Best Camera for Professional Real Estate Photos

[Leigh_Harper]

Hello There,

Just wondering if you could please tell me what would be best set up to take Professional Real Estate Photos.

My first investment will be to get a basics course done and then endeavour to tackle the intermediate areas of Professional Photography soon after.

* Course is booked in two weeks time.

My internet research has me at a Canon EOS 6D Mark II and looking into the 15/30 lens and possibly 24 -70 as well?

Budget is supposed to be under $4k but if it gets to $8k than so be it.

However ideally I am looking towards a 4k camera and video in one (eos 6d is 1080?).

Given up on researching on the net and very confused and will talk to the photography teacher on what the best camera and lenses to get.

Is it a risk purchasing a secondhand camera?

If anyone could please offer any help would be truly appreciated and once I have myself educated with photography would very much enjoy passing on learnt knowledge to others.

Thanks from Leigh

 

[mobi1]

Any good camera mated with good wide angle lens. My Estage Agent friend uses Sigma 10-20 on his Nikon crop sensor camera.

 

[Klaus dk]

Most any interchangeable lens cameras will do. Buying second hand or refurbished is safe if you buy from a well reputed dealer. Canon 6D II is a good camera, but I would also look at the mirrorless options.

There are substantial savings in going down in sensor size (APS-C or micro4/3), just be aware of the crop factor when choosing lenses.

I would recommend a camera with a tiltable screen, as you will sometimes need to place the camera close to a wall or in a corner where the optical viewfinder is difficult to look into.

If you can, you might want to find a camera with built in HDR functionality. That could save you some PP work.

Don't forget a stable tripod on your shopping list. You will want low ISO and narrow apertures, so your exposure times may be long.

Lighting interiors is a challenge, so plan on investing in lights and more education on lighting.

Good luck and good light.

 

[Mark S Abeln]

That is a decent kit, but then again so are many other modern cameras, and as others mentioned, lighting can be important as well.

Don’t underestimate the time it will take to learn how to take good photos, which can take years of effort. Many beginners think that the camera does all the hard work for them, and that the better the camera, the better the results: actually, the opposite is true. A smartphone will typically give a beginner far better results than an enthusiast or pro level camera. High end cameras offer more controls that can be used or misused, often inadvertently.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

"Professional" Real-Estate images are taken by a "professional", (possibly with ANY camera). I have sold images taken w, $5.99 disposables and my weddings/runway shots were with a $104 camera, (rangefinder Canon QL-17-GIII), even thought I had more than $25,000 worth of gear. I simply used what was best for a specific job.

I would recommend a (new-technology), Mirror-Less (ML), over a (60+yo technology) SLR/dSLR.

The suggestion of FULLY, (not just "tilting"), articulating LCD and HDR were good.

A Ultra-Wide-Angle lens is good ... BUT ... you must be very-aware of "perspective"-distortion and how to use it creatively.

Personally I use, (for RE), a Panasonic FZ-1000 with Raynox 5072 UWA adapter, (with 67 to 72mm step-rings).

It has f/2,8 lens, FA-LCD, HDR, "Hand-Held NIGHT-shot" mode, auto-"leveling", and it can AF in -4EV.

It can also tele zoom to 400mm-EFL, (but you won't need that for RE).

It is available for less than $800, but does more things than many other more-expensive cameras, (that will be suggested to you).

It also has 5-axis Image-Stabilization to reduce the need for a tripod, (compared to only 2-axis possible w/ dSLR).

 

[Krusty79]

Generally, you're shooting for the web, so you don't need a real high end camera. Full frame is overkill IMO. Any decent mirrorless or APS-C camera will do. You'll need an ultrawide lens and software like Lightroom to correct the wide angle distortion.

You may not know this at this point, but you're going to have to decide whether to go the HDR or off-camera flash route. HDR is quicker to shoot, but involves more processing time. I think using an off-camera flash (or flashes) takes a while to learn, but is more versatile and gives you more control over the light. And you'll have to buy at least one flash (you'll need more for large rooms) and light stands. Then practice.

 

[rurikw]

Canon's excellent TS lenses could help you get the exteriors right. High interior spaces too I guess. 17 and 24mm would be most useful.

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Thanks very much they are very awesome photos --
Leigh Harper

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Thanks very much for tips and will be taking notice of them

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Very much noted Mark which is why I plan to spend a few thousand if need be to get educated on how to do it right.

thanks for that

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Thanks very much photo teach I will check out the camera you mentioned and makes sense what you said.

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Thanks Krusty79 the off camera flash sounds like the one to learn.

tips much appreciated

 

[Leigh_Harper]

Thanks heaps I will check them out--
Leigh Harper

 

[Tim Reidy Productions]

you can do this work for about 1000 -2000 very well

with a m43 body you would want a 12-35mm and a lens that is around 7-18mm

with a apsc you want something like a 10mm-20mm and a 17-50mm

with a full frame camera a 15-30 and a 24-70mm lens.

zooms will help you frame your shots, and that might be better suited than a higher res prime lens.

most cameras in the market will do the rest. this comes up to what you want for the body.

 

[FingerPainter]

<the same old same-old>

What a surprise,!

Leigh, you should be warned that Joe (PhotoTeach2) recommends an FZ1000 nearly every time he responds to somebody asking for a camera recommendation, regardless of the application. He says all cameras are a compromise and the FZ1000 is the perfect compromise.

If the FZ1000 was so wonderful for real estate photos, you'd expect to find a lot of real estate photographers using one. I have met quite a few real estate photographers over the years and none used an FZ1000.

One of the problems of the FZ1000 for real estate is that its fixed lens doesn't have a wide enough field of view for interiors. Joe addresses that by sticking a Raynox HDP-5072EX 0.5x conversion lens on the front of his non-removalabe lens. The problem with this is that this conversion lens produces a semi-fisheye effect, which will produce unwanted distortions in real estate photos. and it will significantly reduce the sharpness of your images.

The other main reason when real estate pros don't use the FZ1000 is that it sensor is a couple classes smaller than the APS_C sensors typically used in the profession (and three classes smaller than cameras like the one you care considering). A smaller sensor means worse noise in lower light, so using the FZ1000 would mean dragging out and setting up their lighting equipment more often than with a camera with a larger sensors. The FZ1000 has a wonderful built-in flash that combines well with the camera;s leaf shutter for some really neat effects, but real estate photographers often prefer the advantages of off-camera flash.

 

[FingerPainter]

Hello There,

Just wondering if you could please tell me what would be best set up to take Professional Real Estate Photos.

The camera body will possibly be your least important equipment choice. Any body that takes interchangeable lenses and has a sensor of APS-C size or larger would do just fine. Micro Four Thirds cameras might do in a pinch, but they aren't where I'd start looking.

Lens choice will be more important. For interiors you will want a lens that produces the field of view of a 16mm lens on a FF camera, or wider. That means 11mm on APS-C, 10mm on Canon's smaller variant of APS-C or 8mm on Micro Four Thirds.

The most challenging aspect of real estate interiors is lighting. There are two aspects to this. One is that good photos need a lot of light, and light levels are low in most houses. The other is that pictures of interiors often include windows, and the high light levels seen outside can overpower the light available inside.

The common solution to the first aspect is to use flash or other portable artificial light. The flash on the camera is often insufficient for this purpose, so many professional real estate photographers have off-camera lights on stands, that they place out of view from the camera to light up far corners.

The second aspect can be addressed in a number of ways. One is to just block out any interior view, by closing shutters, blinds or curtains. Another is to take two photos - one exposed for the exterior view and one lit and exposed for the interior, then blend the two in software, A third approach is to use so much artificial light indoors that it balances the outdoor light.

Another important piece of equipment will be a tripod and head. You'll want one that is easy to set up and change height, but also easy to get to one specific height - 1/2 the typical ceiling height in your housing market. Get one with a device that helps you level the camera.

The most important, expensive and hardest to learn part of your equipment probably ought to be the lighting system.

My first investment will be to get a basics course done and then endeavour to tackle the intermediate areas of Professional Photography soon after.

* Course is booked in two weeks time.

My internet research has me at a Canon EOS 6D Mark II

Could be overkill.

and looking into the 15/30 lens

A good choice for eh application on Canon FF

and possibly 24 -70 as well?

Might also be overkill.

Budget is supposed to be under $4k

? Supposed to be?

but if it gets to $8k than so be it.

However ideally I am looking towards a 4k camera and video in one (eos 6d is 1080?).

Learning to shoot video panoramas or walkthrough is a whole other skill.

Given up on researching on the net and very confused and will talk to the photography teacher on what the best camera and lenses to get.

Good idea if he specializes in real estate photography. Otherwise, could be hit or miss. Perhaps research local real estate photography companies, to asses job opportunities sand equipment they use (and training they may supply)

Is it a risk purchasing a secondhand camera?

Not much of one if you purchase from a reputable dealer or refurnished units from the manufacturer.

If anyone could please offer any help would be truly appreciated and once I have myself educated with photography would very much enjoy passing on learnt knowledge to others.

Thanks from Leigh

--
Leigh Harper

 

[PhotoTeach2]

<the same old same-old>

What a surprise,!

Leigh, you should be warned that Joe (PhotoTeach2) recommends an FZ1000 nearly every time he responds to somebody asking for a camera recommendation, regardless of the application. He says all cameras are a compromise and the FZ1000 is the perfect compromise.

Are you suggesting that all cameras are not "compromises" ???

If the FZ1000 was so wonderful for real estate photos, you'd expect to find a lot of real estate photographers using one. I have met quite a few real estate photographers over the years and none used an FZ1000.

Simply because it mostly unknown by those who have not used/tried it.

One of the problems of the FZ1000 for real estate is that its fixed lens doesn't have a wide enough field of view for interiors.

NO "KIT" LENS DOES, on ANY camera.

However that is not totally true. ANY lens, (wider than 35mm-EFL), will start to show "perspective" distortion and thus must be used "carefully". (note that this has nothing to do with the "fish-eye"-effect distortion mentioned below)

"Perspective" distortion is identical to the appearance of Rail-Road Tracks that are "wide" close but appear to get closer together in the distance. The "wider" lens you use for such a photo will make it appear greater. (also when shooting buildings w/ camera pointed "up", and the buildings will appear to lean-together).

So this effect can be VERY problematic in interior shots with ANY (Wide-Angle) lens, (and the wider-the-lens the worse the effect can be). You MUST shoot any interiors "straight" on, (at "mid-level" height).

Joe addresses that by sticking a Raynox HDP-5072EX 0.5x conversion lens on the front of his non-removalabe lens. The problem with this is that this conversion lens produces a semi-fisheye effect, which will produce unwanted distortions in real estate photos. and it will significantly reduce the sharpness of your images.

It is "sharper" than most separate lenses.

I CANNOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE between my regular images and those w/ 5072.

And it is FASTER since I can use f/2.8.

But I seldom have to use it, (except for some "effect" shots), because, (for reasons I already described), for most shots a standard WA presents the most "natural" look anyway,

Note also that a UWA lens can indeed make a room look "bigger" than it is, but that can be problematic if you can get sued for "false-advertising", (and I have heard of that happening).

The other main reason when real estate pros don't use the FZ1000 is that it sensor is a couple classes smaller than the APS_C sensors typically used in the profession (and three classes smaller than cameras like the one you care considering). A smaller sensor means worse noise in lower light, so using the FZ1000 would mean dragging out and setting up their lighting equipment more often than with a camera with a larger sensors.

NOPE ... I indeed USED TO HAVE TO use (many) flash units before, but NEVER had to yet with the FZ-1000.

Note that I even had small "screw-in" units where I replaced the normal light-bulbs in "table" lamps so it would look more "natural", (but still light the room brighter).

The FZ1000 has a wonderful built-in flash that combines well with the camera;s leaf shutter for some really neat effects, but real estate photographers often prefer the advantages of off-camera flash.

OK, yes it has a more-powerful-than-average built-in strobe, (GN-48).

BUT ... of course I can also use External/Off-Camera. (it even has "multi" flash control similar to Nikon style.)

*********************************

FP, I AM a real-estate BROKER, (not just agent), and use it for (all my) RE work.

(so speaking from personal experience)

Yes, it is only (normal) Wide-Angle and I do use a 5072 for UWA (12mm-EFL), but it has VERY LITTLE "fisheye" distortion. (albeit I do have a Nikon 8mm fisheye for my FF when I might want/need it)

And yes, I suppose there may not be (many) others using it but that is BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU that put-down the camera that HAVE NEVER USED IT.

I have said many times that I once also felt the same way, and had never recommended anything smaller than FF (or DX at min). But once I (was literally "forced" to), used a 1/2.3" I found it was not nearly as bad as I expected, and indeed totally acceptable.

I have actually shot a wedding with 1/2.3". No problems and I was able to include types of shots I never had been able to before.

But the FZ-1000 is 4X larger than that 1/2.3" and never found any limitations with it, (even at night).

I already listed the features that are "RE" friendly, FA-LCD, auto-Bracketing and HDR, Hand-Held NIGHT-shot, Panoramic, -4EV AF, 5-axis IBIS, auto-"leveling", (and maybe MOST IMPORTANT -- WIDER DOF @ f/2.8)

And he will even have, ("continuous"-zoom to) 400mm-EFL as a BONUS, (which he admittedly won't need much for RE).

AND it has 4K-video.

I CHALLENGE you to list even ONE other camera that has ALL those features for $600-800 ??? (and the 12mm-EFL is possible w/ RAYNOX 3062 or 5072)

 

[PhotoTeach2]

Hello There,

Just wondering if you could please tell me what would be best set up to take Professional Real Estate Photos.

The camera body will possibly be your least important equipment choice. Any body that takes interchangeable lenses and has a sensor of APS-C size or larger would do just fine. Micro Four Thirds cameras might do in a pinch, but they aren't where I'd start looking.

It is exactly where I would start looking IF I wanted/needed "interchangeable" lenses, (ILC)

But I don't need ILC when I have "continuous" zoom from 24 to 400mm-EFL.

Lens choice will be more important. For interiors you will want a lens that produces the field of view of a 16mm lens on a FF camera, or wider.

I listed above that you SELDOM actually need more than 24mm, (because of inherent "perspective" distortion -- that is normal for any Ultra-Wide-Angle (UWA) lens.

I have indeed used 12mm-EFL (wider than available with ANY other interchangeable lens), but only for CREATIVE EXAGERATION.

Real-Estate images should look "natural".

That means 11mm on APS-C, 10mm on Canon's smaller variant of APS-C or 8mm on Micro Four Thirds.

All only 16mm-EFL after 1.5 / 1.6 & 2X crop-factor).

The most challenging aspect of real estate interiors is lighting. There are two aspects to this. One is that good photos need a lot of light, and light levels are low in most houses.

Yeah, it used to be a major problem, but seldom any more. ("Hand-Held NIGHT-shot" mode)

The other is that pictures of interiors often include windows, and the high light levels seen outside can overpower the light available inside.

Quickly handled w/ (in-camera) HDR.

The common solution to the first aspect is to use flash or other portable artificial light. The flash on the camera is often insufficient for this purpose, so many professional real estate photographers have off-camera lights on stands, that they place out of view from the camera to light up far corners.

Yep, used to take hours to properly "light" a home, but not usually necessary any more.

The second aspect can be addressed in a number of ways. One is to just block out any interior view, by closing shutters, blinds or curtains.

I can't believe you are suggesting that ... the "windows" are the most appealing part of any home.

Another is to take two photos - one exposed for the exterior view and one lit and exposed for the interior, then blend the two in software, A third approach is to use so much artificial light indoors that it balances the outdoor light.

In-Camera HDR works.

Another important piece of equipment will be a tripod and head.

Yep, used to always use those also, but NOT MUCH anymore. (since 5-axis IBIS and auto-"leveling")

You'll want one that is easy to set up and change height, but also easy to get to one specific height - 1/2 the typical ceiling height in your housing market.

Easy/fast w/ FA-LCD.

Get one with a device that helps you level the camera.

Why if the camera has a large (aircraft "ADI" style) level indicator, and/or "auto"-leveling.

The most important, expensive and hardest to learn part of your equipment probably ought to be the lighting system.

I agree that at one time, it was vitally important. But not so-much anymore.

My first investment will be to get a basics course done and then endeavour to tackle the intermediate areas of Professional Photography soon after.

* Course is booked in two weeks time.

My internet research has me at a Canon EOS 6D Mark II

Could be overkill.

Yes ... bad for many reasons.

and looking into the 15/30 lens

A good choice for eh application on Canon FF

and possibly 24 -70 as well?

Might also be overkill.

Budget is supposed to be under $4k

? Supposed to be?

but if it gets to $8k than so be it.

However ideally I am looking towards a 4k camera and video in one (eos 6d is 1080?).

WHERE have you been getting advice ... totally UN-NECESSARY.

Learning to shoot video panoramas or walkthrough is a whole other skill.

Given up on researching on the net and very confused and will talk to the photography teacher on what the best camera and lenses to get.

Good idea if he specializes in real estate photography. Otherwise, could be hit or miss. Perhaps research local real estate photography companies, to asses job opportunities sand equipment they use (and training they may supply)

Is it a risk purchasing a secondhand camera?

Not much of one if you purchase from a reputable dealer or refurnished units from the manufacturer.

If anyone could please offer any help would be truly appreciated and once I have myself educated with photography would very much enjoy passing on learnt knowledge to others.

Thanks from Leigh

--
Leigh Harper

 

[FingerPainter]

<the same old same-old>

What a surprise,!

Leigh, you should be warned that Joe (PhotoTeach2) recommends an FZ1000 nearly every time he responds to somebody asking for a camera recommendation, regardless of the application. He says all cameras are a compromise and the FZ1000 is the perfect compromise.

Are you suggesting that all cameras are not "compromises" ???

No, that's one of several things we agree on. Where we disagree is whether the FZ!000 is a perfect compromise, as you have often stated, and on whether it is a gpod compromise for the application at hand.

If the FZ1000 was so wonderful for real estate photos, you'd expect to find a lot of real estate photographers using one. I have met quite a few real estate photographers over the years and none used an FZ1000.

Simply because it mostly unknown by those who have not used/tried it.

LOL!

One of the problems of the FZ1000 for real estate is that its fixed lens doesn't have a wide enough field of view for interiors.

NO "KIT" LENS DOES, on ANY camera.

Doesn't matter. I'm not suggesting a kiy lens. One of the advantage s of an ILC is teh ability to use a lens more suited to a particular task at hand.

However that is not totally true. ANY lens, (wider than 35mm-EFL), will start to show "perspective" distortion

Perspective distortion is not an issue here.

and thus must be used "carefully". (note that this has nothing to do with the "fish-eye"-effect distortion mentioned below) ...

Joe addresses that by sticking a Raynox HDP-5072EX 0.5x conversion lens on the front of his non-removalabe lens. The problem with this is that this conversion lens produces a semi-fisheye effect, which will produce unwanted distortions in real estate photos. and it will significantly reduce the sharpness of your images.

It is "sharper" than most separate lenses.

The FZ1000 camea system including its lens is not sharper than typical combinations of lenses and bodies used for real estate photography.

I CANNOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE between my regular images and those w/ 5072.

You seem to think everything produced by your baby is sharp./. The fact that you cannot see a difference doesn't mean that there isn't one and that it won't be seen by those who matter for the OP.

And it is FASTER since I can use f/2.8.

Many of the lenses one might use for real estate interiors also use f/2,8. But as you know, f-number is not as important here as noise, diffraction and DOF, for which your f/2.8 is like f/8 on FF.

But I seldom have to use it, (except for some "effect" shots), because, (for reasons I already described), for most shots a standard WA presents the most "natural" look anyway,

Note also that a UWA lens can indeed make a room look "bigger" than it is, but that can be problematic if you can get sued for "false-advertising", (and I have heard of that happening).

The other main reason when real estate pros don't use the FZ1000 is that it sensor is a couple classes smaller than the APS_C sensors typically used in the profession (and three classes smaller than cameras like the one you care considering). A smaller sensor means worse noise in lower light, so using the FZ1000 would mean dragging out and setting up their lighting equipment more often than with a camera with a larger sensors.

NOPE ... I indeed USED TO HAVE TO use (many) flash units before, but NEVER had to yet with the FZ-1000.

Note that I even had small "screw-in" units where I replaced the normal light-bulbs in "table" lamps so it would look more "natural", (but still light the room brighter).

The FZ1000 has a wonderful built-in flash that combines well with the camera;s leaf shutter for some really neat effects, but real estate photographers often prefer the advantages of off-camera flash.

OK, yes it has a more-powerful-than-average built-in strobe, (GN-48).

BUT ... of course I can also use External/Off-Camera. (it even has "multi" flash control similar to Nikon style.)

*********************************

FP, I AM a real-estate BROKER, (not just agent), and use it for (all my) RE work.

(so speaking from personal experience)

Speaking from personal experience, all the photos i have seen taken by actual brokers were worse than photos taken by professional real estate photographers. I wouldn't except that to be the case with you, because you know your way around a camera.

If you are an active broker, It should be very simple to point us to some examples of your best work in the field so we can judge what the FZ1000 is capbable of in the hands of a true professional.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

<the same old same-old>

What a surprise,!

Leigh, you should be warned that Joe (PhotoTeach2) recommends an FZ1000 nearly every time he responds to somebody asking for a camera recommendation, regardless of the application. He says all cameras are a compromise and the FZ1000 is the perfect compromise.

Are you suggesting that all cameras are not "compromises" ???

No, that's one of several things we agree on. Where we disagree is whether the FZ!000 is a perfect compromise, as you have often stated, and on whether it is a gpod compromise for the application at hand.

I have said that I personally have found it a perfect-compromise.

But it is indeed a compromise and I certainly would use (several) other choices for specific purposes, (but it is perfect for RE).

If the FZ1000 was so wonderful for real estate photos, you'd expect to find a lot of real estate photographers using one. I have met quite a few real estate photographers over the years and none used an FZ1000.

Simply because it mostly unknown by those who have not used/tried it.

LOL!

You have not used it, (at least not enough to give it a full review).

One of the problems of the FZ1000 for real estate is that its fixed lens doesn't have a wide enough field of view for interiors.

NO "KIT" LENS DOES, on ANY camera.

Doesn't matter. I'm not suggesting a kiy lens. One of the advantage s of an ILC is teh ability to use a lens more suited to a particular task at hand.

But any ILC gets (very) expensive when you bypass the "kit" lenses.

However that is not totally true. ANY lens, (wider than 35mm-EFL), will start to show "perspective" distortion

Perspective distortion is not an issue here.

You have obviously never done RE work, "perspective" distortion is a MAJOR problem.

it is indeed "THE" major problem.

Try shooting a "small" bathroom for a kitchen (w/ UWA) w/out (perspective) distortion.

And the "wider" lens the worse -- so I have to be even more careful when using the Raynox @ 12mm. (but it will "zoom" from 12mm back-to 24mm-EFL)

and thus must be used "carefully". (note that this has nothing to do with the "fish-eye"-effect distortion mentioned below) ...

Joe addresses that by sticking a Raynox HDP-5072EX 0.5x conversion lens on the front of his non-removalabe lens. The problem with this is that this conversion lens produces a semi-fisheye effect, which will produce unwanted distortions in real estate photos. and it will significantly reduce the sharpness of your images.

It is "sharper" than most separate lenses.

The FZ1000 camea system including its lens is not sharper than typical combinations of lenses and bodies used for real estate photography.

Well, it is WIDER than any other separate (ILC-UWA) lens. And I have read reports that some are not-so-sharp when used wide-open.

So I am indeed not "sure" it is sharper, but can say I don't see much/any noticeably un-sharpness when it is attached.

I CANNOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE between my regular images and those w/ 5072.

You seem to think everything produced by your baby is sharp./. The fact that you cannot see a difference doesn't mean that there isn't one and that it won't be seen by those who matter for the OP.

The first, (and most common), use for RE images is MLS. And they are only viewed by computer.

Some (LUXURY and/or RANCH) properties may indeed need a "brochure" but those also are mostly printed w/ smaller images. (8.5"x11" max)

Note that many "brochure" properties deserve some more "creative" lighting effects, (like NIGHT shots w/ interior lights or SUNSET). The FZ-1000 is more than sufficient for all that also.

And it is FASTER since I can use f/2.8.

Many of the lenses one might use for real estate interiors also use f/2,8. But as you know, f-number is not as important here as noise, diffraction and DOF, for which your f/2.8 is like f/8 on FF.

Please not "equivalence" again. And for RE, you absolutely do NOT want a narrow DOF.

So the "equivalence" is an ADVANTAGE anyway.

(narrow DOF used to be a MAJOR problem w/ FF)

And since we are indeed often working w/ "lower" light, "diffraction" is also not an issue.

Noise ??? (I am printing/selling 24"x36" posters from FZ-1000.)

But I seldom have to use it, (except for some "effect" shots), because, (for reasons I already described), for most shots a standard WA presents the most "natural" look anyway,

Note also that a UWA lens can indeed make a room look "bigger" than it is, but that can be problematic if you can get sued for "false-advertising", (and I have heard of that happening).

The other main reason when real estate pros don't use the FZ1000 is that it sensor is a couple classes smaller than the APS_C sensors typically used in the profession (and three classes smaller than cameras like the one you care considering). A smaller sensor means worse noise in lower light, so using the FZ1000 would mean dragging out and setting up their lighting equipment more often than with a camera with a larger sensors.

NOPE ... I indeed USED TO HAVE TO use (many) flash units before, but NEVER had to yet with the FZ-1000.

Note that I even had small "screw-in" units where I replaced the normal light-bulbs in "table" lamps so it would look more "natural", (but still light the room brighter).

The FZ1000 has a wonderful built-in flash that combines well with the camera;s leaf shutter for some really neat effects, but real estate photographers often prefer the advantages of off-camera flash.

OK, yes it has a more-powerful-than-average built-in strobe, (GN-48).

BUT ... of course I can also use External/Off-Camera. (it even has "multi" flash control similar to Nikon style.)

*********************************

FP, I AM a real-estate BROKER, (not just agent), and use it for (all my) RE work.

Speaking from personal experience, all the photos i have seen taken by actual brokers were worse than photos taken by professional real estate photographers. I wouldn't except that to be the case with you, because you know your way around a camera.

True, but RE work today are often shot with only CELL-PHONES.

But you are basically CORRECT above, because NO RE image is taken by the "camera", they are taken by the "PERSON" USING THE CAMERA.

So a $8K camera, (which the OP suggested he was prepared to spend), will NOT get him any better images, (than possible w/ FZ-1000).

(but the unique combination of options/features in the FZ-1000 will enable some things not possible w/ even more expensive cameras -- but it STILL WILL BE UP TO HIS "SKILL")

(so speaking from personal experience)