[Dnabors]

I find myself getting more and more interiors assignments, and currently my only "wide" lens is the kit 18-55mm that came with my K10D. So, I'm saving up for and researching wider lenses with (hopefully) better optics, esp. sharpness. Problem is, I can't really afford anything in the $600-700+ range. Any suggestions?

[k100d]

the problem with the crop factor is old wide lenses are now normal
if you want to go a bit wider, you can try the 16-45 lens , or if you're on a budget and still need wider, a cheap second hand 20mm lens with a film SLR

i think the DA14 is probably out of your budget and no one knows when the DA 15 limited will be out

[Gooshin]

you have 4 options

Sigma 10-20
Pentax 12-24
Pentax DA14

these are rectalinear

then you can opt for

Zenitar 16mm
Pentax 10-17

these are fisheye

the cheapest one is the Zenitar 16mm, its a solid piece of russian steel and costs cheap (can be had for 150-200 depending where you find it)

the downside is that it has no auto focus and can only be used in M mode, the upside is that its a sick lens.

[pentagor]

Well, it depends, how much wide you need to go. As some mentioned there is Sigma 10-20, Pentax 12-24 and soon to be Tamron 10-24. You can go for FE Pentax 10-17 or even Zenitar 16mm.
If you don't need to go so much wide, you can use Pentax 16-45 or even Sigma 17-70, which is IMO very good lens for the money.

There is maybe one interesting thing. I just got myself a used film SLR (MX-7) and put the Pentax DA kit lens on it. There is some heavy vigneting at 18mm, but it is almost perfect at 22mm. As the Film SLR has a 35mm film, 22mm are really wide!!

[pixelpruner]

I have the sig 10-20 and would highly recommend it! I'm an architecture student and use it extensively for interior and exterior building photography. There is a lot of corner distortion at 10mm, but it's worth it for how much you can fit in. I also find I'm able to compose decent shots, even with strong perspective, as wide at 10mm. however, get people in your viewfinder and you have to position them right in the middle or... well they look squished. very squished... the photozone review is a fair reflection of my lens' performance. Oh and feel free to contact me if you want me to upload some samples.

[clawhammer]

you mention that it is probably a little out of your price range, but I got the DA 14 for taking interior shots and love it. The distortion on this lens is almost a non-issue. It is beautifully built, sharp, and good at controlling PF, and I find myself using it more and more for other stuff as well. truly a great lens.

[thePiRaTE!!]

Faced with the same dilemma as yourself, I went to my local camera store and tried a Sigma 10-20. I took some room shots and wall shots to get a feel and instantly noticed the massive FOV. After the warm glow of that, I found the distortion and vignette was noteably severe esp at 10mm. For artistic work, its a cool effect, but for real estate it made a small room look huge. Some realtors might like that I guess, or you could correct that sort of thing in PP... when I brought this up with my guy there, it was suggested I'd be better off to invest in a good tripod, make use of my 31 and splice shots if necessary. Now I'm researching a good tripod instead, heh.

Just another 2 cents to consider.

[Canada_Rockies]

Faced with the same dilemma as yourself, I went to my local camera store and tried a Sigma 10-20. I took some room shots and wall shots to get a feel and instantly noticed the massive FOV. After the warm glow of that, I found the distortion and vignette was noteably severe esp at 10mm. For artistic work, its a cool effect, but for real estate it made a small room look huge. Some realtors might like that I guess, or you could correct that sort of thing in PP... when I brought this up with my guy there, it was suggested I'd be better off to invest in a good tripod, make use of my 31 and splice shots if necessary. Now I'm researching a good tripod instead, heh.

Just another 2 cents to consider.

Life is a bunch of decisions, for sure. You could create a panorama with your 31 that would do the job nicely. One hint for interiors: the center of the lens should be exactly half way up the height of the wall. This will at least reduce or eliminate perspective distortion from the mix.

You can see some interior shots I took on my Flickr site, and see the effects of these distortions on the images. The 12-24 shot on the site looks quite odd because I was considerably less than 48" from the floor when I took the shot. If you want, I'll take the same room (which has since been finished, thank the Lord) from a tripod with the lens at 4 feet up.

You can also see what can be done with a shot with perspective distortion using post processing in the DxO samples on the 16-50. The perspective control is there in most software. You just draw two lines that are supposed to be parallel an tell the program "Go".

[Dnabors]

Thanks for the help, everybody! I'm still mulling over all of the info, but feel much better prepared now. I can't believe I never considered slicing - that's a great idea!

[konraDarnok]

Thanks for the help, everybody! I'm still mulling over all of the info, but feel much better prepared now. I can't believe I never considered slicing - that's a great idea!

AutoStitch

This program does a fantastic job. And it's free.

[bigben91682]

I was on Cunard's Queen Mary 2 a few weeks ago and took some interior shots with the DA 10-17. Even with the fish eye distortion you get a good idea of the granduer of the interior spaces. I think the FE effect is actually quite effective depending on how you want to represent the interior space you are shooting...be it a "real" representation with a stitched image or rectilinear wide angle, or an exaggerated view with FE distortion.

Some PP on these but no de-fishing..

[ryan s]

the cheapest one is the Zenitar 16mm, its a solid piece of russian steel and costs cheap (can be had for 150-200 depending where you find it)

the downside is that it has no auto focus and can only be used in M mode, the upside is that its a sick lens.

Word...I'm hooked on it like a fiend. I've found it only needs focusing if there's something like 3ft away from the lens (which rocks).

Side note...don't try walking down stairs with the cam to your eye...it's weird...lol leaving it at that

[Lowell Goudge]

you have 4 options

Sigma 10-20
Pentax 12-24
Pentax DA14

these are rectalinear

then you can opt for

Zenitar 16mm
Pentax 10-17

these are fisheye

the cheapest one is the Zenitar 16mm, its a solid piece of russian steel and costs cheap (can be had for 150-200 depending where you find it)

the downside is that it has no auto focus and can only be used in M mode, the upside is that its a sick lens.

Actually one more Sigma 12-24mm EX DG, and soon the tamron 10-24mm.

From all test reports I have seen the sigma 12-24 is a better lens than the 10-20 and is full frame also but I believe slower and bigger due to the image circle it has to cover.

I have the 10-20 and use it for more than interiors. It is my principle sightseeing lens, especially when in a foreign city since you usually can't step back far enough, or if you can, you get a lot of visual pollution (overheat trolley wires etc...)

[713alan]

There is also the Sigma 14/f2.8 which is a rectalinear lens.

[hll]

wait for tamron 10-24....
if you don't shoot in low light 12-24 sigma is for full frame, you should see its samples. i don't know whether it is as sharp as 12-24 pentax....