Tilt shift adapter vs lens

T

Terry Bogard

Messages
1
Edit My Images
No
Hello everyone, I m new to this site and this is my first post. Anyway getting straight to the point. I m starting out as an architecture photographer. I m doing some research on lens in general. What do you guys think is the best route in terms of investments? Should I go for the TSE Lens or just adapter? Are there any significant differences in terms of function beside price? I have figured out i will be using more shift function rather than tilt. Your contribution will be very much appreciated, thank you.
 
Hi Terry and welcome to TP.

Which camera are you using? I'm not familiar with tilt-shift adapters, but off the top of my head I'd think you would run into problems with a full frame DSLR. Specialised tilt-shift lenses are constructed to project a larger image circle than conventional lenses, so the lens can be shifted relative to the sensor and still illuminate the whole sensor. (See sketch below.) With a conventional lens you don't have the same scope to move the image circle, unless you're using a crop-sensor DSLR or you're prepared to crop your image quite heavily. But for architecture you probably want a wide angle view, so cropping isn't really what you want to be doing.

11262-1430146791-e68ae09d8a8d04f2fd7a209c6b80ec9e.png
 
You'd need to adapt a medium format lens for T/S on a 35mm body. Mirex make adapters, for RB, Pentax 67 and other MF mounts. I think there are some adapters on eBay as well, can't recall if they were shift only though.
 
Welcome to TP :)

TBH, adapters are a bit of a bodge/workaround. They only work well in limited circumstances. Eg, with a DSLR, you need medium-format lenses - and most likely 24mm or shorter for architecture, so that narrows the options fairly dramatically. You can also use full-frame lenses, but only on M4/3 cameras.

Custom made T&S lenses are the way to go, though I'd say the shift function is arguably the least useful, as it's so easily replicated in post-processing. Hire one from Stewart (above) and see how you get on.
 
I think the guys above have got it right....a dedicated TS lens is the way forwards for architecture. I have 3 TS lenses and also a couple of adapters. The adapters are excellent quality, no question, but they're not ideal for architecture. Using a shifted lens requires a much larger image circle than the format being used to capture. I have Pentax 645 and Pentacon Six mount lenses to use on mine (around 80mm circle compared to 44mm for a typical 35mm lens). The problem is that 45-50mm focal length is considered to be wide on medium format so there is very little in the way of rectilinear lenses that are shorter with 30mm being the domain of the fisheye lenses.

Bob
 
You can replicate the effects of lens shift in software, at the cost of losing some resolution, depending how far you push it. 50% loss is a simple number which is probably not too far off as a general maximum. Let's say you want a maximum print size of A3, approx 12" by 16". At 300 PPI that needs about 18MP. So if you lose 50% to software perspective shifting you need to start with 36MP.

That suggests to me that really sharp A3 architectural prints using software shifting would be just possible at a stretch with the best of today's DSLRs and lenses using software perspective shift instead of optical, but that if sharp A4 prints are your top required print size then today's best DSLRs and lenses are probably comfortably up to it.

This is just a back of an envelope speculation to get an idea of where the image quality trade offs are between optical shifts (with a tilt shift lens) and using software shift. The attractive thing about software shift is that it applies to all your lenses, all focal lengths.
 
chris malcolm said:
You can replicate the effects of lens shift in software...
Click to expand...
Only some of them. You can't use software to create a photo of a square-on mirror without a reflection of the the camera. You can do that with a shift lens.
 
chris malcolm said:
You can replicate the effects of lens shift in software, at the cost of losing some resolution, depending how far you push it. 50% loss is a simple number which is probably not too far off as a general maximum. Let's say you want a maximum print size of A3, approx 12" by 16". At 300 PPI that needs about 18MP. So if you lose 50% to software perspective shifting you need to start with 36MP.

That suggests to me that really sharp A3 architectural prints using software shifting would be just possible at a stretch with the best of today's DSLRs and lenses using software perspective shift instead of optical, but that if sharp A4 prints are your top required print size then today's best DSLRs and lenses are probably comfortably up to it.

This is just a back of an envelope speculation to get an idea of where the image quality trade offs are between optical shifts (with a tilt shift lens) and using software shift. The attractive thing about software shift is that it applies to all your lenses, all focal lengths.
Click to expand...

I think the loss of sharpest in post processing is mostly hypothetical, though of course it exists. The reality is that large shifts, in correcting converging verticals say, looks unnatural (makes buildings look top-heavy) so is best avoided anyway. T&S lenses also don't have a massive amount of movement (compared to say a camera with movements) and when you push to the max you're right on the edge of the lens' image circle where there may be some optical reduction in sharpness.

But you can't replicate the manipulation of depth of field in post. And T&S lenses are brilliant at shift-panoramas, with no distortion and amazing sharpness. I hired a Canon 24mm T&S from Stewart last year and that was giving me an effective 12mm field of view that way, with stunning quality (it effectively doubles the image area). If I did more architectural work, a T&S lens would be top of the list.

NB For a cheap mess-about with tilt functions, get a Lensbaby http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-lensbaby-spark-canon-fit/p1532920 and a medium-format enlarging lens off E bay for just a few quid. I mounted one with BluTack and was fairly amazed at the image quality :)

StewartR said:
Only some of them. You can't use software to create a photo of a square-on mirror without a reflection of the the camera. You can do that with a shift lens.
Click to expand...

Cloning? That's not limited to reflections either ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
StewartR said:
Only some of them. You can't use software to create a photo of a square-on mirror without a reflection of the the camera. You can do that with a shift lens.
Click to expand...
Of course you can do it with software! Often do that to avoid reflections in glass of exhibition cabinets, taking photographs of murals where a square on viewpoint is not possible, etc..
 
thank you for all your input guys, finally found the post I actually posted, :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top