Reading mode: Light Dark

What lens are you using for architecture?

Go to last post
T

tesch

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
426
Solutions
1
Reaction score
29
Location
San Francisco, CA, US
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
 
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
How about one of the wider canon FDs? They're quite affordable and pretty good optic wise.

You may also want to look into the 24mm F2 ZA, but that's not what I'd call affordable :P
 
sjredo said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
How about one of the wider canon FDs? They're quite affordable and pretty good optic wise.

You may also want to look into the 24mm F2 ZA, but that's not what I'd call affordable :P
Click to expand...
I like the Olympus OM 24mm f/2.8 on a Kiron shift-adapter. This lens performs rather well on the A7, and the FOV is good for architecture.

Compare the two images below: the Touit 12mm f/2.8 is a 'better' lens on the A6000, with a wider FOV, but the geometric distortion is very noticeable.

You can correct for this in post (I use DxO viewpoint), but I find that it also crops the pictures to less than what I can get with the OM24 on a shift-adapter.

For architecture, being able to pre-view the effect of the shift is quite helpful.

As to the lens quality - I think it is rather acceptable. Images below were not 'pushed' in LR, just sharpened a tad, with nothing else done to them. On my monitor, the Touit has more vivid colors, but this can be overcome by moving the sliders - the OM24 has a different coating, changing the color rendering (JPG).



OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift

OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift



Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).

Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).



--
Cheers,
Henry
 
blue_skies said:
sjredo said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
How about one of the wider canon FDs? They're quite affordable and pretty good optic wise.

You may also want to look into the 24mm F2 ZA, but that's not what I'd call affordable :P
Click to expand...
I like the Olympus OM 24mm f/2.8 on a Kiron shift-adapter. This lens performs rather well on the A7, and the FOV is good for architecture.

Compare the two images below: the Touit 12mm f/2.8 is a 'better' lens on the A6000, with a wider FOV, but the geometric distortion is very noticeable.

You can correct for this in post (I use DxO viewpoint), but I find that it also crops the pictures to less than what I can get with the OM24 on a shift-adapter.

For architecture, being able to pre-view the effect of the shift is quite helpful.

As to the lens quality - I think it is rather acceptable. Images below were not 'pushed' in LR, just sharpened a tad, with nothing else done to them. On my monitor, the Touit has more vivid colors, but this can be overcome by moving the sliders - the OM24 has a different coating, changing the color rendering (JPG).



OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift

OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift



Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).

Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).



--
Cheers,
Henry
Click to expand...
This is a great option! You have swayed me to the Oly! So did you choose the Oly because you thought it was the best lens for your architecture or did you already have one. I'm asking because now I'm looking at the shift adapters that are available and there are choices for Nikon, Minolta and Contax.........the plot thickens!
 
The Sony E-10-18 might be a natural choice for architecture or real estate. It has also been used with the A7 camera, with the rear baffle removed. Beyond my price range, though. I'm still using the E16 with the UWA as required.
 

Attachments

  • 3032846.jpg
    3032846.jpg
    730.5 KB · Views: 0
I posted that.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I noticed that Sony didn't have prime lenses below 30mm. That means no low mm wide angle on primes. I thought that was interesting. I also thought it was strange to go from 35mm prime to 30mm prime in their product portfolio as this would not be a very big difference. I've seen third party lenses down around 24mm, which I'm guessing is closer to what what would be used for architecture. It could be even lower, but I'm new to photography.
 
Last edited:
tesch said:
tesch said:
sjredo said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
How about one of the wider canon FDs? They're quite affordable and pretty good optic wise.

You may also want to look into the 24mm F2 ZA, but that's not what I'd call affordable :P
Click to expand...
I like the Olympus OM 24mm f/2.8 on a Kiron shift-adapter. This lens performs rather well on the A7, and the FOV is good for architecture.

Compare the two images below: the Touit 12mm f/2.8 is a 'better' lens on the A6000, with a wider FOV, but the geometric distortion is very noticeable.

You can correct for this in post (I use DxO viewpoint), but I find that it also crops the pictures to less than what I can get with the OM24 on a shift-adapter.

For architecture, being able to pre-view the effect of the shift is quite helpful.

As to the lens quality - I think it is rather acceptable. Images below were not 'pushed' in LR, just sharpened a tad, with nothing else done to them. On my monitor, the Touit has more vivid colors, but this can be overcome by moving the sliders - the OM24 has a different coating, changing the color rendering (JPG).

OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift

OM24 on shift-adapter on A7 - see the vignetting at maximum shift

Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).

Touit12 on A6000 (18mm eq. FOV).

--
Cheers,
Henry
Click to expand...
This is a great option! You have swayed me to the Oly! So did you choose the Oly because you thought it was the best lens for your architecture or did you already have one. I'm asking because now I'm looking at the shift adapters that are available and there are choices for Nikon, Minolta and Contax.........the plot thickens!
Click to expand...
I already had the Oly - adding the shift (and also a tilt) adapter was natural.

I was hoping that it would work on the full-frame, and the vignetting is visible, but doesn't even require removal at times.

As FF wide-angle lenses go, the OM24 is a pretty good one by itself. I prefer using it over the CV21/4, the latter being wider but also being prone to vignetting (magenta) shift.

--
Cheers,
Henry
 
jack scholl said:
I wouldn't forget the SEL1018 for architecture. We have used it quite often for that purpose. And it is great for indoor shooting as well with the OS. Not cheap, but a very nice lens.



Jack
Click to expand...
Agreed, but the OP's question was for the A7, as in FF. I would not recommend the E1018 for this, even though it does cover the FF sensor, but only around 13mm and with some edge/corner softening (and likely no correction).

I do find 24 in FF, and 16 in APS-C, to be about the 'widest' that works for architecture. You can frame wide, as in your image, and place building on center-line to mitigate the effects, but the distortion is usually detracting, and encourages cleanup in post.



24mm on FF (16mm on APS-C), framed wide - showing geometric distortion, which gets worse if wider FL

24mm on FF (16mm on APS-C), framed wide - showing geometric distortion, which gets worse if wider FL



Using Tilt function in image above.

Using Tilt function in image above.



--
Cheers,
Henry
 
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
So this is a paid work? You need more pixels, the A7R maybe preferred. As to lens, you can't beat the Canon EF TSE17L. (If you can carry a tripod, etc, there are other good/even better solutions with shift adapters for A7R or D810). You want a lens with/offers shift capability. Obviously there are price to pay.

Steven
 
Steven-T said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
So this is a paid work? You need more pixels, the A7R maybe preferred. As to lens, you can't beat the Canon EF TSE17L. (If you can carry a tripod, etc, there are other good/even better solutions with shift adapters for A7R or D810). You want a lens with/offers shift capability. Obviously there are price to pay.

Steven
Click to expand...
Sure, take the $2,500 A7r and add the $2,500 TSE17L and you are out over $5k.

It is too bad that there are no good UWA tilt options for APS-C (the crop factor spoils it).

I had the A7 and OM24, and getting 'tilt' ability set me back $200. Worth the experiment. Especially when highlighting the 2nd sentence of the OP above (underlined).

If I were doing real estate, I surely would consider a full TS lens, and likely on FF and not APS-C. But for just real-estate, the TS lens is not needed - the Touit12 on the A6000 does quite well, and images can be straightened if needed (often not needed).

Also, I have seen real estate photographers doing more of panorama images - for slow & interactive web playback - rather than going full UWA with distorted images.

And full-page glossy images usually are printed at less than 8Mb, resolution means less than proper sharpening/lighting/framing, etc.
 
blue_skies said:
jack scholl said:
I wouldn't forget the SEL1018 for architecture. We have used it quite often for that purpose. And it is great for indoor shooting as well with the OS. Not cheap, but a very nice lens.



Jack
Click to expand...
Agreed, but the OP's question was for the A7, as in FF. I would not recommend the E1018 for this, even though it does cover the FF sensor, but only around 13mm and with some edge/corner softening (and likely no correction).

I do find 24 in FF, and 16 in APS-C, to be about the 'widest' that works for architecture. You can frame wide, as in your image, and place building on center-line to mitigate the effects, but the distortion is usually detracting, and encourages cleanup in post.

24mm on FF (16mm on APS-C), framed wide - showing geometric distortion, which gets worse if wider FL

24mm on FF (16mm on APS-C), framed wide - showing geometric distortion, which gets worse if wider FL

Using Tilt function in image above.

Using Tilt function in image above.

--
Cheers,
Henry
Click to expand...
Henry,

I have used 1.1X Clear Zoom with good effect on my APS-C cameras, particularly to cover the weak corners in my E 16/2.8. (Also 1.2X with my Olympus bodycap lens, ha ha!)

Could Clear Zoom be used as a partial solution in some cases such as this one? I mean such as using the E 10-18 on an A7, without needing recourse to the crop adjuster mode in the camera? By using a 1.1X Clear Zoom you might only lose a couple of megapixels.

Steve
 
Hi Tesch,

If you really think there is a market for architectural work you should be looking at some T/S or PC style wide angles.Although expensive when new they can be found in reasonable condition 2nd hand.There is also a 24 T/S Samyang that I believe sells for around $700US.These lenses also work very well as straight wide-angles but are, I think a necessity for serious architectural work.While UWA lenses are very good for interior subjects the use of PC/ TS lenses allow you to eliminate keystone distortion & the need for corrections in PP.

I have a 28F4 & 35F2.8 PC nikkors that seem to work better on my A7 than they did with my Nikon film cameras,the reccomended parameters can be almost ignored without a filter,there maybe stronger vignetting if you use filters & extreme shifts.The older fully manual PC lenses are perhaps more suited to digital use although the Canon TS range is considered the cream of the crop but the newer ones will need a electronic adapter to control the aperture with the added expense.Finding a good 2nd hand PC lens maybe a bit harder than a normal WA but they are out there & worth considering if you think you will be shooting any subject where perspective control is a benefit.

Steve.


A7 35PC nikkor. Dorrigo Hotel & town center.
 

Attachments

  • 3001003.jpg
    3001003.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 0
blue_skies said:
Steven-T said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
So this is a paid work? You need more pixels, the A7R maybe preferred. As to lens, you can't beat the Canon EF TSE17L. (If you can carry a tripod, etc, there are other good/even better solutions with shift adapters for A7R or D810). You want a lens with/offers shift capability. Obviously there are price to pay.

Steven
Click to expand...
Sure, take the $2,500 A7r and add the $2,500 TSE17L and you are out over $5k.

It is too bad that there are no good UWA tilt options for APS-C (the crop factor spoils it).

I had the A7 and OM24, and getting 'tilt' ability set me back $200. Worth the experiment. Especially when highlighting the 2nd sentence of the OP above (underlined).

If I were doing real estate, I surely would consider a full TS lens, and likely on FF and not APS-C. But for just real-estate, the TS lens is not needed - the Touit12 on the A6000 does quite well, and images can be straightened if needed (often not needed).

Also, I have seen real estate photographers doing more of panorama images - for slow & interactive web playback - rather than going full UWA with distorted images.

And full-page glossy images usually are printed at less than 8Mb, resolution means less than proper sharpening/lighting/framing, etc.

--
Cheers,
Henry
Click to expand...
You are confused with Shift vs tilt. For architecture work, you want shift, not tilt.

I disagree with your resolution comments for paid work for architecture.
 
blue_skies said:
As FF wide-angle lenses go, the OM24 is a pretty good one by itself. I prefer using it over the CV21/4, the latter being wider but also being prone to vignetting (magenta) shift.

--
Cheers,
Henry
Click to expand...
The CV 21/4 works much better on the crop cameras, where vignetting, magenta shift and smearing do not seem to be a significant



eef9b15808fa4388ac903e166cbe6162.jpg




problem.
 
Steven-T said:
blue_skies said:
Steven-T said:
tesch said:
I have the chance to shoot architecture photos on a regular basis for a potential client using my A7 and I need to get a good wide lense. I need to keep the price as low as possible at this point so I'm asking what lens would be my best choice? My first thought is the Minolta 20mm f2.8 with the LAEA4, which I already own. I would love to be able to afford the new Zeiss FE 16-35 but that's a $1k price difference for something that may not pan out.

TIA for your response!
Click to expand...
So this is a paid work? You need more pixels, the A7R maybe preferred. As to lens, you can't beat the Canon EF TSE17L. (If you can carry a tripod, etc, there are other good/even better solutions with shift adapters for A7R or D810). You want a lens with/offers shift capability. Obviously there are price to pay.

Steven
Click to expand...
Sure, take the $2,500 A7r and add the $2,500 TSE17L and you are out over $5k.

It is too bad that there are no good UWA tilt options for APS-C (the crop factor spoils it).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Steven-T said:
Steven-T said:
sorry - shift
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Steven-T said:
Steven-T said:
I had the A7 and OM24, and getting 'tilt' ability set me back $200. Worth the experiment. Especially when highlighting the 2nd sentence of the OP above (underlined).

If I were doing real estate, I surely would consider a full TS lens, and likely on FF and not APS-C. But for just real-estate, the TS lens is not needed - the Touit12 on the A6000 does quite well, and images can be straightened if needed (often not needed).

Also, I have seen real estate photographers doing more of panorama images - for slow & interactive web playback - rather than going full UWA with distorted images.

And full-page glossy images usually are printed at less than 8Mb, resolution means less than proper sharpening/lighting/framing, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Insofar as the subject doesn't move, I love my Canon EF 17-40/4 (with MB III adapter) on the A7. Still waiting for the FE 16-35/4. I also use the Canon EF 24/2.8 IS. Nice to get exif info with the adapter.



A7 with Canon EF 17-40/4

A7 with Canon EF 17-40/4



--
Dave
 
I'm sorry, I don't like the 100% perspective control and I don't like the over processed HDR-look of your image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

saltydough
Complete noob to tele zoom; advices for sumo tournament.
Replies
12
Views
16K
Dave981
D
MVDH
Compact travel lens - Sony FE 35 F2.8 ZA or FE 40 F2.5 G
2 3
Replies
48
Views
39K
wheresrunnicles
W
MVDH
Everyday pocketable camera: maybe RX1R II ?
Replies
19
Views
14K
MacroDonata
MacroDonata
T
  • Question Question
FE 85mm F1.4 GM lens vrs FE 100mm f2.8 STF GM OSS
Replies
18
Views
13K
Docno
Docno
D
Building a lens line-up?
Replies
6
Views
10K
Martin_99
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top