown above. Lightroom has a profile to correct the distortion as a RAW file, so that isn't a big deal either. I like that the Sigma gets down to 8 mm, and the auto focus actually works most of the time, but when used on a Pentax, anything shot between 8 and 10 mm is not recorded in the correct place in the EXIF data to be able to apply the lens correction profile in Lightroom. It requires extra steps to correct the distortion. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, but considering the cost and extra effort involved with going below 10mm, I like the Tamron.