tilt shift lens (Page 2): Since I shoot mostly architecture, I use t/s lenses all the time. I have an old asahi pentax 28mm shift and just got the 17mm t/s lens from Canon. I'm less...

nrkimages

Since I shoot mostly architecture, I use t/s lenses all the time. I have an old asahi pentax 28mm shift and just got the 17mm t/s lens from Canon.
I'm less impressed with the sharpness of the canon, but the pentax is amazing.
with 35mm format, there are limitations compared with a view camera, but nonetheless, having the shift capability is something very important to me.
yes, you can correct - to a degree - in photoshop, but it's really not the same. plus, correcting in photoshop, you necessarily lose some of the image - a real problem when shooting in very tight spaces.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

IMHO, there is. I'd rather get as much as possible correct at the time of exposure than have to fix things in post. One of the strong points of using a view camera for architectural work. The adjustments available with one of those was the inspiration for the PC lenses for 35mm.
--Bob

pecohen wrote:

My thinking was somewhat along these lines - but I have no actual experience with the tilt/shift lens. My mind was really posing this as a question and perhaps someone can answer it. I was wondering what the advantage is of doing the tilt/shift with the lens rather than later in post-processing. I suspect there is an advantage.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

A few years ago (1970's) I had a very rush-job to take about 15 shots of industrial/factory premises, for B&W Press use. Rather than struggle with my Sinar 5 x 4, I loaded one of my Nikons with Pan F film, mounted the Nikkor 28mm PC lens, and carried out the shooting session. Developed the film (2 frames of each view) and printed the 15. 10 x 8 glossy prints, all posted off by 4pm the same afternoon. The client and editor, were both pleased with the results. I could not see myself getting the job done in the same time-scale using the Sinar 5x4.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

pecohen wrote:

I was wondering what the advantage is of doing the tilt/shift with the lens rather than later in post-processing.

You can increase depth of field with a tilt lens without having to stop down so much that your image suffers from diffraction. You cannot increase depth of field in post processing, unless you do focus stacking. As has been noted, you lose some image quality when doing perspective control in post, so shift is advantageous there.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

rmalarz wrote:

IMHO, there is. I'd rather get as much as possible correct at the time of exposure than have to fix things in post. One of the strong points of using a view camera for architectural work. The adjustments available with one of those was the inspiration for the PC lenses for 35mm.
--Bob

I agree to some degree, but only because generally you do capture more and better information if you make a correction when shooting. But if you can get just as good a result with post processing then I don't see a reason to spend good money just to do the job in the camera rather than in the computer - this is especially the case if the total time spent shooting and processing stays about the same.

Of course the trade-off will be affected by how much you enjoy shooting vs. how much you enjoy post-processing.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

RWR wrote:

You can increase depth of field with a tilt lens without having to stop down so much that your image suffers from diffraction. You cannot increase depth of field in post processing, unless you do focus stacking. As has been noted, you lose some image quality when doing perspective control in post, so shift is advantageous there.

That sounds about right. Thanks for that information.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Rongnongno wrote:

Tilt shift have two main purpose:
Modify the perspective, not the point of view.
Augment the the acceptable DOF at the price of distortion.

The most popular use of shift is to correct converging verticals, aka keystoning. Shift corrects keystoning by allowing the camera sensor to see a different part of the considerably larger image circle. The result is similar to changing the point of view. For example, rather than tilting the camera and lens upward to get a tree or a building in the composition, you merely shift the lens up, which effectively moves the point of view higher, mostly eliminating the need to tilt the camera. If you have an object in the near foreground, like a utility pole, you can shift the lens to the side to eliminate the pole from the image. This is also similar to changing your point of view, since it is the equivalent of a lateral move to accomplish the same thing without actually moving the camera.

Depth of field - tilting the front of the lens downward has the effect of changing the plane of focus from vertical and parallel to the film/sensor plane to one that is angled or tilted towards the horizon. No distortion is introduced during a tilt movement on the front element. The only price to pay is that because the area of focus becomes cone-shaped, you need to be careful of elements in the composition that are higher than the cone can cover. You can increase the angle of the cone by using a smaller aperture to help ensure that the important elements are in focus. Try googling th "Scheimpflug Principle" to gain a better understanding of front element tilt, and check these articles out to better understand how a tilt/shift lens actually works.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/tilt-shift-lenses2.htm
http://www.oopoomoo.com/2012/03/seven-advantages-of-using-tilt-shift-lenses/
http://www.australianlight.com.au/blog/post/using_lens_tilt_for_landscape_photography/

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

Gene51 wrote:

The most popular use of shift is to correct converging verticals, aka keystoning.

Thanks, Gene. I was about to write out a more detailed explanation myself, but you've said it all better than I could! (By the way, the second URL gave me a warning that the site was unsafe, but it loaded OK).

studavis

I have a 17mm TS e only thing I would do over is get the 24mm TS. Best example I can tell you an advantage is: I was in a hotel lobby and wanted to shoot directly in to a mirror but wanted me out of it, I did so by standing to the side and tilting the lens. Great picture.

melismus Loc: Chesapeake Bay Country

I have designed a tilt-shift adapter that mounts SLR lenses on mirrorless. I have a working prototype. I have been trying to get it to market, but nobody thinks there is demand for it.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I do not use a tilt and shift lens but it is a must for architectural photography.

Jer Loc: Mesa, Arizona

I own the 24 millimeter Canon tilt-shift lens. I use it for panoramic photographs. I also use it to increase or restrict depth of field.
I bought the lens used and saved a lot of money. I don't use it very much unfortunately. I am glad that I have it. It's nice having a lens that you can control depth I feel by another means then f stops. For the Keystoneing you can use Photoshop rather than this type of lens but like I said that's not why I have the lens.
You're just going to have to decide if your usage is going to be worth the cost for you. Rent one and see what you think.

pyroManiac Loc: HIXSON,TN

A cheap and easy fix which I use in lieu of a shift is mount a wide angle lens, frame vertically with the camera parallel with subject then crop off the bottom. (You may decide that the bottom of the photo fits well enuf that you do not trim). This does not help DOF but if on a tripod just go to a smaller f stop. I will not nor ever plan to get a shift lens.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

RWR wrote:

Thanks, Gene. I was about to write out a more detailed explanation myself, but you've said it all better than I could! (By the way, the second URL gave me a warning that the site was unsafe, but it loaded OK).

Thanks!

My view camera background started in 1969, when it was a lot more common to see view cameras in action compared to today. I had several, and used them extensively for architectural, landscape and commercial (catalog) photography.

Sorry about the URL - I think it may be a false positive - I didn't see it here. If I had, I'd never have posted it.

ebercovici

I have a tilt adaptor for use of my old Nikon lenses on my Sony A7RII. The tilting is not very effective, and to tilt to any reasonable degree causes massive vignetting. The adaptor was not very expensive but is not very useful. I guess that I paid mostly for education.