[marcinklysewicz]

As in title - best lens for architecture photography (churches) in canon system - for full frame Canon 5D and for Canon 40D. What do you recommend? Help please .

[stepheno]

This is not so much a recommendation as what I use. I have both a 5D and a 40D and so my lens line-up reflects that, to a certain extent. For a general walkabout, which includes architecture I will use a 24-105 on both cameras. If I feel I need more width then I will use the 17-40. Both of those are cracking lenses.

For extra width on the 5D I use a Sigma 12-24. Now this produces some extra-ordinary effects and you may lose a lot of the frame when lens correcting. HTH

[Markulous]

Of course what we all should use are Tilt-and-Shift Lenses but they're a tad expensive!

As Stephen says above, if you use a wide then you'll get distortion (which I like under certain conditions) or face losing a hefty chunk when you attempt correcting (which is not very easy anyway and never looks absolutely right)

So I use whatever image I'm trying to achieve: 10-20mm for distortion through to 18-50mm for slightly truer capture

[marcinklysewicz]

stepheno your example photo looks great but it's not what i'm looking for - it must be perfect without any "special" effects. I understand that it should be something around 55mm.

[stepheno]

Just as an example here's the image after correcting and cropping -



and since you mention 55mm. this one was taken with the 24-105 at 58mm. HTH.

[Markulous]

I'm thinking you mean more like this, Marcin, tho' this was taken with a Zenitar 16mm fisheye and was then corrected (so it is possible to get the geometry right!)

[marcinklysewicz]

hmmm... i don't understand it? so what is the benefit of those lenses if i need to correct photos using some software? wi(l)de angle ?

if you could click here:

http://www.klysewicz.co.uk/images/ph...2/church03.jpg

for that kind of photography i need good lens.

[stepheno]

The real benefit of wide angle is the SFX but mainly for certain landscapes.

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by marcinklysewicz

hmmm... i don't understand it? so what is the benefit of those lenses if i need to correct photos using some software?

Without the wide I wouldn't be able to get







But if I was going to take architecture with little/no distortion then the only one to get would be a Tilt and Shft, as I mentioned. It's the only way to get close to being certain of no distortion

[AQ]

If the lens you use on the camera is horizontal then any verticals in a building will stay vertical (near enough) you will of course get a lot of foreground in any picture taken that way and you will have to be further away from the building to get it all in.

If you tilt the lens upwards, as most of us do, the verticals will appear to converge. The more you tilt the more the convergence. Also the wider angle the lens is the more convergence you see as in Stephano's first picture and less so in that link you posted of the church. In that the verticals are still not vertical in the frame.

This is not a fault of the lens just the way the laws of optics work.

You only have three options

You can use the expensive tilt and shift lenses, as already mentioned, to get a picture in the camera with the verticals and horizontals "square"

Keep the camera horizontal and far enough away to get all the building in. Not always possible in cities etc

Correct the image something like Photoshop again as Stephano showed.

[silkstone]

Apart from some spectacular perspective effects, one basic reason for w/a is so you can get the whole subject in the frame without stepping backwards over the cliff or into the path of a bus.

Correcting converging verticals etc isn't something to be afraid of, nor does it spoil the shot if it's done carefully. IMO it's best done by manipulating the RAW image using a converter which allows perspective correction. The effect is more-or-less the same as using a tilt/shift lens, as shown by the excellent examples from Mark and Stephen in this thread.

[marcinklysewicz]

thank you all for your help . i have to say that it's great to have people like you here . i'm preparing some project plan and i needed this information about lenses. now i know what i should look for. also i found this website:

Canon USA Consumer Products - EF Lenses 101 - Applications - Architecture

could be useful for everyone (portrait, close up, sport, landscape, interiors, wildlife, architecture - lenses) - but for canon only .

[AQ]

Originally Posted by marcinklysewicz;

also i found this website:

[URL="http://www.usa.canon.com/app/html/EFLenses101/app_architecture.html"

Canon USA Consumer Products - EF Lenses 101 - Applications - Architecture[/url]

could be useful for everyone (portrait, close up, sport, landscape, interiors, wildlife, architecture - lenses) - but for canon only .

Thanks for the link. Who cares about Nikon anyway

I think that if you get one of each of those lenes you should be well equiped for whatever buildings you want to photograph.

[Markulous]

Originally Posted by Anthraquinone

Thanks for the link. Who cares about Nikon anyway

Nikon Perspective Control Lenses | Shift Lenses

Oh, and that 1st pic of mine was taken with my Sigma SD10 + Zenitar, none of this Canon nonsense!

[fionaB]

well i adore old architecture and most if not all of mine up to now have been taken with the bog standard 18-55 kit lens.......... note i said up until now when i collected my new walkabout lens from the post office...... the sigma 20 - 40 f2.8. havent ahd a chance to put it thru its paces yet......but i will!

Fi

[marcinklysewicz]

fionaB when you'll have some examples show them please. it'll take me some time to find funds for special "architecture" lens so the more I know the better choice I'll make.

[John F]

Well I have a Canon 24mm tilt and shift lens. I don't use it all that much because it has a tendency towards CA. I find I prefer to use my 17/24mm zoom when I cannot get far enough away to use 50mm. I did submit some pictures on this forum that were taken with the T&S lens. The verticals were parallel but it was commented that this did not look natural and I must agree. I was told that those who use large format with tilt and shift front and back panels always allow some slight convergence of the verticals.

[spxxxx]

I've just got the 16-35 f/2.8 MKII - and it handles the distortion very well - far better than my excellent 24-105.

It is a tad expensive though. but for my use at weddings the lack of distortion is invaluable