TSE 24mm & D60

[Ray Robertson]

[font color=\'#000000\']Doug,
I was hoping you wouldn't mention this. It's been the best kept secret for a long while. Judging by the reaction on this forum to the imminent release of the 11.2MP Canon 1Ds, there's a lot of interest in 'maximum pixel count'.

The Canon tilt & shift lenses have been available for a good many years and they're the best method I know  of 'effectively' upgrading whatever model of of Canon DSLR you own. The D30 can be effectively converted to a D60 (and more) and the D60 to the 1Ds (and more) - within the constraints of the image stitching process, of course. And as has been mentioned already, one of these constraints is movement between frames, specifically at the area of overlap.

With landscape photography, this is often not a problem. With street photography it would be.

In my own experience, the greatest restraint of all that applies to ALL image stitching programs that I've tried, is the difficulty of correcting for perspective errors as one swivels the the tripod head around. The now defunct PowerStitch was the best program available for correcting these perspective mismatches, but in my view it wasn't adequate and was unbelievably slow (much, much, much slower than Genuine Fractals even). Anyone contemplating image stitching would be advised to get Image Assembler from Panavue.

The beauty of the Canon T&S lenses is that there are NO perspective errors when using the shift mechanism. None whatsover, even close up. Maximum file size can be in excess of 50MB. Compare that with the 1Ds 36MB (8 bit, of course).

There's one caveat, just in case you think I'm employed by Canon, the tilt and shift mechanisms are preset to an 'orientation'. In other words, usually the shift goes along the long axis and the tilt goes along the short axis. (I wonder if they've changed this since I bought my TSE 90mm). If you're photographing tall buidings, you turn the camera vertically and 'shift'. If you're photographing landscapes with the camera horizontal (which is usually the case), you tilt. If you're into landscape photography and you're stitching frames, you're only going to be able to stitch approximately 2 horizontal images. Now, here's an interesting aside for those who deplored the 1.6 multiplier effect of the D30 & D60. The T&S lenses allow you to get around this. With a full frame Canon film body, you can stitch two horizontal frames but with a large overlap resulting in something significantly less than 72mm (2x36mm). With the D60, to cover the full horizontal movement, you need to stitch 3 frames (with an even larger overlap) but still giving you a true doubling of sensor length (44.8mm) which equals an 8 bit file size of approx. 36.2 MB.

If you're prepared to spoil the set up for architectural shots, you can have the lens reset by a qualified technician (or do it yourself if you know how) so the shift takes place along the short axis. That way, you can turn the camera vertically and stitch 4 frames resulting in a 53 MB image. How does that compare with the latest crop of unaffordable DSLRs?[/font]

[Ray Robertson]

[font color=\'#000000\']Alan,
Sorry the thread has gone astray a bit. I can't see why there should be any problems using the TSE lenses with DSLR cameras. The tilt adjustment is always a bit fiddly. It takes a bit of practice to get the parts of the frame in focus that you want in focus without getting other parts of the frame out of focus that you don't want out of focus. I suppose you know these lenses are not auto focus. I bought mine mainly for the shift feature. I'll try a few shots with the D60 using the tilt and let you know if I see any artifacts.

For those having difficulty stitching images, there are a few rules. Use the same exposure for all frames, usually an average of the entire scene. Keep the camera level and watch out for straight lines in the foreground, like roads and long roof lines. These are very likely to present perspective problems at the point of overlap. A straight road is likely to change direction, or a branch of a tree will not knit. It's very time consuming to compensate for such errors in the stitching program and sometimes, having wasted hours on trial and error, one finds it simply can't be done. The errors are too great. I much prefer to use the shift mechanism of the T&S lenses. Image Assembler has an automatic stitching option which is a great time saver.[/font]

[Ray Robertson]

[font color=\'#000000\']Me too! One of my unfinished projects is exploring the potential of my TS-E 90mm. However, I don't think there's any need for an unfinished stitching project. The Image Assembler automatic feature takes about as long to stitch the 3 or 4 images you would get from a T&S lens as it takes to boot your computer. It's not fool proof. Insufficient overlap and perspective problems will defeat it. But those are not problems you get with the shift process of the T&S lenses.  I paid about $60 for the program.

Andy has hit upon the Achilles Heel of the T&S system. Yes, there is peripheral light fall off as there is with the Fuji 617 without Centre ND filter. I don't know if it's as great. I think probably not. From memory I think the image circle of the Canon T&S lenses is 60 or 65mm. The D30 or D60 would be protected from the extremes of light fall off because of the smaller sensor, but it's still evident. However, from the image stitching perspective, this factor is irrelevant. There is no noticeable change in light intensity at the area of overlap of each frame, so the light fall off at the edges and corners is only apparent when viewing the resulting stitched image as a whole. If it's still a concern, then Michael's tutorial on a digital centre filter will be helpful.

As a result of renewed interest in my T&S lens  (as a result of this thread), I've just discovered that the Canon teleconverters magnify the degree of shift. With the D60 and T&S lens, I can get a maximum file size in excess of 50MB (8 bit colour). With a 1.4 converter, that increases to about 70MB and with a 2x converter, about 100MB. Not bad, eh![/font]

[Andy Jones]

[font color=\'#000000\']Hey Dan, That's a Yogi Berra that I hadn't heard before ! LOL

I was thinking of those macrofocusing rails that you can attach to the baseplate of the camera used sideways, if they have enough rack to them, should be accurate enough.  In practice, however, the difference we're talking about is (I suspect) easily taken care of by the stitching programs as you suggest - but I'm a perfectionist I guess.

This has generated a product idea for the new Kodak 22MP back they've developed - build a 4x5 back with rails that hold the sensor so that it moves across the film plane to take three images without touching either the camera or lens between exposures - this gives you a 4.6" x 2.5" image with 66MP (3x 38.8 mm x 50 mm) - wouldn't that be cool!?!?  Perhaps Sinar is already working on it if they're serious that this sensor can replace 120/220 film....[/font]

[mtomalty]

[font color=\'#CC9900\']Alan

I haven't noted any problems with this lens when used on both
a D60 and 1D.

The vertical correction and 'extreme' depth of field that this lens
enables is a definite asset but the lens does suffer a little from
chromatic abberation at extreme magnification which does make it
appear a little softer than other quality lenses of similar focal length.

Mark Tomalty[/font]

[barry]

[font color=\'#000080\']Sorry guys!
I was a bit confused about the 4 screws issue. You're right, it's nothing to do with the shift orientation. My lens is set so the tilt is at right angles to the shift, and it stays that way until changed by removing the four screws. Essentially, the way it is, means if I want to photograph a skyscraper with flowers in the foreground just a few feet from my feet, which I want to get pin sharp, I can't. But I can get one side of the building sharp and the other totally out of focus. Not necessarily very interesting.[/font]

[Alan Davey]

[font color=\'#000000\']Apologies if this has ben covered before.

Are there any issues using a tilt/shift lens with digital cameras such as the D60?[/font]

[ricwis]

[font color=\'#3BB9FF\']I was visiting a local lighthouse two weeks ago and met another photographer using film Canon gear.  He had the 24mm TSE and I had my 16-35L.  I said I always wanted to try one of those lenses and he said I've always wanted to try the 16-35.  So we exchanged lenses.  What a deal.

The TSE is a wonderful lens and works very well on the camera (I had my D30 and didn't get the D60 until two days after this).  It is manual focus and I had no trouble.  This was a bright, sunny day.  The pictures had what I would say is a lot more contrast right out of the camera.  The sky, especially, was a very deep blue.  What it did was straighten the vertical edges of the lighthouse image.  Comparing to the 16-35, it is noticable in the print.

Now I have this on my list as the next lens I would like to get.

BTW, he liked the 16-35 and put that on his list.

If you would like to see a comparison, email me and I'll send you a shot of the lighthouse with each lens.  I don't have any web pages right now that I can post images.
Rich[/font]

[Mike Spinak]

[font color=\'#000000\']Wow! Doug, that's a great idea. I've been thinking already that I want to try stitching images to create panoramics, once I go digital. I was looking for an elegant solution to enable me to shift a tripod mounted camera a few degrees at a time while rotating along the nodal point, as opposed to rotating along the camera base. The tilt/shift solution sounds promising.

Would this cause distortion or uneven exposures?[/font]

[ricwis]

[font color=\'#3BB9FF\']Panarama's would be interesting to try with this lens.  I've tried with several of my lens and using both portrait and landscape orientation.  The problem I always have is exposure, especially in sky or water.  Seems there is a slight difference in each frame with brightness and contrast.  It has always been visible when I stitch the images together.[/font]

[erik hansen]

[font color=\'#000000\']i'm curious to know what these perspective errors are that everyone is talking about.  i am very familiar with photographs taken with true panoramic cameras, both 35mm and 120.  these images often have a "warped" characteristic about them.  hard to explain, they just seem somewhat "off."  if this the same sort of look you would get by stitching together multiple images shot with a regular camera?[/font]

[Andy Jones]

[font color=\'#000000\']Thought : If you want the "most seamless" stitching with the T/S lens, you should ideally keep the lens "still" between shots i.e. move the camera as much in the opposite direction as you shift the lens.  This effectively gives you rear shift (or cross) so the image stays in the same place and you take different parts with it in each exposure. In principle, there's no stitching needed - just careful alignment in PS.  If you keep the camera still and move the lens, there's an opportunity for parallax issues, but even then, the stitching software should take care of that. Manual exposure should take care of the differences and as suggested, determine this setting from the complete image by averaging some how.

 Question : Does the T/S lens have a large enough image circle so that the + and - extremes of the shift don't show light fall-off? I've gone up and down in considering this lens but never bought the bullet, so to speak.  

Reasoning: The 1Ds is now reawakening such thoughts with the wide angle being 24 mm again!  And they're competing with my thoughts about an Ebony45S which has 120mm backcross to get 4x10 images where the lens stays still and the back moves - I don't think the 1Ds, good as it sounds, is going to give me enough pixels for the 24x60 prints from the 7600 which arrives any day now [/font]

[Andy Jones]

[font color=\'#000000\']RS - I also have a few unfinished projects but that's another story!

Your comment about "a 16 mm lens works so therefore a 24 mm must be OK" isn't quite right since image circle is independent of focal length - and I was asking about the image circle and if it extends to the extremes of the shift range.

[  Take a 50 mm lens for a 35 mm format and put it in a 4x5 view camera; it still has a focal length of 50 mm but the image won't fill the film area because it's image circle isn't big enough.  ]

 I'd assume that Canon ensured that it was acceptable in general, but many wide-angle lenses have some fall-off in light intensity at the outer edge of the image circle (i.e. in the corners of the rectangular frame)- my Sigma 18-35 is only noticeable in stitched panoramas so I had to create a digital centre filter (like Michael's tutorial) to get the sky to stitch without intensity changes.  24 isn't really that wide but the image circle may be losing intensity at its edge...

Anyone seen this with the 24 T/S?[/font]

[dbarthel]

[font color=\'#000000\']How about the ultimate solution: A Hasselblad Arc body and the new Sinar 22MP back? View camera movements and a huge sensor.

Dan[/font]

[AJSJones]

[font color=\'#CC9900\']Barry, I hope all the fussing would be done in the set-up before going out to take the pictures - once the rail is in place and tested, it would take as much time to shift the camera as it would to shift the lens at those critical moments.  

I used to take  more "post-card" type images and until I read about including a foreground as a way for the viewer to "get into" the picture, and I understood why they didn't work well as "art".  However, parallax was never an issue.  But, if there's any object in the foreground, it's an obvious/critical element of the composition and the last thing I want is for it be detectable that it's been messed with.  It's the same kind of issue as with panning about the camera axis rather than the lens node axis - it either looks weird or "fixed", especially if there's anything in the foreground.

Thanks RS - that's good to know about the lever.  You do have to use the screws if you want to change which plane tilts, right?  For panoramas as Ray suggests, with the real sensor vertical and move sideways to create the pano, you want the tilt to be forward... (so in the vertical position to get tilt forward and shift sideways, the lens needs to be configured so it has rise/swing when in the horizontal mode)[/font]

[ricwis]

[font color=\'#3BB9FF\']Alan,
If you want to see a photo from the lens on the D30, email me and I'll send it to you.  You can examine the photo and compare the same photo with a standard lens.  You will be able to see if the lens would work for you.
Rich[/font]

[Dan Barthel]

[font color=\'#000000\']Andy, you are dead wrong on your analysis of moving the camera, rather than the lens.  What is being accomplished when shifting the lens is placing a different part of the image circle on the film/sensor, without moving the plane of focus of the lens. It would be physically impossible in the real world to move the camera body without displacing the plane of focus. So leave the camera alone, and shift the lens.[/font]

[Dan Barthel]

[font color=\'#000000\']Andy, you're right. But to quote Yogi Berra, In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they're not. I just don't see how to get the perfect mechanical parallelism required to make it work. I feel much more comfortable leaving the camera physically in the same spot, and shifting the optics. The net distortion you will get is like taking the left half of the picture with your right eye, the the right half with your left eye. Wrong in theory, near impossible to see in practice.

Dan[/font]

[barry]

[font color=\'#000000\']Andy,
I shouldn't like to think you might miss a great photographic opportunity whilst fussing around trying to avoid miniscule parallax errors of little practical consequence!!  [/font]

[Ray]

[font color=\'#CC9900\']Could someone give me advice on the 4 little screws that hold the mounting ring in place. Apparently, to stitch images of a panoramic scene with the camera held vertically (which gives an effective sensor size of 45x22mm as opposed to 45x15mm), one needs to remove the 4 screws and turn the mounting ring thru 90 degrees. All my little screwdrivers have failed to budge any of these screws. Looks like I'll have to visit a camera repair shop.[/font]