Options
Two simple questions
Hello gang,
First off I need to say that I am only a point and shooter. I love photography and maybe someday I will be able to really dig into it but for now I have very basic questions that I did not see posts for so far.
I am a Realtor and use a simple Fuji 6MP P&S pocket camera. I actually think the picture quality is pretty good. OK, that probably says it all! Anyway, I have two issues and am looking for a simple, practical camera to improve on two things. One is inside room pictures. I was told that a wider angle lens, say @28mm would make the rooms look a little bigger. I am afraid of getting a fish eye look which I have seen in some pics. The other thing is taking pictures outside with just an LCD screen makes it tough with sun glare.
I would like a recommendation of a simple digital camera that would take care of those issues. I have read ads for sub-DSLR camera that sound like they would work (I do not really need a long range lens for this but I guess would not hurt for non work related pics). However I have read reviews where even some of the bigger name manufacturers disappointed buyers. Seeing as how a pocket camera seems to satisfy me perhaps I would not notice the things they do?
That is one; the next is where to find improved techniques for the kind of simple shots I am talking about. I've done a quick look for am not coming up with them here so far. I suppose that these are very rudimentary issues that most here take for granted.
Thanks in advance and I hope to some day delve into much more advanced photography but at this point it is a practical matter for me.
First off I need to say that I am only a point and shooter. I love photography and maybe someday I will be able to really dig into it but for now I have very basic questions that I did not see posts for so far.
I am a Realtor and use a simple Fuji 6MP P&S pocket camera. I actually think the picture quality is pretty good. OK, that probably says it all! Anyway, I have two issues and am looking for a simple, practical camera to improve on two things. One is inside room pictures. I was told that a wider angle lens, say @28mm would make the rooms look a little bigger. I am afraid of getting a fish eye look which I have seen in some pics. The other thing is taking pictures outside with just an LCD screen makes it tough with sun glare.
I would like a recommendation of a simple digital camera that would take care of those issues. I have read ads for sub-DSLR camera that sound like they would work (I do not really need a long range lens for this but I guess would not hurt for non work related pics). However I have read reviews where even some of the bigger name manufacturers disappointed buyers. Seeing as how a pocket camera seems to satisfy me perhaps I would not notice the things they do?
That is one; the next is where to find improved techniques for the kind of simple shots I am talking about. I've done a quick look for am not coming up with them here so far. I suppose that these are very rudimentary issues that most here take for granted.
Thanks in advance and I hope to some day delve into much more advanced photography but at this point it is a practical matter for me.
0
Comments
I did a Google Search : Here
And it returned some results. Look at the Search box it displays to see how to effect a dgrin only search.
Hope that helps!
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Panasonic makes several - I own a Lumix DMC- ZX7, because it has a built in GPS unit that tags the location data into the files. But the lens is as wide as a standard 28mm lens also. It is inexpensive too.
It does not shoot RAW, but it does shoot tiffs so I get by with it.
I have several images shot with the ZS7 here - http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/Travel/Alaska-with-Marc-et-al-August/13910583_GA99Q#1020907393_RqRVq
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
what Fuji do you have
It's not what you look at that matters: Its what you see!
Nikon
http://www.time2smile.smugmug.com
Proper interior (and exterior) shooting is not something to be taken lightly, at least if you really want good results.
It requires low-light-no-noise capable camera body, great artefacts-free optics, knowledge of lighting (and maybe a few extra lights with remote triggers), a tripod, a good software - and knowing how to use all that... Before you know it, you're talking 5..7 grand worth of equipment and years of training/learning. Skip any single element - and you're back to the glorified snapshots...:-(
Basic rules of *any* business dictate that you should outsource everything that is not your core competency. You're in a real estate, not in a real estate photography. Don't let your hobby mess up with your lifeline. It's a waste of time and bad for business...
An old Nikon Coolpix 8400 (24mm equivalent) with an SB600 to pop the flash off the back wall or ceiling would give a realtor all he or she would ever need 99% of the time. The most important feature a realtor's camera can have (other than a good wide angle capability) is a hot shoe.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Can you provide a link to your web site? I am interested in viewing your architectural shots.
Sam
Architects & Designers
Kitchens
Baths
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
I agree with the other comments too, in so far as there's only a certain level of quality needed for home shots. Depends on what price range of home is being presented, of course, but turning the average home sale shots into more than just documentation could lead to let down when the potential buyer sees the real room.
My wife and I have been looking at homes on line and the pictures are 99.99% gawd awful. Just a little effort by the Realtor would make a big improvement in the shots and give a reasonable presentation, good enough to entice the prospective buyer to visit and look first hand. The web site Loving Listing shows how NOT to do it.
Doug
My B&W Photos
Motorcycles in B&W
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Thank you so much! Positive feedback from people on this forum is more meaningful to me than kudos from non-photographers (like clients) who are easily impressed.
Although I like their money.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Very nice architectural shots. Great color, detail, lighting, and although I like the compositions many images had me wanting to see a wider view.
How many lights do you typically use, and how long does it typically take to do say a single room shot?
I would love to spend a day with you.
Sam
Thank you Sam. You're very generous. Many of these images are actually cropped from wider views for the clients' purposes. Truth be told though, most full room images are usually a bit boring (if technically interesting.) Usually one of the first shots I take is a full wide zoom shot, just to show the client what's possible. They never get excited about the image, though they're uniformly impressed with the capability. I also use that image as an opportunity to dazzle them with tethered shooting and Lightroom's capabilities. I never make it look too easy, but I want them "wowed." The most often used images in their advertising seem to be vignettes, highly concentrated images of color, fabric, space, and texture.
I shoot Nikons, and the Creative Lighting System is one of the biggest reasons. I have one SB800 and three SB600s. I use the pop-up on the cameras to control all the speedlights. I don't think I've ever actually used more than three flash heads in a shot though. When at all possible, I try to make use of the lighting plan the designer charged his client for! I mostly use the speedlights for fill, or to balance interior and exterior light. I used to use umbrellas a lot, but have evolved into bouncing off back walls and corners more than any other particular technique. My Photovision 34" Digital Calibration Target is my best friend.
Nikon's CLS makes for very fast set-up and take-down. No cables, no pocket wizards, no external battery packs or a/c cords. I can usually get two good images of a space within a couple hours of arrival, and that includes "styling" the space and schmoozing the client and her client. I'll also admit to making a shot look tougher than it is. People are funny. They want to believe you're working hard for the money they're paying you.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
The equivalent of 28mm (on a 35mm camera) would be the minimum that you'd want, and still probably not enough... I'd start with 24mm (16 on a DSLR). If using a DSLR, I'd go for a 3rd party (Tokina, Sigma, etc) ultrawide zoom, ie: 10-20, 12-24, etc. For point and shoots, look into a Raynox wide converter, ie: .5x or .6x that will thread onto most good point-and-shoot cameras via an adapter. This won't yield as good of quality as the DSLR lenses, but will get the job done.
You won't get fisheye if it's not a fisheye lens, however, there will be some barrel distortion, especially with a converter. I correct this in photoshop. Really the only way around this is to look through the viewfinder.
Be careful here, because this can be the source of great frustration; there is no magic camera, and you will likely be very disappointed in your investments... a lot more than a good camera go into a good final image. I've heard quite a few stories from agents complaining that they went through a lot of headache and money in cameras only to find that didn't get them the images they want, which in the end drove them to me. If you have realistic expectations, then you might find a satisfactory camera solution.
I personally would recommend skipping point-and-shoots and look at a bottom-end Canon or Nikon DSLR and an ultrawide lens... that will run you just shy of $1k. These will also have a hotshoe which will allow you to use a good flash. The biggest advantages of a DSLR are lower noise, less lens distortion and much better dynamic range.
For this, take a look at: www.photographyforrealestate.net
Just a follow up on this. I settled on a Fuji S1800. I appreciate the comments and suggestions. As I wrote I am on a budget and had a couple of features I was after. This has those and the bonus of panoramic shots too. My limited research has really opened my eyes to a whole different world of real estate photography. I freely admit that I am not dealing with the kind of high end RE that some of you guys are. You can buy a pretty nice house here for what some of the kitchens cost in those properties.
I imagine that most of you could buy a "camera in a bag" at the supermarket and out shoot me with a high end DSLR so I will use what I have and try to learn how to use this better. Hopefully when I need a better setup I will be able to afford it!