shooting interiors and need lens advice

[stacibeth]

Question,
I am shooting with the canon1ds mark 3, i shoot alot of interiors and architecture. I currently have the schneider 28mm pc lens, which is great, sharp and nice, i have noticed the color/contrast quality to seem very cool, and can be very frustrating, but otherwise its ok.

i also have the canon85mm L2 which i love, and is super sharp, its great for details,

the question is, when i am shooting say a bedroom, the 28mm elongates and distorts the bed, the 85 is so super zoomed in , i need a happy medium, say a 50? or 35? Is a 35mm still going to elongate? What are your suggestions.

I have the canon 24-105 zoom, which i find very soft and gives me way too much barrel distortion. so thats out.

Thanks

[Ellis Vener]

your question really is about perspective rendering , how a three-dimensional space translates to a two-dimensional media versus your your visual experience of being in the room. The result is the near to far relationships in the photograph look distorted ("elongated") compared to what you experience standing in the room.  Choice of focal length is part of the equation as well.

The only way to really "correct" it is to choose where to put the camera so that the "distortions" look right to you. This might mean moving the camera further away if you can, raising to a higher position, choosing a different angle to shoot from, or a combination of two or three strategies. Do you bring a ladder or a step-stool to your shoots? Do you have a tripod that can take the camera up to near the roof?

Without seeing your  photo, carefully controlling your lighting:  placement, highlight and shadow relationships, and light fall off pattern  may also help to trick the viewer's eye.

In post production you might get away with using Photoshop's perspective distortion tools but it's really a lot less work to get it as right as you possibly can when you shoot.

[uaiomex]

Photography is a craft of compromises. Being able to fit most of a room in a photograph is great but this brings perspective problems as elongating towards the sides and corners and creating a distorted size ratio for things close and afar. Nearby things get bigger while at the same time producing the farther objects to look smaller hence to appear farther than they actually are.
In short, this is the way it is. We can' to do much about it but to look for angles to diminish these unwanted effects. When unwanted, because once, a client asked me if it was possible to make the swimming pool look bigger. No problem, as every photographer knows, this is a brezze with an ultra wide-angle.

TS glass is a godsend for keeping walls in perfect verticals but funny enough, it enhances the near/far exaggeration  effect, so you have to watch for that too.

Since the trick is finding the best angle to diminish the UWA effect, the advice is to try as many angles as possible. Experience will help in no time to find the best angle with less sweat. It is amazing how different a piece of furniture can appear by only movimg the tripod a few centimeters. The same applies for raising or lowering it.

Regards
Eduardo

Question,
I am shooting with the canon1ds mark 3, i shoot alot of interiors and architecture. I currently have the schneider 28mm pc lens, which is great, sharp and nice, i have noticed the color/contrast quality to seem very cool, and can be very frustrating, but otherwise its ok.

i also have the canon85mm L2 which i love, and is super sharp, its great for details,

the question is, when i am shooting say a bedroom, the 28mm elongates and distorts the bed, the 85 is so super zoomed in , i need a happy medium, say a 50? or 35? Is a 35mm still going to elongate? What are your suggestions.

I have the canon 24-105 zoom, which i find very soft and gives me way too much barrel distortion. so thats out.

Thanks

[stacibeth]

thanks for your advice about angles. I understand in tight spaces this will probably happen and i'll need to move around and adjust. But.... in the event theres plenty of space, and i dont want the wide angle, i want a closer shot, one that wont elongate the bed, ...1. what lens is the best for this situation, in sharpness and quality, a 35mm, a 50mm??? 2. I've attached a few images that suggest what i'm looking to do (these are not my images, just an example)

thanks

[uaiomex]

They both seem to me like fiftys
Ed

[David Eichler]

Question,
I am shooting with the canon1ds mark 3, i shoot alot of interiors and architecture. I currently have the schneider 28mm pc lens, which is great, sharp and nice, i have noticed the color/contrast quality to seem very cool, and can be very frustrating, but otherwise its ok.

i also have the canon85mm L2 which i love, and is super sharp, its great for details,

the question is, when i am shooting say a bedroom, the 28mm elongates and distorts the bed, the 85 is so super zoomed in , i need a happy medium, say a 50? or 35? Is a 35mm still going to elongate? What are your suggestions.

I have the canon 24-105 zoom, which i find very soft and gives me way too much barrel distortion. so thats out.

Thanks

All wide angle lenses distort, and the wider the angle the more the distortion. Long lenses distort too, but in a different way. The trick is in understanding these distortions and either using them creatively or learning to minimize them so that they are not a distraction. No easy answers. You have to learn to use your eyes and know your equipment. Also, it will depend upon your own style and whether you are producing the images for others to use, since they might have their own criteria that need to be met, which might force you to make compromises in composition that you might not do if shooting only for yourself.

As for the Canon 24-105mm lens, it is a design that is capable of delivering very good sharpness if used correctly and you get a good copy. Lens quality can vary considerably from one copy to another of the same design, due either to mediocre quality control or the lens getting knocked out of alignment. Or, it might simply be a defective lens. The barrel distortion of the lens can largely be corrected with software. However, for optimum results for architectural photography it is best to start out with lenses that have inherently low levels of rectilinear distortion.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

the question is, when i am shooting say a bedroom, the 28mm elongates and distorts the bed, the 85 is so super zoomed in , i need a happy medium, say a 50? or 35? Is a 35mm still going to elongate? What are your suggestions.

Hi,

There are only three parameters that need to be known to determine if the linear perspective projection will look natural:

• 1. Sensor dimensions
• 2. Viewing distance of output
• 3. Output dimensions

All dimensions are expressed in the same units, otherwise you need to add a conversion factor to one or more of them to convert to the same units.

When the ratio of focal length to sensor dimensions is the same ratio as the viewing distance to the output dimensions, then perspective is natural.

Alternatively, although output viewing distance will still influence perceived perspective, one can approach it from a subject dimensions angle. This is therefore more a way to calculate the angle of view, with the output viewing distance undetermined.
Then the required parameters become:

• 1. Sensor dimensions
• 2. Subject distance
• 3. Subject dimensions

And the output viewing distance needs to be adjusted/calculated as well.

I've added the formulas as an attachment, simple to copy to a Smartphone or Tablet. All this and more is available as a more comprehensive planning tool here.

Cheers,
Bart

[Petrus]

All wide angle lenses distort, and the wider the angle the more the distortion. Long lenses distort too, but in a different way.

First one is correct, second not so correct. I'll elaborate:

There are two kinds of distortion we need to consider. First is the real planar projection distortion. The further away (measured in degrees) the object is from the center of the image, the more it is elongated towards to edge of the image. This is naturally most noticeable with wide angle lenses, and nothing can be done about it. In the message above it is correctly noted that this distortion disappears if the right size print is viewed at the correct distance (with one eye), but that seldom happens, as a wide angle shot printed in small size would have to be viewed from a few cm distance with a magnifying glass to make the projection true. Long lenses have practically no distortion of this kind, as the picture angle is narrow.

Second distortion, which really is no distortion, is the perspective. Perspective IS NOT caused by the lens, but the shooting distance. Naturally long lenses are usually used for great distance and wide angles at close distances, but it really is the distance and not the lens which causes these "distortions". And they are not distortions, but natural relative sizes of the objects in the picture, which depend only on the relative distances of the said objects from the camera, NOT the lens used. If you are 100 meters away from two similar objects which are a meter away from each other, they look the same size. If you are one meter away from the first one, second one looks half the size (and the focal length of the lens you happen to have on your camera makes certainly no difference in this).

The sample pictures OP posted look like they were shot with a normal lens (picture angle about 45 degrees diagonal) whatever it happened to be for each camera used. That kind of shots look natural, but are bit misleading, as they a likely to have been shot in a studio, where there is a lot or room to step back and use longer lenses than would be possible in real bedrooms. In a real room you just have to use the longest lens which can be used to frame the whole scene which needs to be photographed, and that often means a fairly wide wide angle. It is certainly also possible to crop, if there is enough resolution in the image, cropping a 28mm lens image slightly would give exactly the same image as using 35mm lens, with some loss of resolution. If the pictures are for the web this works perfectly well, if for print, no.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

In the message above it is correctly noted that this distortion disappears if the right size print is viewed at the correct distance (with one eye), but that seldom happens, as a wide angle shot printed in small size would have to be viewed from a few cm distance with a magnifying glass to make the projection true.

There is another variation possible, and that is to create (much) larger output and view it from proportionally further away. For Web-publishing, one can use a technique that's normally used for viewing Virtual Reality 3D panos, but now with a large sized normal rectilinear image projection in a smaller viewport. Zooming out for a total view will then again introduce the perceived distortion towards the corners, but now it's clear that it is caused by the zoom action (which forces to look at the output from the 'wrong' distance).

Cheers,
Bart

[Ellis Vener]

"All wide angle lenses distort"

I'd expand that to all lenses distort. What you have to learn is how to use the distortion to your advantage by choosing a point of view that renders the subject the way that is the best match for how you want to a specific photo to work. So much for theory and philosophy. Oh and as I was writing this, I just heard John Waters say in a "Fresh Air with Terry Gross" interview that "Technique is nothing more than failed style."

For architectural work, if you want the least amount of apparent near/far distortion, it is usually the case that you should should choose the longest focal length the room will allow and depict the space in a realistic way. For some rooms that might be a 14mm lens, a 17mm Tilt/shift lens at one extreme or a a 300mm or longer lens. It just depends on a) the space and b) your intent.

Perceptually for me, I think a 28mm lens best matches the way my eyes, brain, and mind see the world.

[David Eichler]

"All wide angle lenses distort"

I'd expand that to all lenses distort. What you have to learn is how to use the distortion to your advantage by choosing a point of view that renders the subject the way that is the best match for how you want to a specific photo to work. So much for theory and philosophy. Oh and as I was writing this, I just heard John Waters say in a "Fresh Air with Terry Gross" interview that "Technique is nothing more than failed style."

For architectural work, if you want the least amount of apparent near/far distortion, it is usually the case that you should should choose the longest focal length the room will allow and depict the space in a realistic way. For some rooms that might be a 14mm lens, a 17mm Tilt/shift lens at one extreme or a a 300mm or longer lens. It just depends on a) the space and b) your intent.

Perceptually for me, I think a 28mm lens best matches the way my eyes, brain, and mind see the world.

I don't think "normal" lenses distort, at least not in any of the ways under discussion here. Otherwise, might as well just say photography itself is a distortion.

[Ellis Vener]

"Otherwise, might as well just say photography itself is a distortion."

Of course it is! It's also an abstraction. A photograph has its own reality, separate from what is depicted.

[Fine_Art]

Question,
I am shooting with the canon1ds mark 3, i shoot alot of interiors and architecture. I currently have the schneider 28mm pc lens, which is great, sharp and nice, i have noticed the color/contrast quality to seem very cool, and can be very frustrating, but otherwise its ok.

i also have the canon85mm L2 which i love, and is super sharp, its great for details,

the question is, when i am shooting say a bedroom, the 28mm elongates and distorts the bed, the 85 is so super zoomed in , i need a happy medium, say a 50? or 35? Is a 35mm still going to elongate? What are your suggestions.

I have the canon 24-105 zoom, which i find very soft and gives me way too much barrel distortion. so thats out.

Thanks

You want a 50 'normal' lens to present relationships similar to how your eyes see. You can simulate the 50 in a test by stitching 2 verticals from the 85 that agrees with you, or crop your 28 for a low resolution test image.

I appreciate how challenging camera placement in rooms can be. Sometimes objects just don't cooperate!

[stacibeth]

Again thank you all for your thoughts about distortion and perspective. But my main question..... What 50mm lens would be best in sharpness/quality and for this specific use?

Thanks
Stacy

[Petrus]

Again thank you all for your thoughts about distortion and perspective. But my main question..... What 50mm lens would be best in sharpness/quality and for this specific use?

Thanks
Stacy

The sharpest ones, either Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art, out of which two the Sigma can be considered a bargain.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

The sharpest ones, either Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art, out of which two the Sigma can be considered a bargain.

Indeed, those seem to be the best, with high resolution, contrast, and low aberrations. The glare and flare resistance seems excellent. However, for interiors photography one will have to stop down quite a bit with a 50mm, so the differences with other lenses, even the very affordable EF 50mm f/1.4, will not be all that large. The Zeiss Otus and Sigma Art will be better, but not all that much once you reach f/8 or narrower on an EOS 1Ds3.

Cheers,
Bart

[Petrus]

Indeed, those seem to be the best, with high resolution, contrast, and low aberrations. The glare and flare resistance seems excellent. However, for interiors photography one will have to stop down quite a bit with a 50mm, so the differences with other lenses, even the very affordable EF 50mm f/1.4, will not be all that large. The Zeiss Otus and Sigma Art will be better, but not all that much once you reach f/8 or narrower on an EOS 1Ds3.

Cheers,
Bart

Very true. Compared to Sigma you could save a few hundred dollars, with a used lens even more. Then, on the other hand, Sigma gives the ability of playing with shallow DOF if the need arises without any loss of quality.

[pfigen]

The Sigma has the added benefit of having virtually no visible barrel or pincushion distortion straight out of the box, even when focused close. I have both the Sigma and the Canon 50mm 1.4 and stopped down, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.

[Ellis Vener]

The Sigma has the added benefit of having virtually no visible barrel or pincushion distortion straight out of the box, even when focused close. I have both the Sigma and the Canon 50mm 1.4 and stopped down, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.

In my experience with both, that is mostly true, but the Sigma has almost no chromatic aberrations (color fringing at the edge between a dark area and a bright area) even down in the corners of the frame.