11-24mm or 16-35mm no distortion

[Seeyoulaterby]

I need a wide angle lens for real estate photos Deciding between 11-24mm or 16-35mm 

[Waddizzle]

The 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM can exhibit some noticeable distortion. I cannot say how much the 11-24mm exhibits.

I'd recommend a Tilt-Shift lens like the TS-E 17mm f/4L Tilt-Shift Lens.

[kvbarkley]

Nowadays distortion can be corrected. My T6S will do it in camera if it knows about the lens.

[ebiggs1]

"I need a wide angle lens for real estate photos ..."

This is easy.  You want the Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Lens for Canon.  It is one of only a couple Tokina lenses I ever recommend.  But this lens is truly fantastic.  It is as good as anything Canon or Nikon make in this range.  Matter of fact it is better than the Nikon!  The best part is its price.  I think they are around $700, maybe a little less.

All lenses in this range is going to have some distortion.  But it is mostly correctable in post.  However you may find it to not be too objectionable and leave them as is.  Two year warranty.  Canon and Nikon just one year. This is a lens everybody needs they just don't know it.

You don't want a T&S.  They are all manual and they are a pain to use.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I need a wide angle lens for real estate photos ..."

This is easy.  You want the Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Lens for Canon.  It is one of only a couple Tokina lenses I ever recommend.  But this lens is truly fantastic.  It is as good as anything Canon or Nikon make in this range.  Matter of fact it is better than the Nikon!  The best part is its price.  I think they are around $700, maybe a little less.

All lenses in this range is going to have some distortion.  But it is mostly correctable in post.  However you may find it to not be too objectionable and leave them as is.  Two year warranty.  Canon and Nikon just one year. This is a lens everybody needs they just don't know it.

You don't want a T&S.  They are all manual and they are a pain to use.

---

I guess I'm a bit confused. I don't disagree with anything Ernie said, but there's an uncorroborated assumption that the OP is using a full-frame camera. Otherwise, neither the 16-35 nor the 16-28 that Ernie recommends is really a wide-angle lens. In which case, presumably, the 11-24 is the better choice.

On the assumption that a FF camera is in use, another lens worth considering is the Canon 16-35mm f/4L. It's a very sharp lens, and its price has fallen quite a lot since it was introduced. Yes it's a stop slower than the two f/2.8 lenses. But outdoors that makes no difference, and my understanding is that the indoor part of real estate photography is always done with a tripod because of the tricky lighting required (multiple flashes) and the high dynamic range (bright windows). So I wouldn't expect the one-stop difference to be an issue.

[ebiggs1]

Bob
Boston, Massachusetts USA

This is, as you have so wisely indicated, a subject that has many solutions.  It depends on whether you are in the high end or general real estate or even the low end market.  The requirements are different.   On some high end jobs the T&S may be the only wat to get the slick prints the agent desires. On some low end jobs a G1x might do.  I have used both. I got a job offer just last week to do some real estate shots.  I know retirement is not all retirement!  Middle income bracket houses.

The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM Lens is three grand if my severely over tasked brain remembers correctly. The Tokina AT-X 16-28mm f/2.8 Pro FX Lens for Canon is less that $700.  This was my overriding reason besides being one heck of a lens,  For the price to performance ratio the Tokina can't be beat.

The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM may be worth it.  I can't say with authority since I don't own one but it will have to earn every bit of that $2300 surcharge over the Tokina.  There again maybe 5mm is worth it.

[Waddizzle]

"This is, as you have so wisely indicated, a subject that has many solutions.  It depends on whether you are in the high end or general real estate or even the low end market.  The requirements are different.   On some high end jobs the T&S may be the only wat to get the slick prints the agent desires. On some low end jobs a G1x might do.  I have used both."

There isn't one corrrect answer, no more than there is one lens for every scenario.  A lot depends upon what camera is used, but I have assumed a full frame body.  Even more could depend upon what lenses are already owned.

Just as having a T&S is a good first choice for high end work, I would also think having an ultra-wide lens would be an essential lens to have on hand for those times when the T&S just isn't wide enough.  I also don't see why a manual focus lens would be a deal breaker, most especially considering that most of the shots are likely to be captured from a tripod.

I wouldn't think that architectural photography is something that you'd want to do a lot of correcting for distortion in post, either. 

I would pick a T&S as a first lens, because you cannot always get the shot you want, or need, by leveling the camera.  Next, I would be looking for an ultra-wide lens, which produced near rectilnear images.  I would also want to have something like the EF 8-15mm f/4L USM Fisheye lens on hand, most especially if I had a crop camera body.  But, first and foremost, I would want a wide angle,T&S lens for architectural work.

[kvbarkley]

We need some help from the OP, but *Real Estate* photography is not the same as *Architectural* photography, so I doubt that T/S is required.

[Waddizzle]

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

We need some help from the OP, but *Real Estate* photography is not the same as *Architectural* photography, so I doubt that T/S is required.

---

In this context, those phrases are interchangeable to me.  High end real estate is really all about the architect.

[EDIT] And, I think a T&S would be invaluable, almost mandatory, to have on hand for "real estate photography."  Like I said, you cannot always get the shot that you want by leveling the camera to minimize distortion.  Many houses are slightly elevated from the street, sometimes significantly so.  Removing lens distortion in post is not a viable option to me.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

---

@kvbarkley wrote:

We need some help from the OP, but *Real Estate* photography is not the same as *Architectural* photography, so I doubt that T/S is required.

---

In this context, those phrases are interchangeable to me.  High end real estate is really all about the architect.

[EDIT] And, I think a T&S would be invaluable, almost mandatory, to have on hand for "real estate photography."  Like I said, you cannot always get the shot that you want by leveling the camera to minimize distortion.  Many houses are slightly elevated from the street, sometimes significantly so.  Removing lens distortion in post is not a viable option to me.

---

A point to illustrate the difference: I can't imagine using a fisheye lens for real estate photography. But I've seen one used very successfully for architectural photography.

I probably wouldn't use a fisheye for either purpose, but that's just me.