Wide angle for interior/architecture

[charlie]

I'd like some suggestions for a wide angle lens for interiors/architecture, something well corrected, full frame, on a budget. Is that to much to ask?

Is the nikkor 16-35mm F/4 lens worth looking into?

I'm open to all makes and models, old or new and would like to hear your thoughts on what focal lengths you prefer in this regard, and examples with various lenses if you wouldn't mind sharing. I have casual experience with interiors and architecture but nothing to serious. 

Currently my widest lens is the nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AI (not great for straight lines), followed by the 24-70mm 2.8mm.

Thank you.

[John Harkus]

The 14-24mm is an amazing lens, but they don't come cheap. Depends how wide you need to go. I have a Sigma 14mm that's pretty good too.
John

[charlie]

The 14-24mm is out of budget at the moment. I'm interested in looking at lenses under $1000, preferably much less. I suspect that's a tall order for a well corrected wide angle. I don't need perfection, just acceptable.

[John Harkus]

I have a 20mm f/4 which works quite well, and was a very good price. The new 20mm lenses from both Sigma and Nikon look fantastic with the Nikon looking really good value.

[Akira]

If you don't need to handhold the canera, pano stitching may be another choice.  If you have a prime lens of 35-50mm range, it would be a good start.

[Airy]

Correcting the wavy distortion of the 20/3.5 AI may be possible; did you check PT Lens ?

Ohterwise I'm a fan of the Sigma 24/1.4 "A". Different FL and wide aperture make it a sensible complement to your 20/3.5. Still wide enough for interiors & architecture, I guess. Never mind those stating that it is the least convincing of the "A" series, basing on MTF charts I guess - I enjoy it more than the 35/1.4 for instance (troublesome bokeh). Sharpness wide open is very good on Df for sure, and once stopped down you'll enjoy a *very* sharp and well corrected lens with particularly low distortion. You'll hardly need f/1.4 for interiors and architecture, but may still enjoy it for new usages. Ultimately, the weight and size (even though primarily motivated by the aperture) pay off in the other domains too.

See in particular the following page:

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.msg10015.html#msg10015

[Frank Fremerey]

I second to Akira: If you take a well corrected 24 or 35mm lens and put it on a tripod with a sturdy NPP-head you get all the architecture and correction capability you will ever dream of.

@1000 Euros you can buy both easily. Do you have a tripod?

If you want handheld single frames get the AF-S 1.8/20G

[charlie]

Thanks all for your input.

Stitching will not always be an option so I am interested in something that can work well with a single frame. I'll test with what I've got with your suggestions and I'll also try some stitching with my 35mm & 50mm primes just for comparisons sake. If these aren't working for me I will probably look into the 20mm f/1.8.

Out of curiosity, what about the 16-35mm f/4 or 17-35mm f/2.8 for this type of shooting?
I don't recall seeing much talk about either of those lenses these days.

[PedroS]

It really depends of how "correct"/"good" your work needs to be.
I have done a lot of interiors/architecture photos for architects portfolios and nothing can replace the PC ones.
They are expensive for sure. Even some times nothing replaces large format...

So if you are in a budget the new 20mm f1.8 is very good, but be prepared for some time on PS. One thing that most don't realize, is the PS corrections are, at the end, not any more real... because you loose the right perspective dimensions. Bt they are pleasing to the eye, thought.

So, for me, the only way to reproduce the best you can, and see, is like Akira said, pano stitching...

Either way a tripod, with a pano head, is always a most.

[Akira]

So, for me, the only way to reproduce the best you can, and see, is like Akira said, pano stitching...

Either way a tripod, with a pano head, is always a most.

Encouraged by Pedro's comment, and based on the fact that NG and FZ are friends again now, I would be happy to share this link of an excellent tutorial by Alan (a.k.a. Alan7140) on Fotozones titled "You always have a tilt/shift lens with you" here:

http://www.fotozones.com/live/index.php/page/articles/_/misc/you-always-have-a-tiltshift-lens-with-you-r182

It is well worth reading. 

[Erik Lund]

The 20-35mm AF-D 2.8 is very well corrected, CA can be removed in PP.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

The 14-24/2.8 Nikkor would be my first recommendation but outside of your budget. The 20/1.8 Nikkor is excellent and slightly under 1k. I sold my 14-24 because I am so happy with the 20/1.8 and it is much lighter and smaller so I am more likely to bring it with me when traveling.

[Frank Fremerey]

The 17-35 is hi res but has very accentuated distortion. I got dizzy using it after a while.

The 16-35 is much better in distortion but it is a low pass filter on hi res bodies.

Ok on a D3 but a waste on a D810.

[pluton]

The 17-35 is hi res but has very accentuated distortion. I got dizzy using it after a while.

I have had a 17-35 for years. On DX cams, then D3, D800.   At 17mm, the distortion that makes Frank dizzy be software corrected to a great extent.  Good enough for interior architecture and exterior building shots, in my opinion. 
Interestingly, once you zoom it up to about the 22mm-25mm range, the lines appear to become very straight.  Better than most 24mm and 25mm prime lenses.
Closer technical inspection reveals that the 17-35 has, at 22mm, crossed over into positive(pincushion) distortion.  No matter....I think it looks good. 
Note: Considerable sample variation has been reported throughout the sales life of the 17-35.

[aerobat]

I fully support Ilkka's recommendation for the 20mm f/1.8
It has low linear distortions - post processing can be kept to minimum.
I like night photography a lot and the 20mm shines at nice starbursts.

Another candidate may be the new AF-S 24mm f/1.8 which I don't have yet.