Interior Wide Angle Shots,

[PeterP]

Christopher,
You picked a good camera :!:
That 18-55 works out to a 27-82.5 with the Nikons 1.5x crop factor.

I'd be careful picking a fish-eye, the effect is interesting to say the least but the distortion makes the images hard to view in large doses. Look for a normal rectilinear lens like a Sigma 12-24, gives the wide views without the fish eye type distortion.

Sarah,
Well see, this one is a black tie type affairs full of local politicians and socialites.
I just don't fit in with that crowd to well.
More likely to see me tarred/feathered and run out of town for something I did there.
For instance, is it appropriate to scoop up some caviar with a lens cap? :G

peterp

[speaklightly]

Caviar is a lens cap, well... But none the less since you jumped into this thread I think that it is logical that you should supply us with a sample photo, as promised. by the way people often call my memory remarkable. We're waiting.

Sarah Joyce

[PeterP]

Here you go, a few just to tide you over, since you seem to be impatient.
I dug up some people free images from a summer wedding.

Temple shot @ 28mm


Temple shot @ 19mm


Temple shot Wedding Altar setup @ 60mm


Temple shot up through the floors @ 100mm


All Shot full frame so no 35mm equivlenecy,
iso 800 - 1600,
no strobes, not permitted in temple..

[speaklightly]

PeterP-

You're off the hook me lad! The #1 photo leaves something to be desired, but the rest are quite nice. Thanks very much for digging them up. It is always nice to give the other members of the forum a visual of what we are discussing.

Sarah Joyce

[PeterP]

I do agree about #1 they would not allow flash in the building for the wedding, and I used photoshop tools to try to bring the "I don't know what it is called" out of some very dark shadows. It went pasty, but at least was printable. It is an important feature so you need a shot of it, but it also looks identical from every side:roll:

I wanted to call it a reliquary, but I don't think that is right name since the building was erected by a sect/cult after they were ejected from the Quakers circa 1825.

Interesting thing about the building is its symmetry, inside and out, no matter how you look at it you get the same patterns of pillars.
It is now a museum, open for hire in the summer, so I will hire it myself next year so I can get in and properly shoot internal the details.

I'll dig a bit more and see if I can find an external shot of the building with no people in it, it is quite interesting.

I must say next to an outdoor wedding last summer that was held on dock & beach with no shade anywhere to be found, this was the hardest place to shoot in.

On another note: WhooHoo it is raining today:!: Means I get out of shooting at a Beaver troup learning how to set up an outdoor camp. :-)

peterp

[Montague]

PeterP wrote:

Which goes to show why real-estate people are not photographers.
A 28mm lens equivalence in 35mm, is just beginning to boarder on the wide-angle range.
It is much better than the existing x50 camera, but does nothing spectacular.

peterp

Peterp

You are so right. We Realtors are helpless with photography. I'm trying to learn. This was a shot of a ceiling in a master bedroom and it turned out pretty good. A Nikon 8400 with the wide angle lens. Most real photographers want beautiful outside shots of open spaces....we're just trying to make the kitchen little bigger!!

Montague