meandihagee
Well-known
Hello,
I want to buy a 28mm for a project shot indoor in tight spaces. The 28mm looks to me as the widest I can go (with a RF) without getting the lines all over the place due to perspective.
Am I right, or I should with a SLR for this?
I want to buy a 28mm for a project shot indoor in tight spaces. The 28mm looks to me as the widest I can go (with a RF) without getting the lines all over the place due to perspective.
Am I right, or I should with a SLR for this?
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Given that I know of no built-in or accessory finder with a projected grid or crosshair, the success with a camera without some kind of TTL finder system (whether SLR, view camera, or anything with live view) will be somewhat limited - at least once you want a handheld camera with purely visual levelling aids.
With a tripod and spirit level, you can easily make do with even wider angle lenses - 21mm or wider RF lenses once have been sold for perfectly serious architecture and landscape applications without skewed lines.
With a tripod and spirit level, you can easily make do with even wider angle lenses - 21mm or wider RF lenses once have been sold for perfectly serious architecture and landscape applications without skewed lines.
oftheherd
Veteran
I have seen some 21mm shots correctly leveled, that showed very minimal to no distortion. I don't recall for sure, but I think the one that impressed me most was used for some photos by Keith. While some SLR give 100% view, most allow a little room for cropping, whether by enlarger or slide holder. Practice will tell you what you can expect from a 28mm or shorter lens, but considering the cost, that isn't perhaps the best way to find out.
Richard G
Veteran
A 21 can be controlled with care, even off the tripod and without a level. I sometimes look at the upright baseplate to ensure I'm straight. It is likely to be better for indoors, but it is a question of whether you want to be lumbered with a lens you won't use much.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
It can be done, but whenever I did so, I made sure I took lots of extra pictures, putting down the camera and relaxing between each shot. There still was a fair risk of losing a few relevant pictures on a bad day. It certainly is a situation where tripods are generally useful.
These days you can of course un-skew pretty horrible pictures in the post-processing, if you don't insist on an all-analogue workflow.
tfarrell
Newbie
I think ultimately it comes down to which system/finder you're working with. If your subject is really important and you know you will be able to get the results you want, then it is probably safer to go with an SLR.
Also another thing to consider is how often you'd use something like a 28mm or wider lens. I personally love my 21mm, but if you're only going to use it once, and you already have a camera system that's perfectly capable of getting the job done then there's no point in picking one up.
Also another thing to consider is how often you'd use something like a 28mm or wider lens. I personally love my 21mm, but if you're only going to use it once, and you already have a camera system that's perfectly capable of getting the job done then there's no point in picking one up.
Brian Legge
Veteran
What are you shooting? You could always go with a perspective control SLR lens. Of course many of those make Leica glass look cheap. 
mdarnton
Well-known
Controlling some aspects of W/A oddities is all about how you hold the camera level, in some respects, but then there are other things you can't control: circles get progressively more oval the farther they are from the center, for instance. This was shot with an effective focal length of 15mm, and I was careful about the setup. As long as it's all straight lines, fine, but if there'd been a basketball on the floor in the corner, though, it would have been a disaster:
Hall, Alpena by Michael Darnton, on Flickr
Hall, Alpena by Michael Darnton, on Flickr
Araakii
Well-known
A good 21mm or 24mm lens (the new 21mm or 24mm super elmar) should have minimal distortion. At least that's what I've heard
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Let me suggest 3 alternatives, all outside the box most of the previous replies:
1) embrace the perspective distortion and fold it in to your creative vision. Actually, I believe this is a quite common approach.
2) shoot with a panoramic (rotating lens camera) such as a Widelux or Noblex. Some do quite creative work with these.
3) shoot several frames with a narrow FOV camera and stitch them together with an image editor like Photoshop to make your own panoramic view. I believe this is a built in function with the Fuji X-100 although I have never used it.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
A lot of corrections to perspective and distortion can be made in PS after the fact if you're willing to scan.
kermaier
Well-known
Controlling some aspects of W/A oddities is all about how you hold the camera level, in some respects, but then there are other things you can't control: circles get progressively more oval the farther they are from the center, for instance. This was shot with an effective focal length of 15mm, and I was careful about the setup. As long as it's all straight lines, fine, but if there'd been a basketball on the floor in the corner, though, it would have been a disaster:
Hall, Alpena by Michael Darnton, on Flickr
As it is, the shape of the circular elements at the top of the doorframe moldings changes considerably as you move from center to edge.
meandihagee
Well-known
thank you for the advice.
maybe I could level the camera an RF with a spirit level on the hot shoe...
a swing camera was one of my original ideas, yes, but I think the pics will look kinda similar
maybe I could level the camera an RF with a spirit level on the hot shoe...
a swing camera was one of my original ideas, yes, but I think the pics will look kinda similar
Sparrow
Veteran
... if you keep them level even a 12mm looks OK indoors ... I have that CV one that fits in the accessory shoe.
meandihagee
Well-known
... if you keep them level even a 12mm looks OK indoors ... I have that CV one that fits in the accessory shoe.
the cv bubble level you can look through? that's super cool. if only I could find one...
mdarnton
Well-known
There's no magic to leveling a camera, and a bubble isn't necessary: you point the center of the photo at a place that is the same height above the ground as your camera is, and you're done. Much more accurate and faster than a level. If you're still having trouble holding the camera level in the other direction. . . . well, you should have solved that problem a long time ago if you're using your camera regularly. if you're insecure about it, use a tripod and stand back and look at the camera. You're making too much of a very simple problem.
If you're intentionally tilting the camera as in the post above (it was intentional, right?), remember that the line going up the center is the one that should be straightly vertical. (you can see it's not, it's towards the left. So much for bubbles.
If you're intentionally tilting the camera as in the post above (it was intentional, right?), remember that the line going up the center is the one that should be straightly vertical. (you can see it's not, it's towards the left. So much for bubbles.