Camera Lenses for DSLR and Mirrorless DSLM

Since there are relatively few possibilities in architecture and real estate photography to create the image with artificial light or flash, the lens has the greatest influence on the image. This equipment is definitely the most important. For this reason, the following section will be somewhat longer and more detailed. For excellent image quality, the lenses are much more important than the camera! Of what use is a 50 MP camera if the image is already projected blurred on the sensor or the contrasts look dull? For this reason, no savings should be made on the lenses; at least not qualitatively. Especially in the field of lenses there are numerous insider tips with which one you can save a lot of money without having to make any loss in image quality.

Previous: The Crop Factor

An anecdote about the ideal allrounder lens

As a professional photographer I am often asked for lens recommendations. The requirements are often not enormous, but the range of topics is somewhat broader. Since especially beginners ask for advice, it is usually even explicitly said not to recommend the most expensive lens, it would only be for a hobby anyway and does not have to be professional (e.g. maximum 700€). Well... So it's not bad if the lens isn't quite as sharp. The remaining requirements are often that it must have a large zoom range. Finally, tele photographs of birds but also landscape and architectural photographs are to be taken during holidays. You also want to take macro shots with it from time to time, because small insects on flowers look beautiful. It should also be able to focus quickly, because with the current lens the playing children are rarely in focus. And of course it would be great if the lens would work just as well in the dark, because the upcoming wedding party needs to be documented. Furthermore, it must not weigh much, because you suffer from shoulder and back problems and of course it has to fit in your hand luggage. If the camera is missing, it may weigh only 200 grams and cost a maximum of 500€ extra... These are the classic requirements of a beginner.

Unfortunately, such a lens, which meets the requirements of a beginner, does not exist. For this range of tasks rather six lenses, which all together cost 13.500€ and weigh about 8 kg, would be necessary. With such an answer, however, it is usually assumed that you may not have so much idea after all. So the questioner will turn away to seek another opinion...

The ideal lens does not exist. Hopefully, the reason for this will become a little clearer in the course of this and the following chapters. What is available, however, are technically almost perfect lenses with an excellent image performance, but these do not necessarily produce beautiful images and are not necessarily recommended in most cases.

“NOW WHAT IS A GOOD LENS?
Not all available functions are really necessary. Which functions are actually required depends on individual needs. A lens that is excellent in theory can be very bad in practice. For example, a super-sharp AF-S PC-E 8-5000 mm f/0.4 DC VR would be desirable in principle. In practice, however, this lens would be as big as a skyscraper and priceless. So not very practical... Probably this is why it doesn’t exist. But even a lens weighing three kilos is not suitable for everyday use. So a good lens is not a lens that has as many features as possible. A good lens is the one that meets your individual requirements! In photography everything consists of compromises. For example, a lens with a high sharpness, minimal distortion and low edge darkening is initially good. However, such properties can only be achieved by additional corrections, which in turn have other disadvantages like bad micro-contrasts. The question must therefore be asked as to what is actually needed. A photographer, whose motive is always in the middle of the picture in front of a blurred background, does not need a lens that is sharp up to the outermost corner of the frame, but therefore distorts the colours a little. It would be much more important, for example, that the blurred area (Bokeh) has a pleasant look. Technically perfect lenses are not necessarily beautiful. After all, the works of Monet, Van Gogh or Picasso also have a very poor resolution and detail reproduction... In this respect, no test magazine would come up with the conclusion of judging the Mona Lisa as poor due to technical criteria; unfortunately, this is common practice for lenses.
”

The classification of lenses

The classification of lenses is primarily based on their focal length and speed. The focal length is the distance between the lens main plane and the focal point. The focal length of a lens is directly related to the image section or angle of view. If a lens were to be shrunk onto a single glass lens and focused to infinity, the distance between the sensor and the center of the lens would be the focal length. The focal length is therefore a relatively hypothetical unit. A 20-centimeter-long lens, therefore, cannot actually have a focal length of only 14 millimeters. In addition, it would have to be 14 mm in front of the sensor and would thus collide with the mirror in the DSLR. Only with a convex-concave + biconvex lens arrangement an actual extension of the focal length can be achieved, whereby the angle of view and the effective focal length remain unchanged. By the way, the distances are smaller with mirrorless cameras, as there is no mirror box in front of the sensor. This means that in the wide-angle range the focal lengths do not have to be artificially extended so much. This allows less complex constructions and extreme angles of view with focal lengths of e.g. 9 mm, which are not available in the DSLR range. With telephoto lenses, the lenses of mirrorless system cameras have to be shortened more than with DSLRs, due to a biconvex + biconcave tele construction. Alternatively, a lens can be lengthened by about three centimeters, at the lower end by additional empty space. Therefore, the overall systems (camera with lens) are usually the same size, although the mirrorless cameras are smaller itself.

The hypothetical assumption of a lens, when defining the focal length, therefore has nothing in common with reality. So when we talk about focal length in photography, we actually mean the effective focal length and not the actual focal length. The former describes the angle of view. Lenses with a short focal length (e.g. 14 mm) have a large angle of view and are therefore called wide-angle lenses. For long focal lengths, such as 300 mm, we speak of telephoto lenses. In between there are still normal lenses (approx. 40 to 55 mm), which correspond approximately to human vision and are therefore well suited for everyday situations like street photography.

In addition to the focal length, the maximum aperture of a lens is decisive. This influences the release or blur potential and is indicated with values such as 1:2.8 which in this case means that you have to move the lens by 2.8mm out of focus to get an 1mm sized blur on the sensor out of a sharp point. This usually correspond to an aperture value of f/2.8 at the same time. The larger the maximum aperture (smaller numerical value), the better the low-light and clearance potential of the lens is theoretically. In practice, this is not necessarily the case because the aperture is not the same as the actual light intensity, since the glass itself absorbs light. Just like an ND filter reduces the amount of light without changing the aperture, the same is true for lenses. The aperture value indicated with the letter abbreviation F (focal ratio) only represents the opening width, whereas the value indicated with a T (transmission stop) represents the luminous intensity. This is unfortunately often confused. A lens with an aperture of f/1.2 can therefore take darker pictures than a lens with f/1.8. In photography, open aperture lenses are not necessarily faster. Only lenses with a T instead of F specification can be compared with each other in terms of their light intensity, an example of such a lens is the ZEISS Supreme Prime 29 mm T1.5. An optical image stabiliser, on the other hand, can significantly improve the low-light performance if a fast shutter speed is not required.

In addition to the focal length or focal length range, as well as the light intensity (or initial aperture), you should also find out about the minimum focus distance before buying a lens. Whereby this is of secondary importance especially for real estate photography. The close-up limit is usually given in centimeters. A readjustment limit of 45 cm, for example, means that the lens can be used to approach the subject up to a distance of 45 cm and still capture it in sharp focus. With smaller distances, however, it is no longer possible to focus the image. The lower the specified close-up limit, the more suitable the lens is for close-up and detail shots.

The autofocus - in a brief

The speed of the aperture and the autofocus will be neglected in the following, as these are not crucial for architectural & real estate photography. Nevertheless, it is quite practical if the lens basically has an autofocus (AF), but how fast it works is secondary for us in architectural or landscape photography. The speed and AF performance depend not only on the camera but also on the lens. For example, an AF can be either accurate or fast, both together is unfortunately rarely the case. This is due to the fact that high-quality lenses are usually equipped with ultrasonic stepper motors. Either the motor takes very small steps and hits the focus point exactly, or it takes large steps and is therefore faster but can slightly miss the target. So it always depends on the balance. In photography almost everything consists of compromises.

Image Stabilization

Besides an autofocus, an optical image stabilizer is another technical feature that a lens can bring along. Image stabilizers compensate for the photographer's own movement and prevent blurring of the image. Thus, sharp images are possible even with longer exposure times handheld, without the image becoming blurred. This is especially useful in poorly lit rooms, as a good image stabilizer allows you to use relatively low ISO values when there is no time to set up a tripod.

Each producer names his image stabilizers differently: VR, VC, OS, IS, OSS or OIS are all names for an optical image stabilization.

Since lenses with wide apertures also bring along larger and heavier glass elements which would have to be moved, a larger image stabilizer with stronger motors would be necessary for fast lenses, which in turn would take up more space. For this reason, extremely fast lenses, such as f/1.2, in combination with an image stabilizer are hard to find. Stabilized lenses usually have maximum light intensities of about f/2.8. There are exceptions here, too, since Tamron actually has stabilized f1.8 lenses in its product range. However, this does not apply to extremely wide-angle or very long focal lengths. Nikon also makes a 200 mm f2 lens with VR, but this costs 7.000€ for a reason. With every additional half f-stop, the price of the lens roughly doubles without necessarily improving the image quality. If a good low-light performance is desired, the weight must be weighed. Either this is achieved by an image stabilizer that compensates us for up to five f-stops; however, this is accompanied by a worse blur potential. Or this is achieved by a larger aperture, which gives us an advantage of just one to max. two f-stops, but allows creative work with clearly visible blur. In the context of architectural and real estate photography, the first solution with the optical image stabilizer seems to make more sense if a choice has to be made.

Zoom Lenses

Lenses with an adjustable focal length are called zoom lenses. With zoom lenses, the focal length and thus the angle of view and image section can be changed on the lens itself. Most zoom lenses have a rotating mechanism for this adjustment, the zoom ring. Zoom lenses have the great advantage that they allow fast and flexible work without having to constantly change the lens and losing time. Due to the adjustable focal length, you can combine several lenses in one. Super zoom lenses with a very wide focal length range, like the 28-300 mm f3.5-5.6VR, weigh just 800 grams. To cover this focal length range with fixed focal lengths, you would need a lens case weighing 30 kg. So zoom lenses are quite practical and save time and weight. But they also have their disadvantages. Most of the time, they have a lower light intensity and a worse release potential compared to Prime Lenses. If only a certain focal length is needed anyway, zoom lenses are usually a bit larger and heavier than the corresponding fixed focal length. This is due to the fact that zoom lenses have more glass elements. On the one hand, each glass element is a source of errors, e.g. aberrations, on the other hand, another element is necessary for the correction of such aberrations. Therefore zoom lenses tend to have a worse image quality, which is probably the biggest disadvantage. A lot has changed with zoom lenses in recent years, today's models are much better and sharper than those of 20 years ago. Nevertheless, there are still differences. Although the latest and most expensive zoom lenses have excellent sharpness and imaging performance, the images often seem flat and not as tangible. Why this is the case will be discussed afterwards when it comes to the lens characteristics in the next blog post. The larger the zoom range, the worse the lens is usually. Therefore smaller zoom ranges should be preferred. A practical way of dividing lenses is to divide them into the sizes: 14-24 mm, 24-70 mm, 70-200 mm and 200-500 mm. In architectural and real estate photography, however, the upper focal lengths are rarely used. With the focal lengths of 14-24 mm (or 15-30 mm) and 24-120 mm (or 24-105 mm), two lenses are available that cover almost the complete working range on full frame. In the APC-S or DX segment, however, the focal length range from 12 to approx. 50/70 mm should be covered in any case. The lower focal length range in wide angle is more relevant than the upper zoom range.

Wide angle shot with the Tamron 15-30 2.8 VC SP

Prime Lenses

With many lenses, the focus can be adjusted beyond infinity.

In general, fixed focal lengths have better image quality and imaging performance than zoom lenses. Fixed focal lengths usually also have a larger initial aperture, so that they are faster and have a better potential for cropping. They use fewer glass elements, so that the contrasts and colours appear more vivid and the details have more tonal gradations. This results in more vivid images with an apparently light three-dimensionality when using fixed focal lengths. How this is achieved, however, is explained in more detail elsewhere. In addition, fixed focal lengths are often a little sharper because the lens requires fewer components and the manufacturing tolerances are smaller overall. With fixed focal lengths, for example, the movable tube is no longer a source of error. Since zoom lenses require more lens groups and are therefore also larger and longer, further negative side effects occur. For example, any material is subject to thermal expansion when exposed to temperature fluctuations. However, with a small compact fixed focal length, this effect is not necessarily relevant to the image and is not noticeable. A longer zoom lens, however, expands more. By the way, this is also the reason why the focus of larger lenses can always be turned beyond the infinity point. With many lenses, the focus can be adjusted beyond infinity. With many lenses, the focus can be adjusted beyond infinity. This is because the lens expands at high temperature, resulting in a so-called front focus, which also occurs when using macro extension rings. The focus point can be rotated beyond infinity to compensate for the expansion error at high temperatures. At the same time, this also makes a good zoom lens more expensive, because all lenses must be held precisely and absolutely tension-free to ensure uniform expansion. Finally, the centering of the lens must be maintained even under thermal expansion. With very small fixed focal lengths, on the other hand, the infinity point on the focus scale is located directly at the stop, and a cheap plastic press-fit for the glass elements is usually sufficient. The second solution, instead of an extremely complex lens mount, is to make zoom lenses less light-intensive. Due to the higher depth of field achieved in this way, slight errors are not noticed so quickly and are therefore only relevant to the image much later. Therefore, small fixed focal lengths can be produced somewhat more light-intense and cheaper than with zoom lenses. In addition, very fast fixed focal lengths suffer similar disadvantages as zoom lenses. Due to the larger aperture, a larger lens diameter is required. Finally, the f-stop value describes the ratio of focal length to the diameter of the aperture. The larger the diameter of the aperture, the larger the lens diameter must be. The lenses also become considerably thicker. Due to the larger and more convex front element, the light is refracted more strongly and optical aberrations, such as spherical or chromatic aberrations, occur more frequently, which must be compensated for elsewhere by additional lens elements. Lenses with high light intensity therefore become larger and longer in a more complex way, as they inevitably have more glass elements. This also leads to a higher susceptibility to errors due to thermal expansion. At the same time, the depth of field decreases with the smaller aperture values, which is why potential image errors can become relevant to the image even earlier. This requires an enormously complex centering of each individual glass element and an expensive type of tension-free element mounting. With every additional half aperture step the lens price roughly doubles, but at the same time the image quality can still deteriorate.

Examples of lens designations

When a lens is designated AF-S 24-70 mm f/2.8 VR, this means that it is a zoom lens with a continuously variable focal length of 24 to 70 mm and the aperture can be opened to a maximum value of f/2.8 over the entire zoom range. This lens also has an image stabilizer and an autofocus. The abbreviation AF indicates the available autofocus, while the S stands for the type of motor or focus system and is manufacturer-specific. For many lenses there are other abbreviations and designations, which are also manufacturer-specific and therefore not uniform.

A 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 VR lens also has an image stabilizer, but the focal length is different. But the aperture is not continuous! The specification f/4.5-5.6 means that the aperture can be opened to a maximum value of f4.5 in the lower focal length range at 70 mm. At the upper end of the zoom at 200 mm, however, the lens loses speed, as the aperture can only be opened to a value of f/5.6. So when zooming in, the lens appears a little darker.

A 28 mm f/1.4 lens, on the other hand, has no zoom function. It is a fixed focal length, which is particularly bright, as the f/1.4 aperture is very small. With fixed focal lengths, or prime lenses, the angle of view is fixed and cannot be changed.

Recommended purchase for lenses – Which Lens should you buy?

The following is a list of the best lenses (mainly for Nikon), which are particularly suitable for landscape, travel and architectural photography. Thereby, not only the best and most expensive lenses are recommended; much more the price-performance ratio as also a pleasant image effect & quality, the workmanship and handiness are in the foreground. Beside well-known optics, also real insider tips are recommended (some links are missing because some lenses are only available as used lenses).

Lens recommendations for Zoom Lenses

Just as it is not easy to recommend a camera in general, it is the same with the lenses. The Nikon system will be discussed here, but also third party suppliers will be mentioned, who also design their lenses for other camera systems. Unfortunately I do not have the experience to give explicit lens recommendations of other manufacturers. Especially for Sony users, but also for Fuji users, this section might be interesting, because there is the possibility to adapt nearly all lenses to mirrorless systems. In the following, we will not name the best and most expensive lenses, but those with a reasonable price-performance ratio, measured by personal assessment from the practice:

“Not sure what APS-C / DX stands for?”

The Crop Factor: APS-C vs. Full Frame

Tokina 11-16 mm f2.8 (only for APS-C), Nikkor 12-24 mm f4 G (for APS-C/DX) or Tamron 10-24 mm f3.5-4.5 DI II VC HLD (best price/performance for APS-C/DX)
Canon EF 11-24 mm/F 4.0 EF L USM (for Canon full format, not for Nikon)
Tamron SP 15-30 mm f2.8 VC G2 (Very good image stabilizer for indoor use)
Nikon AF-S 18-35 mm f/3.5-4.5G (relatively small, light and inexpensive) or Tamron 17-35 mm F/2.8-4.0 Di OSD
Nikkor 24-120 mm f4 ED VR (all OK) or Nikkor 24-85 VR G (better sharpness)
Tamron SP 24-70 mm f2.8 VC (also for Canon)
Nikkor 28-300 mm f3.5-5.6 G ED VR (not so good, but ok for a travel zoom)
And the Nikkor 70-200 mm f2.8E FL VR (alternatively the Tamron SP G2 version)
This focal lengths is rarely used in real estate photography. If this focal length range is used nevertheless, but the purchase price seems too high, the Nikkor AF-D 80-200 mm f2.8 is a cheaper variant. The 70-300 VR is also a conceivable alternative. Even higher focal lengths like the Nikkor 200-500 f5.6 VR are not often used in real estate photography anyway.

Good Prime Lenses

THIS SHOULD BE NOTED With a few exceptions, fixed focal lengths that are not quite as bright should be used more often in real estate photography. An aperture value of about f2 represents a reasonable compromise between image quality, value for money and the possibility of creative work with depth of field. Much faster lenses with aperture values around f/1.2 are actually rather disadvantageous. Whereby there are also very few exceptions.

OLDER MANUAL LENSES ARE NOT BAD!

Details captured with the M42 Pentacon 30mm f3.5 (from 1960)

As long as the comfort of modern autofocus systems and image stabilizers can be dispensed with, old analog fixed focal lengths may make sense when purchasing them. An autofocus is not urgently needed in real estate photography anyway. Also an image stabilizer is mostly not necessary. Some of these older lenses are in no way inferior to modern lenses in terms of image quality and are often available at very reasonable prices. There has been considerable progress in recent years with zoom lenses and also with ultra-wide angles. However, fixed focal lengths above 30 mm have hardly changed at all in recent decades, and in some cases not at all. In particular, focal lengths of 40-90 mm have seen the least technical progress. Most of the time, this focal length range involves simple symmetrical lens designs. The somewhat older Zeiss Distagon or Planar models can be found, for example, in the latest Zeiss Milvus series, but with an identical lens design and new body. An indication for this can be found on the Zeiss Milvus 2/100M, where Zeiss states on the product website that this Milvus lens is of the Zeiss Makro-Planar type. However, when comparing the technical data sheets with sketched construction and the corresponding MTF charts, you will find the proof. By the way, the latter are identical not only for the 100 mm Milvus version. Also, new lenses often use modern and high-tech sounding terms: For example, it is said that modern digital image sensors demand more performance from lenses and that is why the "floating element design", with movable lens groups, was developed to provide stable high-resolution imaging performance over the entire focusing range. This sounds at first like a new and modern feature. But in fact this technology is not new and is also widely used with old lenses. The corresponding counterpart at Nikon is called CRC (Close-Range-Correction), for example, and has been in existence since 1967. It has never been particularly advertised, however, which is why there is no need to find a corresponding designation on the lenses. However, it is also true that some lenses have to be specially adapted to digital image sensors. However, this applies primarily to extreme wide-angle lenses. With higher focal lengths over 30/35 mm, however, it is not noticeable if they have not been perfectly optimized. So it is not without reason that the Nikkor 55 mm 2.8 Ai-S micro has been manufactured in unchanged form since 1979 and is still rolling off the production line today. With a new price of over 600€ it is not exactly a bargain for such an old lens in this focal length and speed class. Fortunately there are older used versions available for much less money. That's why older analog lenses are very important in my list of lens recommendations (mainly for Nikon). But with a few exceptions, these can only be bought used. With older lenses, you should pay attention to compatibility. The Canon EF bayonet has been available since about 1987, older Canon FD lenses are therefore mostly not compatible and cannot be adapted without problems due to the flange focal length. Nikon on the other hand has remained faithful to the F mount since 1959 and all old lenses work to the full extent. Fuji and Sony, on the other hand, have hardly any compatibility problems, as there are numerous adapters available for them. New fixed focal lengths above 30/35 mm are sometimes actually much better than the old lenses. This must not be concealed! However, this is rather seldom the case and mostly old or new lenses are optically almost equivalent. The difference lies in the technical features like autofocus, image stabilizer, a lower weight or splash water protection. Some of the lens bayonets are also new. Technical features can therefore lead to less rejects because the probability of a sharp image is increased. On the other hand, the difference in the final image quality of the photo is usually very small. Often the image quality is not even better but slightly different, because their criteria for evaluation can be weighted differently. So old lenses do not have to be worse. However, this only applies to fixed focal lengths above approx. 30 mm. Even new lenses above 30 mm may indeed have been digitally optimized, but it is hardly noticeable in the application if they should not be. In contrast, the latest wide-angle or zoom lenses are usually actually better than their predecessors. In the extreme telephoto range or with very fast lenses, the situation is similar.

Do not save on the adapter! (Especially relevant for Sony, Fuji or Leica)

You should not skimp on the adapter, the cheapest models can lead to a loss of quality. With a slightly skewed adapter, this can result in a minimal tilt effect that makes the edges of the image appear blurred, even though the lens should actually be sharp at the edges when the center of the image is in focus. At the same time, this can lead to color fringes or other image errors in the affected areas. If, on the other hand, the adapter is built slightly too long, whereby even a fraction of a millimeter can be decisive here, the lens can no longer be focused at infinity. If the latter effect is very small, this error may not be consciously assigned and it is assumed that the lens would not be super sharp. Theoretically, the lens is then no longer perfectly optimized for this new or faulty flange focal length and other image errors may occur. But in practice, these should not become image relevant in case of small deviations.

Which Prime Lenses should you buy?

Similar to the lens recommendations of the zoom lenses, the fixed focal lengths are mainly based on the Nikon system. Because of the good adaptability it is especially interesting for Fuji and Sony users to skip this list. Also the best of the best is not presented, instead the following recommendations take the price-performance ratio into consideration. If, however, a very expensive lens is recommended, this is due to its excellent performance. As soon as we talk about good image quality, this refers to the overall effect of the image, which is actually noticeable in normal use. For example, looking at a printout in A1 format is part of this. On the other hand, searching the edges of the image for minimal color fringes in the 800% view on a 50 MP camera does not count in the useful range for viewing the overall effect. Architectural photographers do not need every lens, but a reasonable lens selection should be available in the range from 15/18 to 35/40 mm. The following list is sorted by focal length in ascending order and hopefully gives a good overview of a personal assessment from practice:

Laowa 12 mm f2.8 (no visible distortion, good imaging performance)

Other manufacturers also offer 11 mm ultra wide angle for Nikon or Canon full format cameras, but these are very strong, have visible color fringes and a drop in sharpness towards the edge, and a noticeable vignette. In this respect, the Laowa is better. For Sony or other mirrorless systems, however, there are even more wide-angle lenses of a reasonable quality. Interestingly, such an extremely wide-angle lens is used less often than is usually expected in architectural photography. Focal lengths between 15 and 20 mm (related to FX or KB), on the other hand, seem more comfortable for indoor photography.

Zeiss Distagon 15 mm f2.8, alternative the Milvus line (good but expensive)

Extremely good wide-angle lens for architectural photography. If the Tamron 15-30 mm f2.8 SP or the Nikon 14-24 f2.8G are available, the Zeiss 15 mm is definitely not a must. By the way, the older Distagon and the newer Milvus variant are identical in construction and only differ in the body.

Nikkor 20 mm f1.8G or Voigtländer 20 mm f3.5 Color Skopar (Must Have)

photo shot with the Voigtländer 20mm 3.5

The Nikkor is even better than the 21 mm Zeiss! But the Voigtländer lens is equivalent. The Nikon is a bit sharper, while the Voigtländer has a better color and contrast reproduction. The bottom line is a tie. The Voigtländer is a very small and light pancake lens and fits with 3cm length in every pocket. Therefore it is better suited for travelling. The Nikkor 20 mm f3.5 Ai-S or the AF Nikkor 20 mm f2.8D, as well as the Nikkor 20 mm 2.8 Ai-S are further alternatives.

Nikkor 24 mm f1.8G or Nikkor AF 24 mm f2.8D

The 24 mm 1.8 from Nikon is preferable to the f1.4 version. It is not only less expensive, but also sharper, has better contrast and colour reproduction. The Zeiss Distagon 25 mm 2.0 or the Nikkor AF 24 mm 2.8D are further alternatives. If the 24 mm Tilt Shift lens is already available, no additional 24 mm lens is needed, as long as the packing size is not important.

Nikkor 28 mm f1.8G

A top lens with beautiful color rendering. Compared to the much more expensive Zeiss Otus 28 mm 1.4, it is a bit less sharp; on the other hand, the micro contrasts are more pronounced, the bokeh is more pleasant as it is smoother, more even and a bit less edgy in high contrast areas. The aperture stars are also more beautiful on the Nikkor, as they are particularly clear. However, the focal length doesn't look so good in many architectural shots: 24 or 35 mm often look better, but this is ultimately a matter of taste. The Nikkor 28 mm 2.8 Ai-S is also a very good alternative.

Tamron 35mm f1.4 or Zeiss Distagon 35mm f2.0 (very sharp and great microcontrasts, must have)

Zeiss Distagon 35mm 2.0 (Similar too the Zeiss Milvus 35mm 2.0 Lens)

The Zeiss lens is one of the best lenses ever. It is not only outstanding in all technical aspects, but also takes nice pictures with pleasant bokeh and beautiful aperture stars. The contrast and color rendition is realistic and yet powerful. The detail rendition and micro contrasts are excellent. This is a manual lens. The newer Milvus version is optically identical in construction and differs only in the body. The latter is not only more expensive, but also has rubber coatings, which will look worn out over time. The Distagon version is completely made of metal. The Tamron 35mm 1.4 is similarly good: The micro contrasts are a bit less pronounced, but the Tamron has a nicer bokeh and has an autofocus. In the APS-C range, the AF-S DX Nikkor 35 mm f/1.8G is a very good and much cheaper alternative, but should not necessarily be bought new due to the price-performance ratio. If at any time you should change from APS-C to full format, APS-C or DX lenses cannot be used without restrictions. Therefore, not too much money should be invested in APS-C/DX lenses anyway. Conversely, all full format lenses also fit on APS-C cameras. The Nikkor AF 35 mm 2.0D is a not so sharp but nice alternative.

Voigtländer 40 mm f2.0 Pancake (very good micro contrasts)

Excellent and high-quality processed lens with low weight and very small dimensions. With a length of just over 3cm it fits in every pocket and is therefore ideal for travelling. The image quality is first class and similar to the 35 mm 2.0 Zeiss, the micro contrasts are very good, although the lens is not quite as sharp at open aperture in direct comparison. On the other hand it is a bit more practical due to its small size. The focal length seems to be pleasant, whereas a focal length of 35 mm is probably more often used. Those who want to accept a slightly worse image quality in favor of a good image stabilizer and autofocus will find what they are looking for with the Tamron 45mm 1.8 VC.

Zeiss Planar 50 mm f1.4 (nice colour reproduction) or Nikkor AF 50 mm f1.4D (nice aperture stars)

If you like to work with open aperture and if you like to have a pleasant blur when taking detailed pictures, the Zeiss Planar is probably the best 50 mm lens on the market, although it is not the sharpest and slight color fringes can occur. Nevertheless, the sharpness is always sufficient and it is not really blurred. This is only noticeable in direct comparison or at extreme open aperture. Although the Zeiss is completely manual, it is not even that old. It came on the market in 2010. By the way, the basic optical design of the Planar construction exists since 1897, although the newer Planar has undergone some modern changes in the meantime. The Nikkor, on the other hand, is also very good and has an autofocus. The aperture stars look better and stronger with the Nikkor than with the Zeiss. Alternatively, the Nikkor 50 mm 1.8 E-Series (Pancake) is a very good and extremely sharp alternative, which can be obtained extremely cheap (sometimes for about 60€). The Nikkor Af-D 50 mm f2.0 is also good and has an additional autofocus, whereas the Nikkor 50 mm 1.8D is a bit cheaper and also has an AF.

Nikkor 55 mm f1.2 Ai (great bokeh)

If you prefer a slightly swirled bokeh instead of a very even blur in detail shots, where the blurred lights in the background look like soap bubbles, this lens will meet your artistic requirements. Although the lens is very old, the imaging performance is still good and the lens is sharp. There is currently nothing comparable to the brand new and current Nikkor lenses.

Voigtländer 58 mm f1.4 Nokton (especially natural image)

This is probably the best lens for detail and portrait photography in the range of 50 to 100 mm. It is even better than the Zeiss Planar, which has already been called the best 50 mm lens, but the focal length of the Voigtländer-Nokton is a bit different. It has a nice bokeh and has a unique image depth effect.

Zeiss Planar 85 mm f1.4

Similar to the 50 mm version, the 85 mm lens is on a similar level. However, those who prefer an autofocus will be satisfied with the Nikkor 85 mm 1.8G. With the Nikkor 85 mm 1.4 Ai-S, one gets a slightly worse, but clearly cheaper alternative. However, a focal length range begins here, which is used less and less frequently in architectural photography. This applies accordingly to all following lenses. Instead of a classic lens, it may be worthwhile to consider macro lenses of this focal length. These are usually sharper and better suited for detail shots, but macro lenses can also be used for "normal" architectural photography. (More information in the lower section on macro lenses)

Nikkor 105 mm f2.0 DC (unique look) or Nikkor 105 mm f1.8 Ai-S (more compact)

At Nikon the DC stands for Defocus-Control. This makes the 105 mm DC lens something very special, as the blur (Bokeh) can be controlled independently of the aperture. The additional DC ring shifts a lens group inside and ensures that either the background appears softer and softer and therefore the foreground appears more intense, or it makes the foreground appear softer and therefore the background rougher. The type of blur can be controlled by an additional ring, whereas the intensity of the blur is controlled by the aperture as usual. All in all, the DC lens is very sharp and contrasty, but its blur appears very soft and pastel, as well as slightly more desaturated and less contrasty than the object in focus. The 105 mm DC lens is therefore considered the best portrait lens, but also delivers beautiful detail shots. The other 105 mm 1.8 Ai-S lens, on the other hand, is a bit more contrasty and appears more colorful even in the blurred area. Furthermore, it is cheaper and relatively small and compact. Compared to the new and very expensive AF-S 105 mm 1.4E ED lens the older 1.8 Ai-S lens renders even better at the same aperture, but is completely manual. The 105 mm f2.5 Ai-S or the 100 mm 2.8 E-Series, however, are cheaper alternatives.

Nikkor 135 mm f2.8 Ai-S, Nikkor 135 mm f3.5 Ai-S (cheaper) or DC version

This lens is extremely sharp, has a pleasant but unobtrusive bokeh and renders outstandingly well overall. If you compare it to the much more expensive and current Zeiss Milvus with the corresponding focal length, the end result is hardly distinguishable at first sight. Nevertheless, this lens is very compact and small in size. Surprisingly, this focal length is used more often in architectural photography than initially expected. For detail shots, the AF DC-Nikkor 135 mm f2.0D offers a very smooth and creamy bokeh in incomparable quality, but this lens is much larger and more expensive.

AF Nikkor 180 mm f2.8 IF-ED or Nikkor 200 mm f4.0 Ai-S

The 180 mm lens is much cheaper than the 200 mm 2.8 and costs only a fraction of that. And it is at least as good! The 200 mm 4.0 Ai-S, on the other hand, is not as fast and completely manual, but it is cheaper and optically it even surpasses modern lenses. But there is a catch: The 200 mm 4.0 Ai-S lens is slightly radioactive and should not be left on the camera for a long time to avoid damaging it. This means that the camera and lens should not be stored together for several months. It is harmless to health if it is only used occasionally for a few hours. Nevertheless, it should be kept away from children. In case of glass breakage the inhaled glass dust can be harmful to health. The glass is radioactive because thorium oxide has melted into it. Some lenses can contain up to 30% thorium by weight, which is also reflected in the weight due to the higher density (although this lens contains much less thorium). This was done because thorium increases the refractive index. Such a highly refractive glass not only has an extremely high refractive index, but also an extremely low dispersion. This means that lenses can be constructed in a less complex way, the glass can be ground much thinner and the lens becomes altogether smaller and gets by with fewer glass elements. Due to the low dispersion, image errors such as aberrations almost never occur. The resulting construction requires much less compromises between image performance and e.g. Bokeh, because of the less glass the colours appear much more intense and real, the global and micro contrasts are also higher and the remaining image quality is in no way inferior to modern constructions. In the meantime, however, it is forbidden to use thorium in consumer products, moreover, the environmental and work safety standards have increased during the production, which makes it no longer economical. Until today, however, no equivalent substitute for thorium oxide in optics could be found. However, this focal length is rarely used in architectural photography, but it can be useful for detailed photographs. A purchase should therefore only be considered if there is a chance to get a used lens at a very reasonable price. Lenses of this focal length (e.g. f/2.0), which are considerably faster, have no significant advantages in architectural photography: In any case, a good release is rarely desired and lenses of this class are too large and too heavy to be suitable for your probably rather rare use. For the genre of real estate photography, it is usually not worthwhile to purchase very fast lenses.

Nikkor AF-D 300 mm f4.0 IF ED (better) or AF-S 300 mm f4 E PF ED VR (smaller)

The first lens from the D-series is one of the best 300 mm lenses purely in terms of optical performance, but the autofocus is relatively slow. The new AF-S lens with the PS element and image stabilizer is lighter, smaller and more compact. It is also much faster and has an optical image stabilizer. On the other hand, the color rendering of the new lens is worse and the images look a bit duller in direct comparison. The new lens is also very expensive. If you're looking for image quality, the old lens is better, but if you're looking for speed, a good autofocus or a light weight and compact size, you'll be happy with the new E-type lens. The Nikkor 300 mm 2.8 Ai-S, on the other hand, is a very affordable version. However, this lens will only be used very rarely in classic real estate photography. Whether or not it makes sense depends on what is to be photographed. For example, it is perfect for portraying entire skyscrapers from a greater distance. More modern lenses such as the AF-S Nikkor 300 mm 1:2.8G ED VR II offer no significant advantages and a much worse price-performance ratio in architectural photography. The bottom line is that these are usually too large and heavy to be practical in view of their potentially rare use. For other genres of photography (e.g. sports), however, lenses of this type are indispensable and are used much more often.

However, even higher focal lengths such as the Nikkor Ai-S 400 mm f3.5 ED IF or the Nikkor Reflex 500 mm f8 C are no longer useful for architectural photography. They are mentioned only for the sake of completeness. A reader of this article may be interested in another genre of photography. The 400 mm lens mentioned above is interesting because it is available second-hand for 1000€, while the new 400 mm 2.8 lens costs over 12.500€. It can also keep up to 90% of the image quality, but this is a manual lens. The 500 mm lens mentioned above is a nice gimmick, because it creates a very special donut-shaped bokeh and is extremely light and compact at the same time. The image quality of the 500 mm lens is not that good, though.

Special Optics

Fisheye lenses - For 360° VR tours

The lenses called fisheye lenses are extreme wide angle lenses with an angle of view of 180° or even a little more. However, this projection can only be achieved due to an extremely high distortion, as an image covering 180° cannot be represented geometrically differently. This distortion is noticeable in the form of a strong curvature of the image; straight lines therefore appear curved at the edge of the image. The barrel-shaped distortion makes it possible to display a hemisphere that corresponds to the complete field of view. Area ratios are therefore more faithful than the image angles, whereas conventional wide-angle lenses, due to their gnomic central projection, tend to reproduce angles more faithfully and not so faithfully. Fisheye lenses almost always have an angle of view of 180°. There are exceptions that even show more than 220° in the diagonal. Normally, however, they almost always have an angle of 180°. And yet there are fisheye lenses with different focal lengths, for the same sensor size, which still have the same angle of view. With a higher focal length, as with other lenses, the subject is larger in the center of the picture. However, the angle of view remains unchanged because the curvature of the image also increases with focal length. Higher fisheye focal lengths are therefore accompanied by more distortion. Shorter focal lengths, on the other hand, can be rectified more easily in image processing programs such as Photoshop and then look like normal ultra-wide angle lenses. Whether it makes sense to do this, however, is another question. A very light and discreet fisheye effect from action cameras (e.g. GoPro) is probably known from everyday life. Here the picture is very wide and in some shots the horizon appears excessively curved. But real fisheye lenses are much more extreme in this respect and are therefore well suited for creative work. For architectural photography the advantage is on the one hand the incredibly wide angle of view. On the other hand, the extreme distortion makes such lenses almost unusable. With some motifs, however, fisheye lenses provide very interesting perspectives and impressive images. Whether this effect is pleasing or not must be weighed up individually. In classic real estate photography, such a lens will rarely be useful. However, there is one exception in this respect.

A USEFUL FIELD OF APPLICATION
To create interactive virtual 360 degree VR tours for the website, such a lens is indispensable! In addition to a fisheye lens, a tripod and a nodal point adapter, as well as the appropriate software are required to process the images into a virtual tour. Examples for such 360 degree VR tours can be found on:
www.architekturfotografie-frankfurt.com/vr-touren

A circular fisheye lens is required for 360° VR tours. This means that the image does not have to be format-filling, but circular, which results in black borders. A conventional fisheye lens can be converted comparatively easily into a circular fisheye lens. This requires a fisheye lens designed for APS-C sensors. This is mounted on a full format camera with a larger image sensor. Now the lens hood of the lens must be removed so that it is not visible in the image (see Crop Factor). With a little luck the lens hood is only plugged in and can be removed with a click. A fixed lens hood, on the other hand, must be sawn off, this is called a "shave". This modification has the advantage that you can get more on the picture. Normally, the angle of view measured on the diagonal is 180 degrees from corner to corner. On the full format, an image circle with a diagonal of 220° is shown. Thus, the lens looks slightly backwards. For a complete 360° image, two single images would theoretically be sufficient. To get more overlap for cropping the panorama and a better image quality, at least three to four single shots should be taken. Although simple 360° VR tours can also be created with small specially built compact cameras (e.g. Ricoh Theta), the quality is not satisfactory. The images of the two lenses are rarely neatly cut together and the remaining image quality is more reminiscent of older mobile phones.

The best Fisheye lenses for Panoramas

Nikkor DX AF 10.5 mm 2.8G Fisheye or Samyang 8 mm 3.5 Fisheye

These two fisheye lenses are perfectly suited for 360° tours and VR tours. The Nikon has a fixed lens hood and therefore needs to be "shaved". But it is a bit better. The Samyang is cheaper and the lens hood is not built in. So it can be removed easily. Actually, these are APS-C lenses, which work circularly on full format and can therefore be used for 360° VR tours. If the camera is set to crop mode, the lenses can be used creatively as normal fisheye lenses. Since it is not often used as normal fisheye in architectural photography anyway, this is a very practical solution. Some Nikon full format cameras automatically go into crop mode as soon as a DX lens is detected. If this happens unintentionally, you have to remember to switch off this function in the camera. But with the Nikon Z6 and Z7 cameras this function cannot be deactivated.

Nikkor AF 16 mm 2.8D Fisheye or Samyang 12 mm 2.8 Fisheye

These lenses are special full-frame fisheye lenses and therefore cannot be misused as circular fisheye lenses. Otherwise, the same applies to these two lenses as to the APS-C versions: The Nikon is slightly better and the Samyang is cheaper. You can also create 360° VR tours with these lenses, but this is a bit more complicated because a special nodal point adapter has to be used and more single shots are necessary. On the other hand, conventional fisheye shots have the advantage of using the full resolution of the camera. How often this is actually needed, however, is another question. A bad lens is also one that pays a lot of money for features that are not needed. Furthermore, there are fisheye zoom lenses on the market which can be used on APS-C and full format equally. On full format these can be used as circular and normal fisheye at the same time. Unfortunately, there are currently no satisfactory lenses in this lens class that can be recommended with a clear conscience.

Macro Lenses - For Detail Shooting & Decoration

The higher the focal length, the lower the close-up limit (NEG) of a lens in normal use. A 100 mm lens can have a very high close-up limit of more than one and a half meters. Long focal lengths that nevertheless have very low close-up limits (e.g. the 105 mm f2.8 with a NEG of 31 cm) are called macro lenses. These are usually very sharp and can be used for other types of photography as well. The lower close-up limit is achieved by the fact that the tube can be extended further than with standard lenses. This, however, leads to the fact that the light rays are not at the optimum angle and increases imaging errors, which must be corrected again with additional optical elements. Therefore, macro lenses are usually somewhat more complex and therefore cost a little more. Macro lenses are best suited for close-ups. The well-known and particularly impressive pictures of insects are for example made with such macro lenses. Occasionally they can also be used for detail shots. The term macro lens refers only to the low close-up limit and not to the focal length. A good macro lens can therefore be a good telephoto lens at the same time as a good telephoto lens and can also capture sharp images of distant objects. Laowa, for example, also manufactures macro lenses in the extreme wide-angle range, whose close-up limit is in the very lower single-digit centimetre range. Another term that is used especially in the macro range is magnification. An image scale of 1:1 means that the object is projected onto the sensor in the same size as it is in reality. With a 1:1 magnification, a 50 cent piece could be imaged sharply and format-filling with a full format camera, so that the coin just touches the upper and lower edge of the image. The reproduction scale indicates how large an object can be reproduced, this results from the interaction of focal length and close-up limit. Therefore, this specification is particularly relevant for close-ups. With a 40 mm macro lens, a 50 cent coin could be imaged as large as with a 200 mm macro lens, provided the magnification is the same for both. With the 40 mm macro lens, however, a smaller distance would have to be chosen. Higher focal lengths, on the other hand, make it possible to keep a greater distance from the object and still achieve a similar image. Of course, the perspective impression may change slightly. With most macro lenses, the speed is not continuous due to the design, but this is not explicitly stated in the lens name. For example, a lens with the designation "100 mm f2.8 AF D Macro" in, the infinity setting of the focus, may actually have a 2.8 aperture. In the close-up range, however, despite the f2.8 aperture, only a low light intensity is achieved, which corresponds approximately to an f5.6 aperture. This is due to the design of the lens, which is due to the long pull-out during focusing, the further we move away from a window, the smaller it finally looks. With magnification, light is always lost. Some lens/camera combinations only show this in the form of an adjusted effective aperture, while others do not update the display of the aperture value or only show the real aperture.

The best macro photography lenses to buy

Nikkor AF 60 mm 2.8D Micro or Nikkor 55 mm 2.8 Ai-S Micro (only for Nikon)

The 55 mm lens dates back to 1979 and is still in production today. If a global corporation like Nikon decides to produce such an old lens in unchanged form until today, then this lens must be extremely good. These two macro lenses are the perfect and ultra-sharp all-rounders. If someone has no experience with fixed focal lengths, one of these lenses should be the first fixed focal length to be purchased. The 60 mm lens is made of plastic and has an autofocus, the 55 mm lens is completely manual and therefore cheaper, but it is completely made of metal and feels more valuable. The new 55mm lens costs about 600€, but you can get it on Ebay for about 200€. With the 55 it is a little more fun to take pictures. Optically these lenses do not take much. Due to their focal length of 55 or 60 mm they are wide enough for moderate architecture shots (especially outdoor shots), but they are also suitable for landscape or street photography. But the focal lengths are also narrow enough for beautiful detail shots with some background blur or portraits with a pleasant cropping. And of course these lenses also allow macro photography in 1:1 scale. The closest focusing distance with both lenses is around 18 cm. Furthermore, these lenses are relatively light, small and compact. If you are used to zoom lenses, you will be astonished by the sharpness of the image delivered by these two lenses! The new Micro-Nikkor AF-S 60 mm 2.8G, on the other hand, is not so nice when it comes to color rendering.

Zeiss Milvus 100 mm 2.0 M, Tokina AF ATX 100 mm 2.8 Pro D or Tamron SP 90 mm 2.8 VC Macro (also for Canon)

The Zeiss is a specialist in the macro range, offers by far the best image quality and impresses with micro contrasts and excellent colour rendering. It can also be focused to infinity, but the manual focus distance is so long that it is necessary to reach around once when focusing. This makes it not very practical in everyday life, outside macro photography. Instead of the Zeiss-Milvius version, the Zeiss Makro-Planar 2/100M is recommended, but more difficult to get. The Tokina on the other hand is a prize-winner. It also has a good image quality and also has a reasonable autofocus. Therefore, even in everyday life, it is fun to use this lens for other situations. On the other hand, it is much cheaper than the Zeiss, unfortunately this is also noticeable in the plastic processing. The Tamron is a little more expensive than the Tokina, but makes a valuable impression and can score with an image stabilizer. Due to the higher focal length, all three lenses require a larger distance to the subject, but due to the perspective, less of the surroundings can be seen. On the other hand, it is also possible to have better exposure. Here too, the magnification is 1:1.

Sigma 150 mm F2.8 APO Macro (for Canon and Nikon)

If you are looking for an even higher and affordable focal length for the macro range, you will not be able to avoid the sigma. The image quality is outstanding and the imaging performance is extremely good, but on the other hand this lens costs a little more. Unfortunately, the Sigma has a relatively large serial variation, so it can happen that a not so good version is caught and should be exchanged. Unfortunately, Sigma also has quality problems with the aperture shutter in general, and not only with this lens. The problem manifests itself in the fact that at some point the aperture can no longer be adjusted. If you search the Internet for "Sigma Aperture Stuck" or "Sigma Art Aperture Problem", you will find more on this topic. In this respect, this lens can be a very good but at the same time a risky investment with a short lifetime. Owners of Sony or Canon cameras can also take a look at the Tamron 180mm f3.5 Macro SP (also available for Nikon, but hard to get).

Tilt-Shift Lenses - For straight architectural photos

Among the "special optics" this lens class is by far the most relevant for architectural and real estate photography! Tilt-Shift or TS-lenses allow the shift, as well as the tilt of the lens system in relation to the sensor. At the same time TS-lenses can be rotated, for example to vary the shift-direction. The Tilt and Shift functions work independently of each other. Shift allows the image format to be displayed correctly if the subject is above or below the camera. To get a full view of a tall building photographed from below, it would normally be necessary to tilt the camera upwards and aim it at the subject. This would make vertical lines on the picture appear to tilt. Such tilting lines would have to be corrected in digital image processing by means of a trapezoidal equalization. To do this, the top of the image would be stretched more than the bottom. This is not necessary with a TS lens. The camera can remain straight. Instead of tilting it now, the lens is moved upwards (shift) and the whole building fits into the image without any falling lines. The building is displayed straight and true to scale. Since a TS lens can be rotated, it is possible to shift not only up and down, but also left and right or diagonally. The tilt enables a shift of the plane of focus by tilting the lens (dummy plough rule). Normally the plane of focus is always parallel to the sensor plane. With open aperture either the foreground or the background is sharply focused, both at the same time is usually not possible. With the TS lens it is different: the plane of focus can be adapted to the object plane and can sometimes be inclined. For example, if the camera is in a low position above a lawn and a house is visible at some distance, the focus would normally be on the house and the meadow in the foreground would be out of focus. If the lens is tilted downwards, the focal plane is sloped and the whole meadow and the house are in focus even at open aperture. On the other hand, the sky becomes blurred at the same time. Since the TS lens can be rotated, the focal plane can also run from left to right and in all imaginable positions. What is especially popular in the portrait area is the tilt against the subject plane in the actually "wrong" direction. This way, especially creative and beautiful blurs are created. In artistic architectural photography a miniature effect is created in the same way. Tilt and Shift are independent of each other and can therefore be combined at the same time.

With a tilt shift lens, it is possible to have the plane of focus at an angle: As we can see in this photo, the dishes, on the table in the foreground, are in focus and sharp. The column on the left in the back, on which the red cloth with the logo is placed, is also in focus and sharp, while the window and the plant on the right side of the picture are outside the focus plane and therefore slightly out of focus. So the plane of focus runs diagonally through the image. At the same time, the picture was taken from a relatively low perspective, looking upwards. This can be recognized by the fact that we are relatively close to the table and look at it from a flat perspective. But also the ceiling lamp is completely in the picture, what is only possible by looking upwards. Thereby, it is noticeable that all vertical lines are straight and do not tilt inwards, as it would normally be expected by looking upwards.

Nikon D810 | ISO 64 | focal length 24mm (Nikkor 24mm 3.5 PC-E) | aperture 6.7 | exposure time 1/2 sec

Lens Recommendations for Tilt-Shift Lenses (Perspective Control)

PC Nikkor 19 mm f/4E ED or Canon TS-E 17 mm f/4L

These focal lengths are very well suited for indoor photography. With low ceiling heights up to approx. 3 m, however, perspective correction using TS lenses is rarely necessary. The Nikkor is a little sharper and the contrasts are slightly better, but it costs almost twice as much. Canon on the other hand offers a slightly larger wide angle at a good price-performance ratio.

PC-E Nikkor 24 mm f/3.5D ED or Canon TS-E 24 mm f/3.5L II

These focal lengths, on the other hand, are much better suited for outdoor shots, but can also be used indoors. Especially for large commercial properties, the image detail also looks a little more pleasant indoors than with lower focal lengths. Here Canon offers the slightly better lens in terms of optical performance, although the differences are limited. Both lenses cost a similar amount.

Nikkor 28 mm f/3.5PC (Ai-S)

Strictly speaking, this is not a full-fledged tilt shift lens, since it cannot be tilted, only shifted. The shift function is the one that is needed much more often anyway when it comes to straightening out falling lines in architectural photography. Due to its focal length, however, this lens is more suitable for outdoor photography. Since it is an older lens, it is relatively cheap for about 400€. The image quality is very good, but the lens is a little distorted. This can be fixed in the image editing.

In addition to these lenses, there are also tilt shift lenses with higher focal lengths, which with a magnification of 1:2 are also macro-suitable and are therefore especially suitable for close-ups and product photos. 45 or 50 mm, 85 or 90 mm and 135 mm are further available TS variations. Other manufacturers also offer TS lenses, but they are either designed for the medium format and therefore much more expensive, or they are much cheaper and usually not recommended. Up to a focal length of 50 mm, tilt shift lenses could be useful for architectural and real estate photography. However, higher focal lengths do not seem economical and less practical. Finally, space in the photo bag is limited and no one wants to have to change lenses all the time.

Older manual lenses with M42 thread mount

ASAHI TAKUMAR 35MM F2.0

This old manual lens is radioactive, but marked by an incredibly beautiful bubble bokeh!

PENTACON 30MM F3.5 (LYDITH)

This Pentacon lens is identical in construction to the Meyer-Optik-Görlitz version. It is characterized by a pleasant and pastel blur with intensive color saturation.

RICOH AUTO RIKENON 55MM F1.4

The Auto Rikenon is a lens that generally renders well, has clear micro contrasts and produces sharp images. The Bokeh appears smooth and even, with a slightly swirling character.

HELIOS 58MM F2.0 (44M-4)

There are several versions of this old Soviet lens, which differ slightly. However, they all have a structured and swirled blur in common. Some of these lenses are available for less than 40€.