1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

is 12mm wide enough for real estate photos?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by lefty, Apr 26, 2015.

  1. lefty

    lefty Mu-43 Regular

    I am putting up a house for rent soon and need a few pics for advertising.
    The widest lens I have is the 12-50 and Samyang 7.5 fisheye.
    Location is in Perth Australia so the rooms and house are not shoebox sized as in other countries.
    I have been lusting after the 12-40 PRO and wondering if that will be wide enough or spend similar money on the 9-18, which I won't use in general.
    what do you all think?
     
  2. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Well if you have the 12-50 and a Samyang fisheye, I'd say you can answer this question for yourself in a big hurry.

    I'm not sure why a 12-40 would be any better than a 12-50, though, either way. You aren't going to want to shoot them at f2.8, you'll want to stop down a bit to get everything sharp and likely use a tripod with some careful lighting.

    If the 12-50 isn't wide enough, you can use the Samyang and some defish software quite nicely.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I don't think 12mm is wide enough. You can already try it with the 12-50 and see for yourself, the 12-40 at 12mm isn't going to be any wider. I would try defishing with the 7.5 fisheye in the first instance.
     
  4. lefty

    lefty Mu-43 Regular

    the house is a bit of a drive away and currently tenanted and I don't want to intrude on their privacy. I am not buying a lens *just* for this purpose.
     
  5. tino84

    tino84 Mu-43 Veteran

    217
    Dec 29, 2013
    I went to Ljubljiana last thuersday, with my 14-150 and pana 14mm with fuji converter, that helps me to reach a 11,5mm.
    these is a pic shooted with pana + converter at...well 10m?

    full.

    I think 12 is good enough, but in case, you have a 7.5, so you got no problems I think..
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    I used the 9mm BCL defished for the same purpose. There was a big difference from the 12mm. Location was an italian big city, so different spaces for sure.

    For defishing I tried Hugin and it was quite insane to use and I didn't like the result. In the end I used my usual editor Lens Correction options specifing a Generic Fisheye 10mm or 12mm and this gave me reasonable results. I also took a few pictures using the in-camera HDR modes to compensate for the light from the windows, some were fine.
     
  7. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    You are better off with a gigapan or panoramic setup on a tripod with stitching.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Let me explain a little more....

    At the root, the question is about Field of view (FOV). For any particular focal length is the FOV large enough to bring all the room's elements into frame. No lens is as flexible in that respect than a panoramic setup with stitching. You can do a full 360 panoramic head.

    Now this will take a bit of work to manually iterate through the pictures and process each one.

    Wanna make the workflow smoother? The gigapan head is basically a robotic panoramic head coupled together with software to automatically stitch the photos. That is the "pan" part of the the company's name. Its quiet easy to use with the major issue being bulk and battery power.

    Furthermore, you can use a narrower FOV lens and take higher resolved photos which requires a larger number of photos to be stitched together. This is the "giga" part of the company's name. You basically can emulate gigapixel ranges of resolution. This will allow viewers to zoom in for minute detail that couldn't be resolved in a single shot.

    Here's a sample of a room.

    http://www.gigapixel.com/360tours/home4.html


    Also...

    Since you are shooting monopod, stitching many photos, and will be working with a deep DOF, fast aperture lens which are generally MORE expensive than a panoramic setup is not necessary. For the most part a standard zoom is all that is required.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    You could try it at home...

    I've already tried at my house with my ZD 7-14mm, and for a 10x11' room, even 7mm rectilinear won't get the entire room.
    9mm rectilinear is not wide enough.

    A fisheye works best if you keep it straight, and apply a little correction.

    Bathrooms are even more difficult.

    Barry
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2015
  10. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    773
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    Microsoft's ICE is a very good free stitcher. Use the 12-50 stopped down, take one shot to find the right exposure value, then set aperture, shutter speed and ISO manually. Take as many photos as you need, top to bottom, left to right. Remember to have about one-third overlap between shots. Drag and drop into ICE and you're done.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. PacNWMike

    PacNWMike Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 5, 2014
    Salish Sea
    guess?
    Why manually? I just use aperture priority to keep the dof the same and stop down. Everything else auto. Let the camera do the thinking. Any decent stitcher will blend just fine. The manual method is a hold over from when the software was just being developed.
     
  12. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    842
    Feb 20, 2013
    I work in real estate and first used the 10.5mm set up (14 + Panny's wide angle converter). Not wide enough. Next I took the converter and hand held it up to the end of the 12-32. It was actually wide enough (9mm) but had vignetting. However, when I saw the fisheye on sale for $199 and I pounced.

    THERE IS NO COMPARISON! The fisheye is by far the superior choice to photography the interior of rooms. Even if it's dark outside and you're taking the photos with a couple 100 watt lamps you can shoot ISO 1600 at f4 and pretty much everything is in focus. Wait until morning with a little sun coming in and you can do ISO 200 at f8. Even better.

    Then, before advertising the property you either a) use them as they are and let everyone know the size of the rooms as to not deceive people and waste everyone's time, b) defish completely and crop the edges, or c) do as I do and only part-way defish and leave some distortion. This is what I've found has been the best method.

    Don't waste your money on the 9-18 because what if you want it a touch wider? 9mm would be good but....sometimes not good enough. And stitching is a pain IMO. Now, you're probably a better photographer than me so take my advice for what it's worth; the photos I display are usually no more than 600x800. Finally, if I were to do it all over again I might even get the 9mm BCL. Its quality is sufficient, I'd say; ignorance is bliss. However, now that I have the 7.5 fish I will for sure keep it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. BigTam

    BigTam Mu-43 Top Veteran

    773
    Mar 19, 2012
    Dortmund, Germany
    Ron
    PacNWMike asked "Why manually?". I prefer to make it easy for the stitcher. The brightness can vary a lot (windows, corners), and the transitions can sometimes look artificial. But yes, stitchers are a lot better now and most of the time will compensate pretty well for exposure differences.
     
  14. Petrochemist

    Petrochemist Mu-43 Top Veteran

    652
    Mar 21, 2013
    N Essex, UK
    Mike
    Having tried Microsoft ICE it's less of a pain than defishing images IMHO.

    In the old days careful alignment of the camera was essential, this is no longer the case. Even in it's earlier version ICE was capable of coping with shots taken from a moving ship, the later version add other refinements.
    Installing ICE was a bit of a pain admittedly as it needed an extra file downloaded & installed first, but it is a totally free option so worth giving a go anyway.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I have no qualms with stitching wide scenes of nature or city scapes. I used to use Microsoft ICE, but the latest version of PS CC is even better, IMO. Stitching interior architecture with its many straight lines, however, is still problematic, and I prefer to de-fish in these cases. With a fisheye you get a smooth (if curved) line, rather than disjointed segments from stitching.
     
  16. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Defishing is about as difficult as adjusting exposure and white balance, IMO. I don't know how it could be called a pain at all.
     
  17. Petrochemist

    Petrochemist Mu-43 Top Veteran

    652
    Mar 21, 2013
    N Essex, UK
    Mike
    I don't think more normal software is capable of de-fishing at all, and I've certainly had shots where the WB was more difficult to sort out than stitching normally is. With the right software neither is a pain.
     
  18. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Munich
    Ian
    Heres interior pictures taken at 9mm. (9-18mm) Even though they are rectilinear, at 9mm and wider including stitched panoramas, things look strange.

    I'd say stick with 12mm and stitch away. I use Hugin to stitch. It's free.
     
  19. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi, when shooting real estate interiors, it's recommended to shoot from a child's perspective; e.g. shoot from about waist level or 3' off the floor. Also, the camera should be level in both horizontal and vertical planes.
    That would help a lot with reducing some of the odd perspectives in your photos.

    Barry