|
the architect firm i work for has the ef 16-35mm f2.8.. works perfectly for both photographing whole buildings, smaller parts of a building and small architectural models.. i think you should get something with a wide angle, but to also have the option to go to 35mm is very nice and a big difference from 24mm -and to me at least much more worth it than what the difference from 16-14mm makes.. dont know about tilt and shift though.. havent tried it.. i've heard it being used for architectural models, but for real buildings i dont know how it will come out -from an architectural point of view..
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
thanks for that Joaaso, makes some sense
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Hi chrisps
I can't answer exactly what kind of lens suites best your interests, allthought with my simple equipment i always use photoshop to correct perspectives and that is a lot of work.. If a lens could do that instantly you save a big amount of time...
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
your equipment is perfect and a 16-35mm f2.8 Completes your Job!
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
On tilt and shift, on those rare occasions when I want to strip perspective out of an architectural shot for ironic / abstract purposes, I find PS Elements does a perfectly reasonable job (in just a couple of seconds, using the "Correct Camera Distortion" filter). OK, the towers are a bit squiffy at the tops, but this is an extreme example of the type.
The thing to remember is to allow a bigger frame around your subject when you compose in the camera, to allow for the "tilting" in Elements, otherwise you can find you are losing part of the building when you tilt.
Incidentally, this is with Sigma 10-20mm, my favourite architectural lens, but unfortunately no use on your full frame sensor.
Originally posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
Stringendo edited this topic 45 months ago.
|
|
|
thanks Stringendo, that was very helpful, so in essence vertical lines are not essential or more importantly expected in top class architectural photos
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
 |
Moyen Format [deleted] says:
No
perspective control is very important in top class architectural shots. You have to control the perspective with movements between the lens and film plane. Hence the use of monorail view cameras or tilt and shift lenses.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
thanks Moyen, I had thought so, but is the digital straightening acceptable or is a tilt and shift a must to stop all that pixel elongation etc. etc
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Moyen Format [deleted] says:
Well i'm not sure.
But i'm a purist really and i think if you can do it without photoshop then all the better. I would rather gain skills as a photographer then as a photoshop pro. If you have the funds for a tilt and shift lens then i would recommend buying one and leave the photoshopping to others.
On a side not for the price of a tilt and shift lens you could buy a cheap monorail camera that has amazing movements. I'm not sure if you are a film or digital user though.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
There's no right or wrong about vertical lines. It all depends what you're trying to do. Personally, if I'm not "correcting" the verticals, then I'm overemphasising the convergences by using the widest possible angle, getting low and looking up! The effect is totally different - not more or less "right" - than preserving verticals. Compare the different treatment of these two otherwise similar subjects. Personally, I like them both.
I totally agree with moyen format that - with this as with other techniques - if you can get the effect in the camera it's more rewarding and arguably more skillful than "correcting" it afterwards in photoshop. Absolutely. But the latter is cheaper, if you don't happen to have the spare cash for those clever lenses, so in that case why not give it a go? It's not a bad compromise. Clearly, however, if you're talking about supplying professional-standard photos that are perspective-free, then only the best will ultimately do, and photoshop trickery will not.
Originally posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
Stringendo edited this topic 45 months ago.
|
|
Moyen Format [deleted] says:
Very nice shots stringendo
True what you are saying about using converging angles to your advantage and really emphasising them as well.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
thanks to you both for taking the time to give such intelligent and informed comment and advice which has really been a big help to me
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Welcome anytime
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
An architectural view camera can do tilt and shift with any lens. The specifically tilt-shift lens is a compromise to allow owners of non-view cameras to do some tilt-shift stuff, the problem being that you're restricted to the use of that lens for tilt-shift work.
If you do it in software, however, you can do it with any lens, just like a view camera. Of course you lose some detail resolution in remapping all those pixels, so if you want to use software to do it, you must start with enough of a surplus of pixels and detail resolution to stand the losses of the software processing and cropping. Twice as much is a good guideline, e.g. if you want to end up with a sharp 8MP image after software perspective adjustments, you should start with something like a sharp 16MP.
If you only do small adjustments to perspective you won't need so much extra.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Thanks architecturephoto and chris, great stuff, very welcome and informative views
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I never correct perspective distortion in post editing and never will. Simply because there will be some cropping to be done after the correction and that ruins the composition if I did not take it into consideration at the point of taking the photo.
Architectural photography is not like others as in a great deal of time has to be spent to produce something good and that's part of the fun really. One of the fundamentals is to get your lines lined up.
Shift lenses are almost a necessacity for buildings if you can afford them. Wide lenses are also important, depending on how you approach subjects. I suggest you re-look into your past works and evaluate if you need shift lenses.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
thanks A P good advice
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
thanks to you all, I have ordered the 14-24, I think I need something at the wider end, thanks to all your comments in helping me make my decision.
I am still considering buying the 24PC tilt shift as well, but sometimes wonder if it will be wide enough when I need it most.
Most architects I speak to say it is essential the perspective is corrected.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
I'd only say again, it depends what you are trying to do. What are the shots for? Architects might like their creations rendered without perspective, but photographers might have their own views on what they want to create with the raw materials on offer.
And after all, one's eyes do not "correct perspective" :o)
Whatever you do, have fun.
Originally posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
Stringendo edited this topic 45 months ago.
|
|
|
In the capacity of an architect in practice and a project photographer, correcting perspective distortion is an important part of architectural photographer because the last thing you'd ever want to do is to give your clients a drawing or photo that does not portrait their buildings in the correct manner.
There are exceptions though, if you can use the distortion to your advantage.
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I use 3 lenses on a full frame Canon:
- Sigma 12-24
- 24 TS-E
- EF 24-70L
Posted 45 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I've never seen a thread that contained so much good advice. I think I may still be able to offer a little additional info. The following numbers are for I.D. only and not priority or import.
1.) Perspective is extremely important in architecture. Corrected or not depends on end use and/or taste. The others already told you that. Stringendo’s sample photos are perfect examples. However if the perspective is perfectly perpendicular it tends to be off-putting to ordinary viewers. It becomes necessary to leave at least a small amount in to maintain a natural look. Even Stringendos corrected sample has just a tiny hint of perspective.
2.) A tilt and shift system delivers slightly better results than perspective correction in software. Especially as the number of vanishing points increases. One vanishing point and software is great. Two vanishing points software is O.K. Three vanishing points software is poor to bad.
3.) Having just stated number two, small perspective corrections in software are always easy and frequently desirable. I don’t think there is any photographer who always sees everything in the viewfinder. Especially with the screens on the back of a digital camera.
4.) Stringendos remark about needing extra space around the image to be corrected is true. It's been my experience that correcting the perspective in software and then cropping tends to defeat the use of the wide angle lens in the first place. Unless you use an ultra wide angle lens (20mm or wider FX format) and correct most of the perspective in the camera by properly aiming the lens and then crop off the excess ceiling or floor that usually results. (I will try to add descriptive photos later)
5.) When it comes to the loss of resolution mentioned by Chris_Malcolm, shooting RAW files with a camera that can deliver 12 or 14 bit per color and processing them with software that works in 16 bits per color is like doubling the number of pixels and that pesky pixel elongation becomes a non issue.
6.) Don't forget that nearly all wide angle lenses also require correction for barrel distortion.
7.) On those occasions when you’re only dealing with one or two vanishing points (rare in architecture), a two or three shot panoramic can be superior to any wide angle lens.
Originally posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
Pixel-Pusher edited this topic 44 months ago.
|
|
You can get the 10-22mm or the 16-35mm f/2.8L ll. Both are great lens for architectural photography.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Pixel-Pusher Thank you! That's fabulously useful.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I agree with others, this is probably the best thread I've seen on flickr. Lots of great information in here.
I'll add that I shoot with the following...
PC 24mm f3.5 Nikkor
50mm f1.4
85mm 1.8
Sigma 10-20mm (this isn't a lens you would want to use professionally, but it must make due before I buy the 14-24 2.8)
Originally posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
Matthew Carbone edited this topic 44 months ago.
|
|
|
Mr. Cooper, are you using the Sigma 10-20 on a full-frame camera or on a DX/1.6 sensor?
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I use the Sigma 10-20 on a D80 (DX sensor) for Real Estate and it's a great lens. There are a few shots with it in my photostream, but I don't post many of my RE Photography shots on Flickr.
Even today many RE Photographers use this lens.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
24mm straight
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Years ago when I shot film with my Pentak K1000. I had my best results with a 28-200. It was a good all around lense for travelling light and fast.
For taking quality shots where you want your verticals straight it was no good but I kept lense swapping to a minimum and it was all for my mental reconning later.
Best thing to know when picking your setup is what you want to shoot and how you want it to be seen. I love Stringendo's two shots above. Sometimes it is not about the lense, but your way of working with it's limitations and exploiting them.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
|
Sigma 10-20 on a DX. Its fine lens and you can get by with it but its not a professional lens. Its all over the place and a hassle to correct under many circumstances.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The 12-24 of Sigma is excellent for full-frame camera and for the architecture shots.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
The Canon 24 TS is my primary lens when I need to keep things straight. I use it allot when I make landscape shots of very long buildings. When in Vertical position it can cover a very wide view.
Great lens but at 900.00 US dollars can be out of range for the armature.
My 20-35 Is a great lens. I have used it for many years and is still going strong.
Posted 44 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Inno' G. Okorji [deleted] says:
I came across this lens in eBay and you can use it on a Canon EOS with adapter.
cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1104559...
Posted 31 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Better understanding of Art alone would help heaps.
Better understanding of Architecture would help a lot.
Some more education and training along those lines might also help.
Better understanding of volumes and shapes is very important.
Some understanding of color or light vs shadows might make a huge difference in color or bw photos.
And the list can go on for a while.
Only after that you will need a basic camera with manual settings and some lens. But at that point you will know that the relation between you, the camera, the subject and the environment all around is... to employ some numbering - 95% while the camera and lens count for about 2-3%, the rest being plain luck.
Sorry to break your game.
Otherwise go for the most expensive items you can get so others could afford better equipment too.
Posted 31 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
As well as a wide angle I think you should go for a prime such as an 85 or a 135. The reason I say this is that it'll let you focus on specific parts of the building that make the architecture so good... I don't particularly think it's a great idea to try and get in as much of the building as possible in one frame... that often leads to information overload and distortion on the buildings actual physical structure.
Try a combination of both. I have an 85 and a 17-40.
Posted 31 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Hey,
So what did you end up with?
I have a nikon 14-24mmf2.8 Photoshop hrdsoft and all kinds of cool stuff but always looking for something better, well different
I do a lot of interior and outside architecture.
Some stuff in here: gallery.me.com/sragnar
Would love to learn from you!!
Posted 19 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Posted 19 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I have the Nikon 24mm PC but I find a 28mm PC F4 more useful. I was lucky I picked up an old but immaculate example a short time ago. If you do find one check that the serial No is more than 1890900 as ones before that are not compatible with the D3. Robert Mullan
Posted 18 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I use a 10-20 Sigma for most of my wide shots. Then lens correction afterwards. I really want a tilt and shift lens.. but well its too much :(
I use a zoom 18-200 to get closer detail shots as well.
Posted 18 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Nikon VR2 18-200. 18 is good enough for wide angle without too much distortion. If you are an architect you need to zoom into details with the 200mm and vr will help for that length. I got around a f25 and 32 on the lens for long exposure sharpness.
Posted 17 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
I don't have as much "cred" as some of the people posting here but I love my 90mm for my 4x5 camera. It's about the same as a 20mm for a full-frame DSLR and the shifts are amazing.
The next lens I'm getting for my 5D will be a 24mm TS-E II. I use the shift so frequently for my 4x5, even for landscape work, that I feel I have to have it for my DSLR.
Even when panning up to look at something, it can keep the perspective from getting "out of hand".
Posted 17 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
camerarch I got around a f25 and 32 on the lens for long exposure sharpness.
You're shooting yourself in the foot by stopping down that far. Diffraction will start to soften the image around f11, steadily degrading sharpness the more you stop down beyond that.
www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photograp...
Posted 16 months ago.
(permalink)
|
|
Is there a "right" automobile? Or a "right" pair of pants? Of course not. Just as there is no "right" lens for architectural photography.
For one image you might need the pull of a telephoto. For another a macro lens. For another a fisheye or rectiliniear wide angle lens.
And that's just for 35mm/DSLR work. What about 4x5? Then we start all over again...
For 4x5 my lens of choice is my Nikkor 90mm f4.5!
Near the top of this Thread someone mentioned architectural models. For that work I like to use my 90mm lens on my 4x5 view camera. With the bellows extended to focus closely I have the advantages of shift, tilt, rise, fall and swing. You can't get all that with a Nikon or Canon shift/tilt lens. Yeah getting accurate focus is a bear but WOW the 4x5 chromes look great!
Terry Thomas...
the photographer
Atlanta, Georgia USA
www.TerryThomasPhotos.com
Originally posted 16 months ago.
(permalink)
AtlantaTerry edited this topic 16 months ago.
|
Would you like to comment?
Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).
|
Architecture /
Discuss
camerarch I got around a f25 and 32 on the lens for long exposure sharpness. 
Feed – Subscribe to Architecture discussion threads
