Lens choice for interior photography work?

[juan_su]

Hi everyone!

 

I am branching off my typical line of work and will soon work for an

interior designer. She just basically wants me to do the shot after

she composes the rooms. I'll be shooting bathrooms, kitchens, living

rooms, etc.

 

I would like some suggestions on what lens I should use.

My choices are:

50mm AF 1.8D

24-85mm AFS 3.5-4.5

18-35mm AF 3.5-3.5

 

From the samples I see of the previous photographer and also what the

client wants, a large depth of field is required to capture all the

detail. I'm inclined to use the 50mm as the main choice. What do you

think and what do you recommend?

[leslie_cheung]

You would need 24mm and wider imo. Step down w/ a tripod

and a flashgun perhaps.

[leslie_cheung]

...and watch out for barrel distortion at the wide end of your

zooms. Get primes if the job pays well imo.

[juan_su]

I should stated that I plan to shoot film, F5 with SB28DX and on tripod and cable release as well. The job does pay, but it's not a huge budget so I'd like to use what lenses I already own.

[Robert_Lai]

In an interior, I find that the standard lens is the Nikkor 28mm PC. Whether you obtain the f/3.5 or the f/4 version is up to you. I got mine in very mint shape used on ebay for about $600.<p>If you have an unlimited budget (which I know you say you don't), then you could order the Schneider Super Angulon PC 28mm f/2.8 in Nikon mount. Unlike the Nikkor, which has a bit of barrel distortion and some chromatic abberration on a digital camera (but I've not seen it with film), the Schneider reputedly has neither of these features. That's as it should be, as the Schneider is a special order item retailing for $1900 at B&H. Looking at Erwin Puts' review of the Leica 28mm f/2.8 PC, I can't help but think that it's the same Schneider lens. Leica experts will correct me no doubt.<p>I find that 35mm is already becoming a rather "tele" focal length indoors. Other very useful focal lengths are the 24mm and 20mm primes.<p>Whatever you decide to use, you need a double bubble level as well as a tripod. I would also suggest as many manual flash units as you can get your hands on, along with a flashmeter to balance them all, and optical or radio slave triggers. I used a couple of Vivitar 285HV units, and some other no-name cheap flashes from the bargain bin of the camera store. These were balanced using a Gossen Luna Pro F, which I also picked up on ebay for a bit more than $100.<p>Finally, for film I find that Fuji Reala or Fuji Astia work wonderfully. I'm including a couple of shots of my home, taken last year when I was learning to shoot interiors. This is on Reala, taken with my F3, using the 28mm PC to advantage with the shifts.<div></div>

[Robert_Lai]

Closeup of the hallway setting. Again, the 28 PC was used. The scans are from a Kodak Photo CD, which isn't of the highest resolution.<div></div>

[Robert_Lai]

One last tip: a good A-frame type ladder will come in very handy to give a higher viewpoint. This is especially good with rooms with cathedral ceilings.<p>I'm throwing in a view of the kitchen. Again, using the 28PC. The shadows reveal that multiple flash units were used, but I tried to give the impression that they came from the window lighting. I was trying to convey a light and airy feeling to the room.<div></div>

[lex_jenkins]

Ditto what Robert advised: gaining a little elevation via a stepladder or even short stepstool (or chair) can help you gain enough elevation to minimize the need for tilting the camera up or down, and can in some cases eliminate the need for a PC lens. This works very well with interiors having fairly high ceilings - around 10 feet or so.

[douglas_green1]

I'd show up with a 20mm, 28mm, and 50mm lenses. But I already own those. At a minimum, a 24mm or 28mm would be required, and my preference would be for primes, due to better correction for linear distortion, and better maximum apertures.

 

If your 18-35mm lens is well corrected for distortion, you might be able to get away with that (or, if, as I suspect, it's got barrel distortion at the ultra wide end, and pincusion distortion at the 35mm end, it should be pretty distortion-free somewhere in the middle, like near 24-28mm). I personally have never had a zoom wider than 28mm that was well corrected for barrel distortion, but I've never owned a wide to ultra-wide zoom.

 

But I think even a bigger challenge for you than the lens, will be the lighting you use - You will want multiple, well diffused light sources to avoid glare and shadows.

[juan_su]

Thanks for all the comments and information. Thanks Robert for the sample posts too. One of my main concerns is actually trying to give proper perspective without distorting the objects in the shot. As for multiple flash issue, the place will actually be light properly by the interior designer herself to give the feeling that she wants to convey. My job is to mainly capture what the eye sees.

 

Also, in regards to films. Thanks for the fuji suggestions, but what are your thoughts on Kodak Portra 160VC or 160NC? I still have many of those in my fridge. Will those do a similar job to the fuji films you mentioned?

 

Also, Robert, what f stop did you shoot those pictures at?

[greg_barringer]

If you're shooting without a flash, you may also want to preset white balance. Try an Expodisc instead fo a gray card. Are you usng film or digital?

[Robert_Lai]

Juan,<p>I can't remember the exact f/stops, but I don't think they were any smaller than f/8. Most of the time I was firing the flashes into large white foamcore boards (available from any art supply store for about $1.50 each) to diffuse the light a bit. That also robbed the intensity out of the flashes. I've found the Nikkor 28 f/3.5 PC to be pretty decent even wide open, though f/5.6 and above will give you the optimum results.<p>I've not used the Kodak films that you mention, but any of the lower contrast, normally saturated films that wedding photographers love should do the trick. The first time, I tried using Kodak Gold 100, and it was far too contrasty for this work.<p>I would say that even if the designer is lighting the setup, you should still bring a lot of flash units firing into a diffuser or firing off a foamcore board to act as fill illumination. Most designers tend to light in a very contrasty way to give a dramatic stage effect. Unfortunately, that's too hard for film or digital to capture all of the details in the shadows and the highlights. It'll be up to you to reduce the contrast range appropriately without ruining her lighting intention.

[lex_jenkins]

You should also ask your client for her preferences regarding the balance of interior vs. exterior lighting.

 

Traditionally great pains were taken to ensure that exterior detail was preserved. I suppose this was in the interest of trying to replicate what the human eye sees. But it often impressed me more as an unnecessary exercise in technical virtuosity. More often than not, I found the results cluttered and distracting.

 

With magazines having a more contemporary sensibility like "Elle Decor" the exteriors are often allowed to blow out. I prefer this for most photos. It lends a more airy, open feel with fewer distractions. And since less artificial lighting is needed the photos look more natural.

 

Some of their photos do maintain exterior detail but only when it really adds to the photo.

 

Pick up copies of two or three magazines that have different photo styles and ask the client which she prefers.

 

The standard style of "Elle Decor" is open and airy with little exterior detail visible from the inside. I'm fairly certain that reflectors, rather than a lot of flash or continuous lighting, is used to illuminate certain areas to maintain a sense of depth without overlighting everything. "Elle Decor" is very upscale, shooting mostly isolated villas, renovated cottages and farmhouses shielded by hedges, or Manhattan apartments. When the exterior of a city apartment has a good view they'll balance the exposure to reveal it.

 

"House Beautiful" is more traditional, but not quite as staid as "Redbook" and others. Rooms are typically evenly illuminated from foreground to background. They do lean toward overexposed exteriors when the outside might be distracting, such as a view of the street with cars parked outside.

 

"Architectural Digest" has taken on a bit more contemporary look but remains fairly conservative compared with other upscale magazines on architecture and interiors. Even when exteriors are allowed to blow out, interiors tend to be fully illuminated - lots of flash or continuous lighting. And they put a lot of thought into how people appear in their illustrated articles, even celebrities. "Elle Decor" often avoids including more than one small photo of the celebrity, altho' a recent article featuring the summer home of Sarah Jessica Parker and Matthew Broderick was more personal than usual.

 

I'd also take a good, sturdy stepstool (which I already have) and a much taller tripod (which I don't have).

 

Good luck.

[juan_su]

Thanks for all the great suggestions once again. I just came back from my shoot today. It went really well. The designer I'm working was very good to work with and I was able to discuss concepts together with her to capture the image.

 

I found myself using Fuji NPH400 set at 320ISO. I was on tripod and didn't need to use too much flash as there was plenty of sunlight coming thru but when I did use it, I needed it to be off the camera. Luckily I had the speedlight on the sc-17 cord. Also, I found myself shooting at least at F8. At times, I shot the same shot at F11 of F16 to give greater depth of field. I ended shooting on the wider end a lot. Unfortunately, I had to use my 24-85 AFS lens, but my concern is the sharpness and distortion on that lens, so I tried to see if I can shoot at 28mm most of the time.

 

I guess if this keep on going well, I should invest on a 24mm or 28mm prime lens. I can't wait until I get the results. I got back again to the house to shoot the exact same shots once the house has been renovated.

 

Thanks all!

[jeff h.]

I have shot some interior shots for homeowners, schools, and an architect. I mainly use a

20/2.8D lens, and also a 50/1.4D lens. To keep the perspective under control, I use a

small step-stool that allows me to get a few feet off the ground. I have never had to shoot

an interior that had a cathedral ceiling. The hardest part, I find, is to get good color with

the interior lights: there is a greenish cast from fluorescent lights that requires a filter

(B+W #499) with daylight film. I have toyed with the idea of getting the Nikkor 28/3.5 PC

lens, but I have never really had a true need for the lens. Reportedly, some software

(Photoshop?) allows you to manipulate perspective, but I've never looked into this.