Tilt Shift Lenses

Greetings, back with another question. I shoot almost all Landscapes as well as a lot of old historic buildings. I use almost exclusively my 10-22 UWA and 70-300 lenses and sometimes my 50mm for these shots. I have a gap between 22mm and 70mm and I was wondering if I would benefit, (based on what I primarily shoot), by another lens in between. I was reading about tilt shift lenses and was wondering how you more experienced Landscape Photographers feel about them and if one would benefit me. If so what would you suggest and why? I shoot with a Canon body and lenses. Thanks for your help.

Greg
Nevada

I don't really feel the need with most landscapes, but mix in the old buildings, and you've definitely moved into TS country in my book. Yeah, you can overcome the distortion in Photoshop, but I'm an original capture sort of guy by nature. The less time I spend on the computer, the more time I have for things more important to me.

Thanks for your reply Hank. I just checked-in to the prices on tilt-shift lenses and they are not cheap, at least for me they're not.

Darwin Wiggett shows an number of superb examples of using tilt for depth of field control and shift for perspective control and stitching. His examples use the new 17mm TS-E, however, they apply just as well to the other three focal lengths.

See the second artile on this page:
http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/category/articles/

Yes, they are expensive, especially the new 17mm and 24mm releases.
However, you can now find some nice bargains for the old 24mm version 1.
The optics are not as good, but the prices are ~ 1/3 of the new version 2.

Keep in mind these are all manual focus lenses, but that shouldn't bother you for landscapes if you are using a tripod.

I find the 24mm TS lens especially useful for architectural images and urban landscapes to eliminate convergence. The shift function allows one to keep the lens level and then compose by shifting the image vertically in the frame, keeping vertical lines parallel. This is equivalent to the rise function of view cameras.

24mm often is not wide enough on my 1.3 crop-factor body, and so I am weighing the pros and cons of getting the new 17mm tilt-shift lens versus getting a full frame body. In truth, I would like both.

Hi Greg,
I have owned a Wisner 4X5 field camera for about 15 years now, and when I got the camera I went back to where the camera was/is built and took a week long workshop with Wisner himself and a pro that had used the camera. I learned a great deal about the cameras ability to tilt and shift. For me, there is no substitute, even in PS. This is the only way to achieve a crystal clear landscape and building scapes.
Best of Luck,
Ross McClure
Golden, Co.

I use mine more for commercial image I do than for landscapes. for nature I do use it for wildflowers and ect. where you want to change the focal plane to get the apparent depth and still shoot a wide open f stop the only solution for a windy day. I love my TS lens, it is always in my bag. With that said if I only shot nature I feel I could spend my money better elsewhere.

Thanks to all for your replies.

James - if your were only shooting nature what lens or lenses would you be looking at? I currently use my 10-22 UWA - sometimes my 50mm - and my 70-300mm.

Greg,
Nature is a big subject. You mentioned landscapes lets take that. I would save up for if you don't already use a sturdy tripod, 5Dmark 2 or 1D a wide zoom, few prime lenses 20, 50, 100, 200 and maybe a TS. I like the 50mm and use it often. My bag 17-40L, 28mm, 50mm, 100 macro, 24mm TS, 200mm 2.8, 300mm f4 IS, 1.4 extender all Canon and extension tubes. I have owned the 20mm, 400 5.6, 300 2.8 and 500 f4 and all great lenses but not for my use. Above equipment it is being in the field at the right time( which means you be there at a lot of wrong times) and using what you have the best you can. Of course good software and ability to digitally process an image plays a mayor part of getting the final image you want. The best chance to get great nature images is to be outdoors often. I would trade time outdoors for more equipment anytime.

The TS lenses can be a great addition to your kit. However, as a few other people here have mentioned, if you're going to do a lot of TS movements, that's really what the view cameras were designed for. I'm not going to get sidetracked because you were specifically asking about TS lenses for Canon. I just want to point out one other consideration if you decide to purchase one of the TS lenses; because the viewfinder of your camera (especially if you don't have a newer DSLR with LiveView) is very small and might be very frustrating trying to determine which parts of the scene are in focus and which ones are not.

Cheers,
Jay DiMichele
www.jasondimichele.com

I shoot 4x5 so take my comments for what they are worth with respect to your needs. When shooting landscape, I nearly always use a rear tilt, with all my lenses. I also have a medium format camera with NO tilt and shift, and I find that to be a large limitation when using that camera. In particular, when shooting landscapes, a rear tilt allows you to achieve “looming foregrounds,” which many people like. Given their price, perhaps you should see if you could rent one prior to buying.

Thanks to all for your continued advice, I appreciate it.

Greg
Nevada

I shoot 4x5, as well. The ability to correct perspective and place the plane of focus is the strong suit of a view camera. However, LF requires a obtaining a new and completely different kit, a different mind set, and a totally different workflow. While a view camera may meet your stated need regarding the type of images you make, it may not be good fit for you. Careful evaluation is called for.

If one is already set up for digital capture and processing, adding LF to the mix will necessitate obtaining film and dealing with it, having a lab to develop the trannies/negs, and having a facility to scan big film. There is also the post processing work to consider. You will also need to negotiate a learning curve and you will be forced to really slow down in order to achieve excellent results. (on a 'busy' day, I might expose ten sheets of film)

Don't get me wrong, here. I love LF and prefer it, but in light of the above, you would do well with a TS lens, I think. That said, if you find the lure of LF too strong to resist, let us know and we'll help you get started.

--P

Come to the dark slide....

I agree with Preston. LF is definitely NOT for everyone. You've got to be OK about letting a good shot get away, because they will. You cannot setup, focus, meter and shoot an LF camera like an SLR. There's no zoom and you can't change lenses and refocus in 30 seconds. You've got to have more time, or the ability to predict what will be there in 10 minutes, or the ability to wait until conditions are right.

I prefer a view camera, but I'm also OK with going out for a day without shooting a single sheet of film.

If those things don't appeal to you and you don't feel a need for massive print sizes with fine detail, then a T/S lens on 35mm will probably suit you well. But like Preston, I'd welcome anyone to the LF movement and would be more than happy to share what I've learned.

Thank you for your continued advice, you guys are great.

Greg
Nevada