dyximan

My question is when taking a cityscape with A crop sensor camera compared to a full frame, Will one leave the building relatively plum level and square and the other tilt or bow more to a counterpoint. My understanding is that the crop sensor like the Camera I use D5300 did tilt the buildings in. My next question is I have read that this can be taken care of in post processing. But was curious if there is anything that can be done within the camera itself and or lens, I read something about a tilt shift lens.
Thank you for your help and advice

tjpratt Loc: Ballard

PS will fix most

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Tilt-Shift Perspective Control lenses are super super expensive. The good ones run $4,000 to 6,000 dollars. I set my camera on a tripod and use a bubble level to check that my camera is not tilted. Then, I get what I get and if you are handy in Photoshop you can do further corrections.

wrangler5 Loc: Missouri

Whether walls "tilt," a term usually used to mean that the vertical lines of a building seem to converge instead of being parallel, is purely a function of the relationship between the plane of the wall and the plane of the film or sensor. If those planes are parallel, the lines of the wall will be parallel, and vice versa. So you can get "straight" walls with any size of film or digital sensor IF you can keep the film plane parallel to the wall.

ELNikkor

The D5300 might have a perspective straightener in the menus, my D5100 does...

LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field

Most cameras do these days...but you had better have lots of "crop space" around the buildings....

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

This could be a lens phenomena if the lens is to wide of angle. This phenomena is emphasized when using a "fisheye" lens, and is known a barrel distortion. This type of distortion can happen with both sensor types.

B

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Unless photographing tall buildings is your specialty as a professional, stick with what you can correct with Software. Tilt-shift lenses cost as much as a use automobile or at least more than your camera. So, no point for hobbyists to even think about. You could easily get a used film full view camera with full movements for less. Of course I already have two view cameras (one studio rail and one folding field) and the required lenses so I'd never consider a T-S lenses, though they do have other cool uses.

As far as I know, there should be no real difference in final appearance of T-S images with either Full Frame or Cropped Factor sensor cameras, there is no reason for there to be. The idea of them is to remove distortions if used properly and not too wide. Sure the same lens might be different for each format. But that is the case with all lenses.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yes, I know what you mean. LOL

R.G. Loc: Scotland

The convergence is related to how tilted the camera is when it takes the shot. A crop sensor camera with its built-in zoom effect should result in you standing further back to get the same framing as a FF camera, so in theory the crop sensor camera would need to be less tilted.

One possibility is to keep the camera level, then in PP crop out any excess foreground. Another possibility is to look for an elevated viewpoint to take the shot from, which would allow a more level line of sight.

Failing all of that, shooting wide as suggested and correcting in PP using a Transform or Perspective tool or some such will work (not as difficult as you might think).

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

No camera will ever do that, but lenses you put on them will! (and it does not has anything to do with the sensor)!

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Since nobody has asked, what lens were you using? A super wide angle lens will cause perspective shifts if you are too close to objects, and with something on the order of a 14 mm too close might be farther away than you think.

So, again, what lens?

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

To some degree, vertical walls do actually appear to converge as they recede up from us, just as railroad track rails do appear to converge as they recede towards the horizon.

R.G. Loc: Scotland

If the lens is a zoom, and if circumstances allow, backing off and zooming in will help (but probably won't provide a complete answer). I usually prefer to leave a small amount of convergence, but apparently for a professional result the convergence should be eliminated.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

One of the most important differences between the view cameras Ansel Adams used, and the smaller cameras such as 35mm (which he also occasionally used) is that a view camera can do what you say. By making the back(the film or sensor) perfectly perpendicular to the ground (parallel to the building), you get upright buildings. Then, by raising the front of the camera (the board with a lens on it), you can move to the upper part of the image (where the top of the building is, leaving out the unwanted ground area). Behold! Straight building, top to bottom. You can also get a similar effect regarding lines that are horizontal in the picture, by swinging the back one way or the other to make the two ends of a building (or whatever) look more (or less) equal in height, when one is farther away. If you shift the whole image to one side by moving the back that way, so the part of the glass in the picture with your reflection moves outside the frame, you vanish from the image.

The advent of 35mm in journalism and later in general commercial use meant we had to get used to tilting buildings--and often we exaggerate the effect on purpose. But yes, Photoshop has perspective correction you can use after shooting--I never tried it. The format of your camera (full frame or less) does not matter.

If you really want to correct perspective in the camera, as you say (I suspect the quality is better? Maybe not...), you can do that for much less money than a zillion-dollar tilt lens. Just buy an old view camera (many are cheaper than that lens), and attach your Canon to the back with an adapter made for that (from eBay--4x5 back adapter for Canon, around $100). The 4x5s called "field cameras" are smaller and much lighter than studio models, and the ones called press cameras (such as Graphic) are meant to be used either on tripod or hand-held. But that was when men were men, especially journalists--by today's standards, the press cameras are quite hefty. You see them in old movies. And press cameras do not have quite as much correction movement as a full-featured view camera. The adapter that fits your Canon to a view camera does not work with wide angle Canon lenses, though--it puts too much distance between sensor and lens. In that case, just use a wide angle large format lens on the view camera with 4x5 film, and give the Canon a rest. In any case the setup will use a large format lens--not the Canon lenses. Then when the film is developed, you can scan it and resume digital festivities.

The large format digital setup requires a view camera lens 125mm or above, because of the minimum distance from lens to sensor. The angle of view for any 125mm lens is exactly the same on your digital camera, if it really is 125mm and not "equivalent to 125mm". My avatar picture here beside my name, of the rex begonias, was shot with this setup, using a big studio lens on an 8x10 camera and a Canon digital 650D camera on back.