wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

yes, it is a limited function, although for this kind of work, nothing replaces the technical field or view camera, expecially lens coverage.
good luck!

DaveC Loc: Illinois

Yep, I would think so too. I'll try it as soon as an appropriate subject comes along.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

I don't see the use for one if shooting mainly landscapes (although it can be handy for increasing DOF with a large aperture), but the main stay for such a lens would be more in architecture and such.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

The theory behind in inward tilt of two tall objects is a consequence of the spherical geometry of lenses. The correction is to tilt the angle between the focal plane (the plane on which the image converges) and the plane of the recording medium (film, sensor, ground glass screen). Wikipedia might have an article on architecture cameras. If you are a practiced user of Photoshop you can acheive the 'correction' with the Crop tool used its 'perspective' mode, but this means creating pixels by a bicubic algorithm internal to Photoshop and also squeezing pixels out, so not every end result comes out pleasingly.

DaveC Loc: Illinois

Using tilt to keep objects at different distances in focus is called the Scheimpfulg rule. (Always wanted to actually use that in a sentence.) I often shot with a 4x5 view camera and used it often. Which explains why I popped for a Nikon T&S when it was first announced. Nowadays, to some extent at least, I reproduce it in Photoshop.

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

It works--I have them all, but rarely use them because their "range" is about the same as a Sigma 8-16--which is a wonderful lens and much easier--cheaper too
Stan

DaveC Loc: Illinois

True, (I have a 10-20), but not nearly as much fun.

architect Loc: Chattanooga

I used a Nikon 35mm PC lens years ago. It is great for three shot panos, as well as architectural work, although the lenses available are not wide enough for interior shots, and especially if using a cropped sensor. I do all my perspective correction in Photoshop now.

DaveC Loc: Illinois

I still have one of those also. Haven't used it in years, except for mounting it in reverse in front of a Nikor 105 Micro for real close-ups.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

I do not own a ts lens but rent them. They are superior to PS correction because you do not wind up cropping half your photo. The shift works well for a bit of extra for a panorama. Depending on the height of the trees and how far back you can get it will have value. The Canon 14mm ts would likely be best for this. The tilt is incredible and one of my main reasons for renting the lens. It adds considerable depth of field at wider apertures and is amazing in landscape photos. It takes work to use it and many are too lazy to learn about it. I suggest renting one to see if you like the work and thought involved in fully utilizing one. Give it a try, you might like it.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

****************************************************************************************
Not quite right in your thinking about the tilt of the lens correcting converging verticals. That is done by shift movement of the lens upwards, keeping the lens and (film) sensor, parallel to the subject. Tilt will give more control of the depth of field to a larger, or lesser degree, than fixed optics.

forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA

I've been looking at Nikon's 45mm PC-E and 24mm during the last two weeks. WRT your landscape question, I have found out things I did not know, even as an owner of Nikon's 85mm tilt-shift. Here are some indicators you are right about using a PC lens for the shots you have in mind.

A seller of a 45mm told me the perspective is more realistic for a landscape pano stitched with shifted shots on the 45mm PC-E than had the scene been done on a wider lens -- we had been discussing the 24mm PC-E from Nikon. His point was that using a wide lens for landscapes introduces perspective issues while the normal lens with shift is a cure for that.

This seller's remark led me to look at the art on my walls, mostly California impressionists from the depression era. These artists mostly did landscapes. I was astonished to see that not one of the ten or so was wide in the manner of a photo panorama. One was square. The most valuable one was portrait! What do photographers know about composition that painters, after hundreds of years with success in perspective, do not??

Next, I saw a remark from Nikon that the 45mm t/s is good for nature. Then I realized that there is a larger infinity of good nature shots one can compose with a normal lens like the 45mm t/s (1:2 reproduction ratio) than with a wider lens.

For your kind of work you may want a circular polarizing lens. I finally found a (no longer made) Nikon CPL, called PL2; should fit either the 85mm or 45mm t/s. Nikon has a system point of view, which I try to follow.

Nikon made shift lenses at 35mm and 28mm, still for sale used, but no longer made. They may be a fit for much of your work, if not all. The ones with the black knob are superior to the earlier ones. I decided against getting these because they do not tilt.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Paul is on the cusp of wealth- congradulations.Hope you can make it 'universal' to suit many cameras and many lenses.

forjava Loc: Half Moon Bay, CA

This is maybe the most understandable and most usable of all the comments here and mercifully short. I mention this because Paul, with his invention, faces a problem, which is writing his elevator speech. As soon as somebody says the Scheim in Scheimpflug, the eyes will go blank.

The point for Paul is that wherever you look on the web, including Nikon's site, the discussions of tilt and shift are too terse to grab hold of. He could consider forming a small, loose community of photogs, versed and naive wrt t/s, to ensure clarity.

melismus Loc: Chesapeake Bay Country

I do hope you are right, John. And yes, I aim for as many lenses and mounts as possible.