Tilt shift

Wail said:
It makes sense, but also doesn't :thinking:!

Excuse my ignorance, but if this was the case then MF lenses are made for MF cameras and would be weak / poor performers with such a T/S adaptor!? Yet the Hasselblad adaptor is for its own lenses mounted on its own camera bodies ... how come it works for MF but wouldn't work for 35mm? Unless MF lenses are inherently designed differently to accommodate such a mount in the onset :thinking:?
Click to expand...
Good point, at face value. However,
1. The Hassy TS adaptor is also a 1.5 tele-extender. This is how the IC of the lens is increased to enable the movements.
2. In practice, this ingenious implementation of TS is a also a compromise, is unwieldy and very expensive.
3. Specially designed TS lenses are much more practical implementations of TS
 
If you want perfect verticals in your architecture photos then you may still have to correct the verticals and distortion with a shift lens, this is certainly the case with the Nikon 24mm PC-E. It can also take longer to correct the distortion than it does with a regular lens as the distortion is quite complex. Photographing architecture I have found 24mm about the best compromise once you get out towards 50mm the verticals don't need massive amounts of correction and you don't loose much resolution in post production as a result.

If you are looking for a cheaper option the older Nikon 28mm and 35mm shift only lenses work well and are around £300 ish, they also work fine on Canons with the use of a cheap adapter ring.
 
HoppyUK said:
The Hasselblad T&S adapter contains optical elements that increase focal length, and also the image circle at the same time.
Click to expand...

Surely Nikon/Canon could also build an adapter that contains optical elements.
 
Ozei said:
Surely Nikon/Canon could also build an adapter that contains optical elements.
Click to expand...

They could, or make a custom T&S lens that does the job rather better ;)
 
HoppyUK said:
The Hasselblad T&S adapter contains optical elements that increase focal length, and also the image circle at the same time.
Click to expand...

Darwinean_JohnUK said:
Good point, at face value. However,
1. The Hassy TS adaptor is also a 1.5 tele-extender. This is how the IC of the lens is increased to enable the movements.
2. In practice, this ingenious implementation of TS is a also a compromise, is unwieldy and very expensive.
3. Specially designed TS lenses are much more practical implementations of TS
Click to expand...

Thank you for the clarification; I had no idea about the built-in teleconverter/extender.
 
ah5168 said:
If you want perfect verticals in your architecture photos then you may still have to correct the verticals and distortion with a shift lens, this is certainly the case with the Nikon 24mm PC-E. It can also take longer to correct the distortion than it does with a regular lens as the distortion is quite complex. Photographing architecture I have found 24mm about the best compromise once you get out towards 50mm the verticals don't need massive amounts of correction and you don't loose much resolution in post production as a result.
Click to expand...

I shoot alot of architecture on a basic dslr and on a variety of 35mm and medium format film equipment. I'm planning on upgrading my gear so I'm looking at large format for film.
But for the dslr I'm saving for the 24mm tilt/shift lens. I didn't realise that using this lens would still require correction in post processing. Having seen a demo of the new perspective control function in Lightroom 5 in your opinion is it still worth investing 1500 quid in a lens (or the cheaper samyang)? What are the advantages of the lens over the developments in lightroom?
 
When you correct in post you end up cropping the edges of the frame where you've distorted the image, so you have to shoot loose, which means losing resolution. Also the results are never as good as using shift.

I too shoot architecture and the TS-E is one of the most useful things in my bag. I only ever correct in post for shots that wouldn't be doable at 24mm, jobs where my only option is a 14mm and then correct.
 
sparty said:
I shoot alot of architecture on a basic dslr and on a variety of 35mm and medium format film equipment. I'm planning on upgrading my gear so I'm looking at large format for film.
But for the dslr I'm saving for the 24mm tilt/shift lens. I didn't realise that using this lens would still require correction in post processing. Having seen a demo of the new perspective control function in Lightroom 5 in your opinion is it still worth investing 1500 quid in a lens (or the cheaper samyang)? What are the advantages of the lens over the developments in lightroom?
Click to expand...

IMHO, getting a T&S lens for controlling perspective and converging verticals etc is a very expensive option. It's very easily done in software (almost any software) and you don't really 'lose' anything cropped off the sides. With a T&S lens this cropping is done in-camera, but the end result is the sides get cropped just the same. There is some loss of sharpness correcting in post when pixels are stretched in this way, but it's barely noticeable if you don't go too far, and in practise you can't go too far because the perspective starts to look unnatural if you do. T&S lenses also lose some sharpness, for optical reasons, and they don't zoom ;)

The really unique feature of T&S lenses is their depth of field control, both increasing and reducing it, and moving the plane of sharpness around creatively :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top