Best Lens for Interior Shots on Allure of the Seas

[arrow3]

Hi everyone! I'd like to find out what everybody thinks is the best/most effective lens for shooting the interiors of the Allure of the Seas. This ship has a lot of interesting lighting that I'd like to capture. I have a Canon Rebel T1i body (crop).

 

I know I'll be needing a decent wide angle with a large aperture. I currently own a Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 but I'm not very happy with it. I was thinking of renting the Canon 14mm f/2.8L for the week (I can't afford that lens). I'm not sure if I'll be happy using it wide open though.

 

Does anyone have any recommendations or any experience with any of Canon's wide angle lenses? I have a Canon 70-300mm lens and I love it. Of course I'm looking for a lens that remains fairly sharp wide open so that I can get decent hand held shots inside the ships.

 

Thanks!

[zackiedawg]

I can't help you with regard to Canon lenses, however am curious what you find lacking with your Sigma 10-20mm. I think personally that UWA lenses are great for interiors on ships, and I use mine (Tamron 10-24mm) almost exclusively as my interior lens when I cruise. Ultrawides do require a little learning curve though to get the best out of them - perspectives can quickly go out of whack, they usually are best stopped down a bit to get good corner sharpness, and watching/controlling the leading and vertical lines is usually quite important for the composition and flow of the shot. I shopped the Sigma 10-20 and the Tamron 10-24 when I was choosing, and thought both were pretty solid...I settled on the Tamron mostly because I felt it had better on-center sharpness wide open, had a slightly nicer horizon reclilinear control, and much better resistance to flare. I keep a gallery of all shots taken with this lens - in the gallery you'll find two different cruises' interior shots, along with lots of other random stuff and other interiors from Disney World and home:

 

http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg/tamron_1024mm_f3545_lens

 

I'd suggest if you haven't already, to consider using a tripod and some longer exposures for the ship interiors. If you stop down your Sigma to F8-F10 or so, keep the ISO at the lowest setting, and let the camera pull of some long exposures, you should be able to get some stunning interior shots that really show off the lighting and colors onboard.

 

If you really feel you need to switch lenses - then I'd say it might be worth a look at either the Tamron 10-24mm, or the well-regarded Tokina 11-16 F2.8. Both are reasonably priced in the $500 area, and might have slightly sharper results as well as faster maximum apertures that could help in the handheld situations.

[arrow3]

Thanks for the reply. I feel the Sigma is very soft, even when stopped down, and even at the center of the lens. It's possible that I got a bad copy of the lens. I'm not sure that Sigma has the greatest QA/QC in the business. I love the look of the photos at 10mm, I'm just not happy with the, in my opinion, real lack of sharpness.

 

I like the idea of the tripod, but would rather have a faster lens that I can handhold. I don't like the idea of lugging the tripod all around the ship.

[arrow3]

By the way, your pics are great!

[zackiedawg]

I'd suspect that you may have gotten a bad copy - not that you should expect any UWA lens to match the sharpness of a fast prime, but on-center sharpness at least should get pretty solid as you stop down to F8 or so - if yours is still soft, you may be right on the Sigma QC striking again (I find they can make some lovely lenses, but do have an inordinate number of quality issues, backfocus issues, etc requiring people to go through 2 or 3 copies until they get a winner). I've got both Sigma and Tamron lenses, and find Tamron to be a much more reliable QC company - 4 different Tamron lenses and all perfect right out of the box.

 

At F8-F14, my Tamron is razor sharp in the middle, and the slightly soft corners when it was wide open are pretty much gone. I still use it wide open though when needed, and on-center sharpness is still quite good.

 

Here's an F10 shot to give an idea of sharpness from the Tamron:

 

This one's wide open at F3.5, handheld at ISO1600 at night - still the sharpness was plenty usable:

 

This was handheld at F3.5 in the atrium of the Emerald Princess:

 

In both handhelds wide open, you can see some corner softness along the extreme ends, but the center sharpness is still solid.

 

In my tests of the two, the Tamron seemed a hair better than the Sigma in the center, but neither would I have considered to be very bad or that far apart...both would produce what I'd consider nice printable results. And from everything I've heard and seen from the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8, it's a sharp and good performer even wide open, and has a respectably fast aperture. If you get the chance, I'd try either of the Tamron or Tokina in a shop and see if they'll do better, or see if any rental places rent one to try.

 

*thank you by the way on the comment on my photos - didn't see that until after I posted!

[Leukoi]

The wider you go, the narrower your depth of field, and the more blur you're going to have. I'd stick with what you have, but run longer exposures on a monopod, or rest it solid on a railing. And on the Sigma 10-20, stay away from 10mm. Go up to at least 11 or 12.

[TheRoff]

It's not cheap, but I have been very happy with Canon's 16-35 f2.8 for interior shots.

 

 

 

Larry

[knittinggirl]

I used my 14-42 mm inside the ship, and my 40-150 on shore excursions.

[chipmaster]

Not accurate the wider you go the larger the DOF, I know its easy to get that confused. But one reason wideangle's are the way to go for the most dof.

 

The wider you go, the narrower your depth of field, and the more blur you're going to have. I'd stick with what you have, but run longer exposures on a monopod, or rest it solid on a railing. And on the Sigma 10-20, stay away from 10mm. Go up to at least 11 or 12.

 

Here are the reviews for the various DX superwides, take your pick there is no perfect lens:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1250/cat/31

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1186/cat/23

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1046/cat/33

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/135/cat/11

 

You do pay a hefty premium for the canon but stopped down I really doubt unless you are a peeper it matters a lot. I personally wouldn't pay for a fast 2.8 prime unless shooting with shallow DOF is what you are looking, for most conditions all the wrong reasons you are going wide.

 

Hi everyone! I'd like to find out what everybody thinks is the best/most effective lens for shooting the interiors of the Allure of the Seas. This ship has a lot of interesting lighting that I'd like to capture. I have a Canon Rebel T1i body (crop).

 

I know I'll be needing a decent wide angle with a large aperture. I currently own a Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 but I'm not very happy with it. I was thinking of renting the Canon 14mm f/2.8L for the week (I can't afford that lens). I'm not sure if I'll be happy using it wide open though.

 

Does anyone have any recommendations or any experience with any of Canon's wide angle lenses? I have a Canon 70-300mm lens and I love it. Of course I'm looking for a lens that remains fairly sharp wide open so that I can get decent hand held shots inside the ships.

 

Thanks!

[TLCOhio]

Hi everyone! I'd like to find out what everybody thinks is the best/most effective lens for shooting the interiors of the Allure of the Seas. This ship has a lot of interesting lighting that I'd like to capture. I have a Canon Rebel T1i body (crop). I know I'll be needing a decent wide angle with a large aperture. I currently own a Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 but I'm not very happy with it. I was thinking of renting the Canon 14mm f/2.8L for the week (I can't afford that lens). I'm not sure if I'll be happy using it wide open though. Does anyone have any recommendations or any experience with any of Canon's wide angle lenses? I have a Canon 70-300mm lens and I love it. Of course I'm looking for a lens that remains fairly sharp wide open so that I can get decent hand held shots inside the ships. Thanks!

 

For my Nikon D-50 and now Nikon D-3100, I have that same Sigma 10-20mm, f4.0-5.6. Clearly, mine has a Nikon mount, not what you used on Canon. I bought it new in mid 2008 for about $500. It was introduced in 2005 and at that time it got the best marks compared to the Nikkor lens that cost much more. It is in Sigma’s “EX” line, which is more of a pro build quality.

 

I have shot lots and lots with this lens, as recently as today inside an office area. Very, very happy with its "feel", quality, results. We did so very much in late July and early August 2008 in southern England, the Baltics and Russia. Then, this past summer, we had over two weeks in England, Copenhagen and all along the Norway coast. Below are a few examples of those photos with this lens.

 

Am I missing something in being happy with this range of results? You can see more pictures from that Norway trip below.

 

THANKS! Enjoy! Terry in Ohio

 

For lots of interesting details, great visuals, etc., from our July 1-16 Norway Coast/Fjords/Arctic Circle cruise experience from Copenhagen on the Silver Cloud, check out this posting. Don’t be shy and feel free to ask any questions of interest. This posting is now over 30,530 views. Appreciate those who have “tuned in”.

http://www.boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=1227923

 

 

The new Terminal 5 at Heathrow has a unique, large roof span over this massive area that is in part a massive shopping-dining mall and, oh yea, a new 21st Century airport gateway/hub. Things worked smoothly at this facility. Nice and interesting design touches by the architect, Norman Foster.:

 

 

 

The Waterloo Room at Windsor Castle celebrates with large painting of the key players involved in defeating Napoleon.:

 

 

 

The Grand Staircase at St. Petersburg’s Hermitage:

 

 

 

As we entered Catherine's Palace in St. Petersburg, here was the welcoming band.:

 

 

 

Inside Catherine's Palace in St. Petersburg with its spectacular reception room, painted ceiling, gold, etc.:

 

 

 

Fountains and water at the spectacular Peterhof outside of St. Petersburg:

 

[arrow3]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I need to get more pics at closer to f/8 with this lens. The problem is that, for interior shots, I can't hand hold the camera stopped down to f/8 usually. I guess I'll need to improvise.

[Leukoi]

Not accurate the wider you go the larger the DOF, I know its easy to get that confused. But one reason wideangle's are the way to go for the most dof.

 

I wasn't talking about focal length, but aperture size. The way I said it probably didn't sound right. Either way, a fast lens isn't necessary for wide angle shots.

 

This is f32 at 1/2 just leaning the camera on a rail.

 

[chipmaster]

Nice shot, I wonder how much diffraction limit you have on it.

 

Capturing water as blur is always challenging, ND filter might be better than stopping down if you are maxed out on shutter speed and ISO.

 

I wasn't talking about focal length, but aperture size. The way I said it probably didn't sound right. Either way, a fast lens isn't necessary for wide angle shots.

 

This is f32 at 1/2 just leaning the camera on a rail.

 

[Leukoi]

Nice shot, I wonder how much diffraction limit you have on it.

 

Capturing water as blur is always challenging, ND filter might be better than stopping down if you are maxed out on shutter speed and ISO.

 

You would probably notice softening with the slow shutter speed and being handheld over any softening from diffraction.

 

A crop of the right penny.

 

 

I've got ND and ND grad filters, and they are definitely better, but I didn't have them with me at the time. ISO on that shot was 200. Point was if you rest the camera firmly against something solid, you can get some really slow shutter speeds when you can't use a tripod. For a low light shot, you could go several stops better than f32.

 

For an interior shot, you could rest it solid, then do some autobracketing and merge them together as an HDR. I would rather do a long exposure or HDR over a high ISO. I'll be on Voyager in March; see what I can come up with.

[donaldsc]

I wasn't talking about focal length, but aperture size. The way I said it probably didn't sound right. Either way, a fast lens isn't necessary for wide angle shots.

 

This is f32 at 1/2 just leaning the camera on a rail.

 

 

One thing that you can do to improve sharpness with long exposures is to use your self timer. This reduces camera movement caused by pressing the shutter and also gives you a chance to brace yourself. A beanbag tripod is also useful and can be carried easily.

 

Great shot by the way. I would not apologize for the blurry penny as that is one heck to a crop to see the blur in the penny.

 

DON

[TheHopscotch]

Take a look at the new Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 or the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. I have owned both and decided to sell the Tokina, because I was much happier with the 8mm on the Sigma vs the f/2.8 of the Tokina...but if you plan to take a lot of handheld shots and need a fast lens, the Tokina works. Both are fantastic lenses!

 

I recently did a comparison of the two lenses on my blog here: http://hopperscott.blogspot.com/2011/01/go-wide-or-go-home.html

 

The Sigma 8-16 is sharper than the older 10-20 from everything I've read, and the Tokina is a very sharp lens too.

[dodger501]

Whenever there is an interior that I really care about, I do HDR. Examples from the Carnival Liberty recently:

 

The Disco

 

The Piano Bar

 

Casino Bar

 

Lido deck at sunrise

 

Nikon D700. My walking-around lens is a Nikkor 28-300 VRII, my UWA is a Sigma 12-24. I find myself using Photoshop CS5's lens distortion correction in Camera Raw frequently on images from both of these lenses.

[awboater]

I have a Nikon-mount Tokina 11~16mm f2.8 (throughout the zoom range). Fast glass, and built very well - close to a professional lens. Its one of the few 3rd party lenses that probably out-perform the camera brand lenses. I purchased is over a Nikon 10~24mm lens as I thought the Tokina was better. The Tokina is also available in a Canon mount, but that is it.

 

I use that lens most of the time on-board ship, especially for interior shots. One issue though is if you want to use a flash, you need a hot-shoe flash as the camera's built-in flash is masked somewhat by the large lens diameter. You will get a rather large horseshoe shaped dark spot in the lower half of the photo if you use the camera's flash.

 

I also have a Nikon 10.5mm fisheye that works for photos like cabins, especially if you run it through Capture NX2 or Photoshop (I use Lightroom) to correct the distortion.

 

But distortion is what a fisheye is all about. But it's nice to be able to correct those few times you want a lower distortion shot.

 

Distortion in the fisheye can provide some interesting photos. Just don't overdo it (take too many shots).

 

My kit lens is a 18mm~105mm, and I don't use that nearly as much for inside shots since I bought the Tokina.

 

I also have a 50mm prime lens. I used to use it due to it was a fast lens (f1.8), but since I bought the Tokina, it stays home.

 

While not generally used for inside photos, I have a 70~300mm zoom that I have found I lug around more than I use. In the Caribbean, where it is generally humid, the long focal length can look washed out due to haze. And a haze filter, regardless of it's claim, really doesn't help that much. If I were to leave any lens home, it would be this one.