RJNaylor Loc: Delmar, New York

I may have missed it but I didn't notice anyone saying that the Tokinas do not have an internal focus motor and the D5100 can not auto-focus it. If you had a D90 or D7000 series they have a scew type focus system in addition to their modern systems.

If you want to focus manually, then the Tokina is excellent.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Semper Fi my brother. I hope the times have been good to you.

Dennis

Alois

Practice HDR and you will be amazed what can be done with any lens and any camera. Your only extra expense will be tripod.

amehta Loc: Boston

The "Tokina AT-X 116 PRO DX-II 11-16mm f/2.8" does have an AF motor.

wilikioti Loc: Deep South, USA

If money means anything to you, buy the Tokina 11-16. I did and I'm very pleased with the choice. One thing about distortion, be sure to keep your camera/lens in plumb. Use a tri-pod when possible.

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Either wide angle lens is fine. But I don't think you are going to get the greatest indoor real estate images without using at least one flash or other light source. To be honest, you need a couple of off camera light sources to do it right. If you aren't going to do it right then just stick with the 18-55 lens that comes with your camera and have a good time with sub par images.

Wendy2 Loc: California

Jeepdaddy is right. I take real estate photos, use a 10-22 MM on a full frame and use 1-2 off camera flashes. Rarely am I able to capture the room well with no flash. Take a look at my site http://www.WendyPickardPhotography.com to see the results of this technique.

As far as distortion, make sure you line up everything horizontally and vertically. I get very little distortion and what there is, I correct in photoshop

Camera buyer Loc: Las Vegas

I have been a professional Architectural Photographer for twenty years. Since digital cameras have come on the scene, I choose to use cameras that offer "Live view", turning them into miniature view cameras, I use the grid to check on my verticals and ALWAYS use a tripod. I shoot at a minimum of f8 and have played with many wide angle lenses. I used the Canon 10-20mm on my Canon 7d. I switched to the Sigma 8-16mm and was happy with that. Remember on the APC size sensor that becomes a 12-24mm. I have moved up to full frame Canon equipment now using a 5DMark II and a 6D with the Canon 16-35mm L series. I am very pleased with the results. I use only available light for a natural look. Shadow areas are dealt with in Photoshop.

(Download)


(Download)

Living Room

(Download)

PhotoGenesis131 Loc: Michigan

I am a Realtor. I have the 10-24. Works grea, but will need the flash at times. I also have the 18-105 and it works, but sometimes not wide enough. 24mm is about the max I would suggest. With crop factor on your dx format the -8 is really 27. If you bought a fixed 20m. It would really turn into a 30mm.
I am very happy with the 10-24.

brrywill

I would consider the Tokina 11-16 for your purposes. It is supposed to be, according to what I have read, one of the finest wide angle zooms for DX cameras. You really don't want to use anything wider than 14mm (21mm full frame equivilant) for interiors or you will exagerate the dimensions of the room. It will also make it easier to keep your lines straight. Prospective buyers will be dissapointed when they see the room in person if you make it look too large in your photos.

I shot architecture and interiors professionally for many years using the Hasselblad SWC/M with it's 38mm Biogon. That gave an angle of view of 90 degrees, which is the same angle as a 20 or 21mm on the 35mm format. I found that angle of view gives the most natural looking perspective to a room or building. Just my 2 cents.

Billynikon Loc: Atlanta

I did real estate shots for years and my SB700 was on the top of my camera all the time. Natural light is limited in house shots as far as I am concerned

Camera buyer Loc: Las Vegas

Using flash tends to flatten the scene and doesn't render the interior as it is truly lit. I'd prefer to lose a bit of shadow than flatten the scene. All of my photos of interiors are shot using the existing light and dealing with some shadow blockage in Photoshop. I shoot everything in RAW. I also never shoot at ISO over 400. On occasion, when shooting exteriors at night, I use a powerful handheld flashlight, to "paint" the darker areas
to fill poorly lit areas. Long exposure while painting.

Kitchen


Master Bedroom


Family Room


House Front with painted shadow areas

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Realtors with cameras... That's often a recipe for disaster. Sort of like soccer moms with cameras. (I can get away with that inflammatory comment only because I'm a former real estate agent myself.) Best money spent would probably to hire a pro to shoot it for you... properly.

Interior architectural photography used to be a real art. I know one of the best in the business and back in the days of film he typically spent hours setting up lighting for a couple shots that took a minute or two (had a van full of gear, even replaced the bulbs in the home/office's existing lighting to insure correct color throughout).

It's a bit easier now with digital. One reason so much effort was put into lighting with film was to balance interior and exterior light levels, so that the windows wouldn't just be blown out highlights. Now with digital you can simply take two shots... one exposure for the interior, one for the exterior lighting as seen through the windows... then combine the best of each in post-processing.

The Tokina 11-16/2.8 is the only f2.8 lens in the ultrawide category for APS-C crop cameras.... BUT you give up much focal length range in order to get that slightly larger aperture, which you don't really need for architectural photography. You'll likely always need to stop the lens down for max depth of field, defeating the whole purpose of an f2.8 lens. And then, if you want to use reasonable ISO, this will force you to use slower shutter speeds... Instead of f2.8, you will need a tripod. A remote camera release might be handy, too. Study up on hyperfocal focusing distances, too.

If using advanced, manual lighting, it can be easier to use a zoom with non-variable aperture. It's a pain to set up a shot with a lot of lighting, having everthing set for a specific aperture, only to have the aperture change when you zoom the lens! Among the third party ultrawides for crop cameras, there are three fixed aperture zooms: Tokina 11-16/2.8, Tokina 12-24/4 and the Sigma 10-20/3.5. Since you are using a Nikon, you also can consider the 12-24/4 DX Nikkor.

If only using TTL metered/controlled portable flash and/or ambient light, a variable aperture zoom should work fine. There are several of those: Sigma 8-16mm, Sigma 10-20 (the cheaper version), Tamron 10-24mm. As a Nikon shooter, you also could choose the 10-24mm Nikkor. (Canon shooters should look at the EF-S 10-22mm.)

A relatively inexpensive prime lens you might want to consider is the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8. This is a manual focus, manual aperture only lens, but that shouldn't be a problem for interior architectural photography. My biggest concern with this lens would be it's tendancy to render "moustache" distortion in the middle of the image. That can be a problem with the straight lines of architecture. It is correctable in many softwares, though. And this lens is far, far less expensive than any of the alternatives including OEM manufacturer counterparts (Nikon 14/2.8, Nikon 14-24/2.8, Canon 14/2.8 II). Aside from the distortion, many think the Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8 is a "better" lens optically, too... sharper and with less vignetting. Note: it sells under both Samyang and Rokinon names, also as a Bower and ProOptic (Adorama house brand). It's all the same lens. It even sells labelled as a Vivitar 13mm (actual focal length is somewhere in between 13 and 14mm, so it can be rounded off either way).

The 14/2.8 is a "full frame" lens, but would give close to a 90 degree angle of view of a 21mm lens on a DX Nikon camera (22.4mm on a Canon crop camera).

Finally, there is also the Sigma 12-24. This is another "full frame" capable lens, and as such it's fairly expensive. It would be fully usable, but somewhat of a waste of money if only used on a crop sensor camera.

Another alternative is to use less radically wide lenses, take multiple shots and stitch them together. This can be done to minimize perspective distortions and wide angle curvatures.

I shoot Canon instead of Nikon, and on my crop sensor cameras I use the Tokina 12-24/4 and Canon's excellent EF-S 10-22mm. If I shot a lot of architectural, I'd invest in the incredible EF 17/4L Tilt-Shift and shoot anything very important on "full frame".

EDIT: Someone noted, and it's true... if you are considering either of the Tokina ultrawide zooms, be sure to check. The "Mark II" versions in Nikon mount have a built-in focus motor. The earlier version did not and will only autofocus on certain Nikon cameras (that have their own AF drive mechanism). I'm not sure which of the Nikon cameras have the AF drive and which don't... but often if you see unusually low price on either of the Tokina zooms, it's the earlier version without the built-in focus motor.

Camera buyer Loc: Las Vegas

Unfortunately too many realtors with digital cameras think they can save the cost of hiring a professional photographer, and do it themselves. The results are usually disastrous. A home seller should insist on having their home properly presented by professional photographs.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Yeah, when I was listing and selling, I made the mistake of letting some of the other folks in our office know that I was also an experienced photographer. I got asked to do a lot of "favors". Typically, as soon as I mentioned a modest fee for my services they left me alone and headed off with their P&S cameras.

OTOH, I also was in more than a few homes where the last thing you wanted was good, clear photos! :roll: