Is Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8 unavoidable for interior/architecture photography?

I get calls from an architecture design studio to shoot interiors and exteriors of their buildings. So far, I have been getting by with the EF 24-105mm F4 on a Canon 6D and now R6. I get good results, but was thinking about making my job easier and results more impressive.

For "architecture photography" everyone recommends tilt-shift lenses, which are expensive and prime. For "interior photography", the top recommendation is the RF 15-35mm F2.8 at $2,399. The zoom range is not that great, but I feel the 15mm wide end of the zoom is necessary as I am struggling to get tight spaces like bathrooms and meeting rooms in at 24mm.

F2.8 for interiors? Probably an overkill, lets more light in, but we are not looking for any artistic shallow DoF effects. Of course at 15mm, the scene should be mostly in focus at any aperture.

Is there a lens with a better zoom range, or cheaper, or in any way a better interior/architecture lens than the subject?

Would I go for a manual focus lens? Maybe. The scene is not going anywhere. But the touch AF on R6 is a godsend when the camera is tripod mounted.

Thanks!

BobKnDP

Have you considered the RF 14-35mm f/4 L?

Just as soon as I wrote this post and went to pick out a lens to link in tags. The RF 14-35 F4 popped right up and I became aware of it. Like I said, f/2.8 seems extra for the interior shoots off a tripod. So, yes.

I would say the same

RF lenses are at a premium.  Actually the TS-E lenses are actually cheaper than the 15-35.  The Laowa's are much less expensive.

You could consider the EF 16-35/2.8 or f4 L.  Buying used would save a lot of money.

Also the Sigma 12-24 ART for EF.

Generally to line up architectural photos effectively one uses a tripod so IS is not necessary, or may even be detrimental.  f2.8 is not necessary unless the overall IQ is superior, which sometimes it is.

I use the 17 TS-E and the Laowa 12/2.8 Zero-D for the odd architectural interior.

So the 15-35 may be very nice, but avoidable.

The prevailing real estate method in my area is to use HDR exclusively. The aperture recommended is f/8. A tripod is also generally easier although, if you are really steady, you could do it handheld. The camera should always be leveled up completely so it's easier with a tripod.

I have used the EF 17 TS-E, EF 16-35, and EF 11-24. The wider the better for some of the really tiny powder rooms. That said, the company I worked for wanted either 16mm or 17mm on a full-frame camera or 10mm on a crop-sensor camera.

The problem with HDR is the number of frames involved in each property. A simple shoot might be 3–400 frames. We often had eight properties to shoot in a day. That came to 3–5,000 frames per day. Many of the shooters picked up a less expensive camera along with a spare since they might shoot over 100K frames in a month. The cameras wore out fast and a spare body was always a good idea.

To simplify, all you need is something in 16mm for a FF camera. Wide apertures are not necessary as f/8 is the best aperture in most cases. The lens does not need to be top of the line, as one poster stated, so checking 3rd-party brands can really pay off as far as cost goes. Most lenses are just fine at f/8.

fredlord wrote:

The prevailing real estate method in my area is to use HDR exclusively. The aperture recommended is f/8. A tripod is also generally easier although, if you are really steady, you could do it handheld. The camera should always be leveled up completely so it's easier with a tripod.

I have used the EF 17 TS-E, EF 16-35, and EF 11-24. The wider the better for some of the really tiny powder rooms. That said, the company I worked for wanted either 16mm or 17mm on a full-frame camera or 10mm on a crop-sensor camera.

The problem with HDR is the number of frames involved in each property. A simple shoot might be 3–400 frames. We often had eight properties to shoot in a day. That came to 3–5,000 frames per day. Many of the shooters picked up a less expensive camera along with a spare since they might shoot over 100K frames in a month. The cameras wore out fast and a spare body was always a good idea.

To simplify, all you need is something in 16mm for a FF camera. Wide apertures are not necessary as f/8 is the best aperture in most cases. The lens does not need to be top of the line, as one poster stated, so checking 3rd-party brands can really pay off as far as cost goes. Most lenses are just fine at f/8.

Would the little RF16/2.8 stm work in these instances?

What does the ART designation signify/contribute?

Is this almost/about the same? Glowing reviews when people are not comparing about getting a grey market copy.

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-14-24mm-Black-212954-Canon/dp/B079QCBYTZ

And this seems to be the exact lens you recommend for $100 more

https://www.samys.com/p/Wide-Angle-Lenses/212954/Sigma-14-24mm-f/2.8-DG-HSM-Art-Lens-for-Canon-EF/200921.html

Thanks, good info! I get a sense from most of the replies that the pricey RF 15-35mm F2.8 is highly avoidable. Looking into options.

Thanks, very good info.

I am looking closely at Sigma 14-24 ART f/2.8 for $1,299

TS lenses seem limiting for the type of jobs I get. Some kind of zoom is better than no zoom, and AF helps in a quick hit-and-run.

Texchappy wrote:

fredlord wrote:

The prevailing real estate method in my area is to use HDR exclusively. The aperture recommended is f/8. A tripod is also generally easier although, if you are really steady, you could do it handheld. The camera should always be leveled up completely so it's easier with a tripod.

I have used the EF 17 TS-E, EF 16-35, and EF 11-24. The wider the better for some of the really tiny powder rooms. That said, the company I worked for wanted either 16mm or 17mm on a full-frame camera or 10mm on a crop-sensor camera.

The problem with HDR is the number of frames involved in each property. A simple shoot might be 3–400 frames. We often had eight properties to shoot in a day. That came to 3–5,000 frames per day. Many of the shooters picked up a less expensive camera along with a spare since they might shoot over 100K frames in a month. The cameras wore out fast and a spare body was always a good idea.

To simplify, all you need is something in 16mm for a FF camera. Wide apertures are not necessary as f/8 is the best aperture in most cases. The lens does not need to be top of the line, as one poster stated, so checking 3rd-party brands can really pay off as far as cost goes. Most lenses are just fine at f/8.

Would the little RF16/2.8 stm work in these instances?

Absolutely! Yes. It's light, small, relatively inexpensive and, reading the review, not that bad for IQ. Real estate photography doesn't require any more especially since it's generally shot at f/8 and manually focused. The barrel distortion mentioned would not present any impediment to a home sale.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-16mm-F2.8-STM-Lens.aspx

atolk wrote:

What does the ART designation signify/contribute?

Is this almost/about the same? Glowing reviews when people are not comparing about getting a grey market copy.

https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-14-24mm-Black-212954-Canon/dp/B079QCBYTZ

And this seems to be the exact lens you recommend for $100 more

https://www.samys.com/p/Wide-Angle-Lenses/212954/Sigma-14-24mm-f/2.8-DG-HSM-Art-Lens-for-Canon-EF/200921.html

They are same lenses if the picture on amazon listing is correct. The Amazon listing just doesn't mention the full name. The little metallic A badge on the left of the body is the ART logo. The $100 you are looking at is street vs MSRP

Specifically, sigma ART can be thought as their Canon L type lineup. More specifically, this is how C, A, S lenses are split in sigma global vision lens lineups - https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/lines/

I think you need to first decide how wide you need to go to

-16mm, 15mm, 14mm, or 12mm ( would you need 11mm)

At all of these there are typically f/4 an f/2.8 version but I think we have already agreed that f/4 is enough for your type of work.

i personally own the RF 15-35mm but I don’t use it for real estate an the 14-35/4 was not out yet. Also have 14mm on other systems I shoot.

Also there are two excellent EF 16-35 L lenses, the f/4L which is ~ $600 used and the 16-35/2.8L III if you wanted a faster lense.