CRoy

I have a Nikon D5300 and need to purchase a wide angle to take interior photos of homes. I want to make sure that whatever lens I use does not distort the images of the photos. Any advice?

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

I use a Tokina 11-20mm f2.8 lens that I have found does beautiful job on interiors. All lenses distort a little but can be corrected in post with something like Lightroom and other software.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

Nikon 10-24mm, Tamron 10-24mm (The NEW version). The Tamron may be the better lens and is cheaper. Extreme wide angle lenses require some knowledge to use properly.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

If you want as little distortion as possible, the lens isn't as important as the setting. For your DX camera a setting not wider than 18mm would probably do the trick.

jimbo70 Loc: Orange Park, FL.

The number one thing is to shoot with the camera level IN ALL Planes (left to right and front to back). That will minimize the distortions.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Any wide is going to distort to some degree, you can take care of it in post, many Nikons, through the menu, have a way to lesson distortion. My favorite Nikon lenses would be the 12-24 f4 DX, 10-24 DX, and 16-35 FX.

CRoy

Thank you for the responses. I will check out the lenses mentioned and make my decision.

Szalajj Loc: Salem, NH

Look into the Nikon 360, vs. a lens!

I watched an amazing demo of this camera last fall. As I was watching it, I thought it was ideally suited for Real Estate photography!

Check it out, you'll be amazed with it's capabilities and the quality it produces!

And yes, you can extract stills from the video that the 360 shoots!

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

I use my Nikkor 16-35 on my D750 and keep my camera 4 feet off the floor because my ceilings are 8 feet high. I use a tripod and cable release. Lens distortion is fixed in Lightroom. ~FiddleMaker

CRoy

I keep hearing the name Tokina. Although I would like to get a Nikon, the price point may be the deciding favor. I am going to look into the Tokina 11-20.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I have the Tamron 10-24mm and regret not getting the Nikon instead. Both have the SWM (built-in focusing motor in the lens) but the Tamron has a slight fisheye at 10mm that isn't present in the Nikkor (Nikon). That said, remember that the 10-24mm (any brand) on the Nikon D5300 or any DX/Cropped Sensor) camera is going to give similar results to a 15-36mm on a full frame. I finally decided to purchase a Nikon D610 Full Frame to use for wide to normal shots without the "DX" penalty. I did manage to get by with my D7100 doing real estate shots for a year before making the plunge. I now use the Full Frame D610 for ALL of my Wide to normal shots and the D7100 for many to most of my normal to telephoto shots. Both are great cameras. I also have 4 lightstands/umbrellas and 6 Nikon strobes (one SB-800, 2 SB 700 strobes and 3 SB-910 strobes to use in camera control mode to provide even lighting in the rooms and around the interior and exterior of the house and property. If you have light stands (especially with umbrellas and booms, be sure to invest in sand/weight bags to hold them in place. A couple of reflectors and reflector attachments for the light stands/ booms is also helpful. Note: all of the above works well for portraits, weddings and other types of shooting as well.

cthahn

Nikon sells an architectural lens. You also need to be concerned about lighting.

WayneT Loc: Paris, TN

The 11-20mm Tokina is an excellent lens for the price and I just noticed that B+H has them for $479 when combined with a mail in rebate. Can't go wrong with this lens at that price.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

aberration

Once had a Nikon 13mm rectilinear lens, and know all superwide lenses cause what iwe call distortion at the peripherary, which for this lens was most of the image. Even so, it took in more that the then available lenses, and needed to be oriented to vertical walls, etc. it made intereiors seem cavernous, and judicious cropping usually was needed. Exteriors however, both needed verticals and horizontals observed and corrected, usually having a scored screen to line up what needed it. Because it was one of the first of its focal length to be imported, I got the jump on many competitors and made a good living with that lens alone. Then it cost me 0ver $ 9000. Its flaw was it needed shielding from lights, sun coming from outside its field of view, due to its bulbous and vulnerable outside element. Often used leaves, branches, even my hand to prevent ghost flare showing up on opposite side of image. It was slow at F 5.6, but worked well for an ultrawide, sometimes producing ludicrous images. Lens sold when I retired 1999.