kenArchi Loc: Seal Beach, CA

Clients want to see the whol l l l le room.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Your 7D is getting on as far as cameras go but it is still a fine camera for what you want to accomplish. The lenses you have are both excellent, I would suggest that you consider either the 10-18 or the 10-22, either of those two lenses are capable of excellent IQ and with your 17-55 that is all you will need. You may want to consider investing in multiple flashes and triggers if you want to push your business to the limit. Here is a flickr group where you may find useful information as well as inspiration.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/photographyforrealestate/

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Both will show keystoning, which many refer to, incorrectly, as distortion. In many cases a decent prime will outperform a cheap zoom, but a good pro-level zoom is pretty close to a prime in freedom from barrel distortion, which is the more common type of distortion in wide lenses. I think the 14-24 outperformed my 14mm prime, and the 24 1.4 is not better than my 24-70 F2.8. But this may be highly copy-dependent. But a good lens profile will address barrel distortion.

Bipod

This is incorrect. I am not talking about keystoning, I am talking about barrel distortion
and various aberrations (particularly Petzval image space curvature).

14 mm prime is super-wide. So is a 14-24 zoom. All super-wide lenses have large amounts
of distortion-- the ultimate being a fisheye lens. Your are comparing two lens with very
high distortion! Photograph a grid or a piece of masonite pegboard with your super-wide lenses
and you'll see what I mean.

I was talking about the OP's 15 - 85 zooms. All zoom designs are a compromise, but especially
those that go from ultra-wide to normal to long. They all suffer from more aberations and
distortion at at lease some focal settings. This is a well-known fact of optics.

I would except to see little if any distoration in a good 85 mm prime. But I'll bet that zoom set to
85 mm has plenty. All he needs to do to find out is photograph a brick wall or a piece of pegboard.

It is sometimes possible to correct distortion in post processsing, provided it is is simple barrel or pincushion
and there are no other aberrations. But why not just use the correct lens instead?

Aberrations are much more difficult to test and characterize. Most zooms have significant curvature of field.
So when photographing an architectural subject such as a well, it will only be truly sharp in the center of field.

Of course, if all someone shoots is weddings or passport photos, then any old lens will do. Might as well just
leave one zoom on your miniature format camera all the time. You'll never notice distoration or unsharpness.

But people who photograph architecture for a living use view cameras -- to eliminate the keystoning you
mentioned. But they do not -- ever -- put a zoom lens on a view camera.

Zooms have gotten a lot better than they used to be. So have electric bicycles--and it's possible to spends
thousands of dollars one. But that doesn't make it a motorcycle.

If you can't admit your zoom lenses are not apochromats, can you at leaste admit that your electric bicycle
isn't a Harley?

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

effective 24mm to 20mm. I use FX 14-24 f/2.8.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Well, when you get to specifics and meaningful differences, a little fact checking is in order-

Here are two reviews - one of the 15-85 and another of an 85mm F1.8

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon-eos/465-canon_1585_3556is?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/419-canon_85_18_5d?start=1

If you look at them carefully - you'll see that at 85mm, the zoom shows .32% pincushion distortion, and the prime lens .24% barrel. Neither has noticeable distortion at 85mm. So much for your expectation that the zoom lens would have "plenty" of distortion. The amounts are statistically equivalent.

Here are two reviews - 14-24 and the 20mm f1.8 prime

https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/975-nikkorafs2018ff?start=1
https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/447-nikkor_afs_1424_28_ff?start=1

You'll see that the prime lens shows barrel distortion of 1.6%, and the zoom at 21mm shows only .505% barrel - which is barely noticeable.

Distortion is less of an issue today - and even a lens with horrible complex distortion, like the 14mm F2.8 Samyang/Rokinon/Bower - which has about the worst complex distortion I have ever seen in a lens that I have used - can be corrected -

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff?start=1

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57172988

Oh, and by the way, the 5.29% barrel/complex distortion in this prime lens is considerably higher than the 3.91% in the Nikon zoom. Just sayin'

I began shooting architectural work for my architecture professors in the early 70s - they needed reasonably priced work to add to their company portfolios. Later I did a bit more work for hire, and had a nice business doing work for large contractors, developers and interior designers. My camera of choice was a Sinar P 4x5 (and later a P2), and an assortment of Nikon and Rodenstock lenses to get it done. I used the large format camera for the ability to control perspective, which includes vertical and horizontal keystoning, and with the swings and tilts I had better control over depth of field. For what it's worth, the reason you don't see zoom lenses on large format cameras is that no company actually makes one.

Field curvature is a fact of life, l lenses have field curvature, btw. But it is not an insurmountable one, if you understand your gear and use it correctly. And each lens can have a variety of curvature effects, depending on subject to camera distance, aperture and focal length (if using a zoom). Your claim that if you shoot a wall with a lens that has field curvature , it will only be sharp in the center is pure ignorance. All lenses have field curvature. Clearly if you know your gear and focus carefully, you can decide to strike a happy medium when you have a lens soft corners - you re-focus to a point in between the optimum focus for the center and that for the edges - and stop down sufficiently to allow depth of field to provide a reasonably sharp image that has good sharpness across the entire field. When using a view camera it was standard practice to load a 4x5 polaroid back to check image sharpness and adjust accordingly. If you actually shot large format you'd know that.

Good article illustrating how field curvature works and why it isn't necessarily a bad thing:

https://petapixel.com/2016/12/21/field-curvature-tricky-problem-photography/

And how common it really is:

https://photographylife.com/what-is-field-curvature

Which "true" APO lenses do you own?

So much for your claim that primes are better in the distortion/curvature/aberration department than zooms. Such is not always the case, and using generalities to make a case reveals that you do a lot of keyboard surfing and have considerable googling skills, but have little practical experience.

BTW, on another note - please use a decent spell checker -

distortion not distoration
processing, not processsing
wall, not well
aberration, not aberation
least, not leaste

And on a final note, I suppose you've never heard of the the Harley LIVEWIRE™ - which is - you guessed it - an electric Harley that costs $29K.

[ur]https://www.harley-davidson.com/us/en/motorcycles/future-vehicles/livewire.html?source_cd=SEM_Retention_PPC&_cr=ppc%7cGOOGLE%7cFuture_Vehicles_Brand_B%7cElectric_Motorcycle%7c%2Belectric+%2Bharley&gclid=CjwKCAiA99vhBRBnEiwAwpk-uMWE0Aneztaln_qgsYIWgqTB-kvBGJ4TxwO-qv0CdL2BAzmla5cc4BoCdHYQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds[/url]

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Which 10-20 is it, the 3.5 or the 4.5-5.6?

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Guys, calm down. We are discussing RE photos that will appear online and as 4x3 (or so) shots on a listing sheet. No one is blowing these up to 40x30 prints. Besides, for most uses, LR lens correction does a decent job correcting a lot of this in post.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

My granddaughter uses a Nikon 3400 with a 14mm lens. I don't know the f stop. She says she gets no distortion, and I don't see any.

She does not have a drone, so she subs that out when needed. She will do a 360 view outside, with a few stills.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Exaactly!
Back in optics class- many moons ago, there were lengthy discussions of optical aberrations and intrinsic defects in lenses. We had to memorize and recognize all of them for the exam. There was a litany of theses gremlins- barrel, moustache and pincushion distortion, coma, astigmatism, chromatic aberration, curvature of field, unwanted vignetting, and many variations, combinations and permutations of all of the aforementioned all named after the scientists who discovered them. These are not myths or folklore- all of theses things exist, however, modern lens formulas and new engineering and manufacturing technologies have minimized many of thes issues. Surely some of theses aberration are present but may only becom evident in optical bench laboratory analysis or in extremely critical work with significent degrees of enlargement. Many of theses aberration or distortions can be minimized or controlled by good camera technique, understanding how to circumvent them and simple post-processing corrections.

On the practical- applied photography side of things, I have used many wide angle lenses in different formats and usages. I certainly have not used and tested everything that is out there nor do I read all the published tests and comparisons unless I am in the market for a specific type of lens. I have used Schneider Super Angulons and and few Rodenstock models for 4x5 and 8x10 film work. I used all the available Zeiss wide angle lenses for the Hasselbald system for decades, and presently use 4 Canon primes and 2 Zooms all with no issues. I do work for architects, interior decorators, a few realtors and supply images for brochures for the hospitality industry- never any complaints about distortion! Image management is the key- know your lenses and their attributes and limitations. Use camera movements (swings, rises, drops, and tilts) or PC lenses and master your post-processing corrective measures. Keystoning and foreshortening can oftentimes be avoided by selecting the proper camera position, and height and avoidance of tilting the without vertical linear correction.

billgdyoung Loc: Big Bear City, CA

....
(he shoots- he scores, and the crowd goes wild)

canon Lee

I am a photographer that would like to own all of the top notch equipment, but I am a practical person as well and It would take years to get my money back if I bought a full frame and a TS lens.

canon Lee

Correct!!!

canon Lee

exactly my point. All to often on this discussion group photographers lose sight that it's only a MLS shoot for little money. All I was considering was to find the right lens to lower the field distortion, most responses were off the scale. I would upgrade big bucks if I had clients that would pay more.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Like I said earlier, Canon offers 2 excellent lenses for your crop body, the 10-18 which has IS that may be helpful in an interior to get a wide shot that may be necessary, or the 10-22 which is as good if not better than many of their L series full frame ultra wides. If you read through the discussions on the link that I provided above to the real estate flickr page you may find some useful tips from pros making their livings shooting real estate.