Lens comparison question about 2.8f vs. 1.4f (Page 3): For real estate photography in general, I do not see that the expense would be warranted. Can you borrow, or rent the lens you...

thrash50

MontanaTrace wrote:

I shoot in low light interiors. Real estate photography.

Currently using a Sony A6000 with a Sigma 19mm 2.8f fixed lens. Pretty good results.
How much advantage would I gain if I buy a Sigma 16mm 1.4f fixed?

For real estate photography in general, I do not see that the expense would be warranted. Can you borrow, or rent the lens you are thinking of buying, and take sample images, with both lenses to compare before making your decision?

repleo Loc: Boston

MontanaTrace wrote:

I shoot in low light interiors. Real estate photography.

Currently using a Sony A6000 with a Sigma 19mm 2.8f fixed lens. Pretty good results.
How much advantage would I gain if I buy a Sigma 16mm 1.4f fixed?

Consider the Rokinon 12mm F2.0 NCS CS instead. I love that lens on my A6000. You will gain a full stop and significantly more width over your 19mm f2.8. At $278 you will probably be able to hold onto your Sigma as well.

gwilliams6

I actually have this Sigma 16mm f1.4 lens and it is stunning in image quality and sharpness, even at f1.4. It has been rated by several trusted reviewers as the very best wide lens for the Sony A6000 series,ever. It is a bargain at its price and absolutely worth it. Having that f1.4 aperture can save your bacon in low light situations. I have this lens and love it for my A6500. At this wide angle folks you will still get good depth of field at f1.4 on any subject unless you are right up close with the lens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWdlFIro6wo
Sigma 16mm f/1.4 User Experience Review - Best Wide Angle Lens for Sony a6000 a6300 a6500 a5100

FTn

MontanaTrace wrote:

Thank you. I'm starting to believe my 2.8f is fine in lower light, as long as I use my tripod. The 1.4f will be better for hand held but I need to use my tripod and save the money. Thank you.

Please don't hand hold your camera when shooting real estate pictures. They will end up looking like all of the crap that you see on Zillow now. Use a good sturdy tripod with a good head and carefully compose each image making sure that all of the lines are straight and the rooms look natural. A 16mm f1.4 lens won't make your images look any better or sell the real estate any faster. Sharper, well composed pictures will though.

gwilliams6

FTn wrote:

Please don't hand hold your camera when shooting real estate pictures. They will end up looking like all of the crap that you see on Zillow now. Use a good sturdy tripod with a good head and carefully compose each image making sure that all of the lines are straight and the rooms look natural. A 16mm f1.4 lens won't make your images look any better or sell the real estate any faster. Sharper, well composed pictures will though.

As a pro of over 40 years, I use tripods, but I can hold steady enough and have taken lots of real estate photos handheld. In tight corners and spaces where a tripod can't go it has been no problem. Learn good hand-holding techniques and how to use walls and such to steady yourself and your camera, and a tripod is less a must.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

"Currently using a Sony A6000 with a Sigma 19mm 2.8f fixed lens. Pretty good results.
How much advantage would I gain if I buy a Sigma 16mm 1.4f fixed?"

You already know that wide open you gain 2 stops of light. You already know that if you shoot wide open you will have less depth of field.
Do you need the extra 2 stops of light?

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

There are many uses for a F1.4 lens as opposed to a F2.8 lens but I do not believe that RE photography is one of them. A sturdy tripod, a longer shutter and a smaller aperture would serve you much better. I shoot most RE with my 14-24 and 24-70, both of which are F2.8, on a Full Frame body. Best of luck.

BebuLamar

I can't imagine shooting real estate photos without a tripod indoor.

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

billnikon wrote:

3 mm and 3 stops

Ugh, two stops.

Jerry Coupe Loc: Kent, WA

Check LensRental or BorrowLens and see if they have the model you are considering available to rent. They you can have a real test.

Alternative, if you have a good camera store in your area, take you body in, ask to try the lens on your body, make some comparable shots with the test lens and your f2.8 lens. Then you can see at wide open the difference in shutter speed and also image quality. Or keep speed constant and see how aperture and image quality vary.
good luck with your search.

Bll Quinby

If I were approaching real estate as a photographer, I would use the tripod route. Even if they don't know it, I think nearly all Realtors are looking for HDR. Tripod, CPL, 5 or 7 bracketed shots at low ISO with a speed of 1/1000. If you can juggle your f-stop to a 10, I am told that is where most lenses shine. Then set your camera to 2 second timer and let the camera do all the work. Crystal clear, HDR photos, w/o blow outs or buried blacks is what puts the commission in the realtor's pocket. Since you're on a tripod, you can fudge that speed. I habitually shoot there since I'm a portrait shooter and despise blurry eyes. But the high speed shutter assures me a clean shot, especially hand-held with a long piece of glass on the front end. Some photogs say, "Just light it correctly to begin with . . . " but we know how impractical that can be when you have an hour to shoot a 5,000 sq' house with gardens and landscaping.

Worth a try before you let go of the cash.

Good luck and keep shooting.

ChristianHJensen

Shutterbug57 wrote:

It’s 2 stops more light and a bit wider. Trade off is shallower DOF.

DOF is probably not a huge concern for a 16mm lens.....................

photogeneralist Loc: Lopez Island Washington State

If you are doing real-estate photography, you are (or should be) using a tripod. Maximum aperture then becomes unimportant since you can then vary shutter speed for correct exposure while using smaller apertures for greater depth of field. If your angle of view is sufficient (never show more than two walls) then save your money and use what you have.

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

If you need it , get it. On your APS-C camera the 16mm would encompass a FOV equivalent to a 24mm which arguably would be the smallest focal length used for real estate. I happen to agree with the general consensus having done some RE in the past. Wider is generally better, tripod is a must for ambient shots.
I would be looking close at the Samyang / Rokinon 12mm f/2 which IMO, which does splendidly for RE ambient light shooting hand held. If you are a tripod, fast lenses are not so important unless you are very busy and time is an issue. Bracketing can also help.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

MontanaTrace wrote:

I'm shooting at infinite. Large rooms. Subject at min. 15 feet away. No background. DOF should be fine. However, would this make a decent lens for portraits? Nice bokeh?

If the angle of view won't be too wide, then it would be much brighter and fine for real estate.

An aperture of 1.4 can give good bokeh but a typical portrait lens has a focal length greater than a nifty fifty on a FF, or greater than 35mm on an APS-C. A focal length of any less requires getting too close to the subject and shots appear distorted.