Timeline for Real estate photography: Low distortion lens VS high resolution lens?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 9, 2015 at 20:52 | comment | added | Jasen | @MichaelClark Thanks for the clarification. DavidRicherby Yes, barrel distortion. While I agree with these comments I don't think the OP's original question is being directly addressed, rather it has become "How to get real estate or architectural shots without (barrel) distortion". Maybe that should have been the question... | |
| May 9, 2015 at 16:11 | comment | added | user13451 | If one is dealing with pointing a lens up/down and regularly using it for architectural type work wouldn't it be sensible to spend the money for the Nikon 24mm f/3.5 PC lens? Canon 24 f/3.5 TS (or that 17mm f/4 TS) lens? Yes, they are expensive lenses... but if you are going to be using that feature... | |
| May 9, 2015 at 13:28 | comment | added | Michael C | In the specific case referred to in your prior comment: pointing the camera upwards or downwards. | |
| May 9, 2015 at 12:46 | comment | added | David Richerby | @MichaelClark Whether that's the only solution depends on exactly what is being photographed, of course. For interior shots of rooms of typical height, it's easy to point the camera horizontally. For an exterior shot of a typical 2-storey building, you don't need a super-wide lens. If, say, a 24mm lens is enough to get the whole house in the frame with the camera angled upwards, you could either use a 24mm T/S lens to correct the verticals or use a wider-angle non-T/S lens, hold the camera horizontally and crop the extra foreground (or, hey, that foreground is the front yard so maybe keep it.) | |
| May 9, 2015 at 12:17 | comment | added | Michael C | In which case the only real solution is a tilt/shift lens. | |
| May 9, 2015 at 10:15 | comment | added | David Richerby | @Jasen What do you mean by "wide-angle distortion"? If you mean, e.g., barrel distortion, that can occur with any lens. If you mean, e.g., strongly converging verticals, that can also occur with any lens. That effect is more pronounced with wide-angle lenses because they include verticals farther from the centre of the frame. The solution to that is to make sure that the camera is level: the cause is pointing the camera upwards (or downwards) from the horizontal, not using a wide-angle lens. | |
| May 9, 2015 at 1:15 | history | edited | Michael C | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 141 characters in body
|
| May 9, 2015 at 1:12 | comment | added | Michael C | What I am suggesting is that the best end result for the specific application may not be the higher resolution, highly distorted lens. | |
| May 8, 2015 at 23:58 | comment | added | damned truths | @Jasen I think Michael is suggesting that it is a trade-off, rather than a "don't do it" situation. So the photographer must weigh up whether it is needed for a particular situation, and since, in this case it is a must, then the photographer will use the technique with the highest end resolution. | |
| May 8, 2015 at 23:17 | comment | added | ths | Interesting, i knew of course that image warping must degrade the image somewhat, but i'm astonished by the amount in the test. | |
| May 8, 2015 at 23:07 | comment | added | Jasen | Are you suggesting not to perform correction? With real estate photography any significant wide angle distortion is not acceptable. So correction will be performed regardless of lens sharpness. | |
| May 8, 2015 at 22:34 | history | answered | Michael C | CC BY-SA 3.0 |