New TS-E Lenses - Independent Tilt/Shift Rotation Usefullness

[davewolfs]

Hello everyone,

My experience with Tilt/Shift lenses is non existent but I do know that they would be beneficial to my photography.

In the press release for the new 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses it is mentioned that the Tilt and Shift rotate independent of each other. What I would like to know is what is the usefulness of having this and if this is any different from the previous tilt shift lenses.

Also, is this new design feature beneficial for landscape photography?

Thanks,

Dave

[michael]

It's a long story, but the bottom line is that being able to change the axis of both the shift and the tilt mechanism is highly preferable to having them fixed.

You should read up on camera movements (ie: view cameras) so that the reasons for this become clear. The topic is quite a large one.

Here's a very brief summary...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/movements.shtml

My review of the new Nikon T/S lens should also provide some insights...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...kon_24_pc.shtml

Michael

[RawheaD]

Hello everyone,

My experience with Tilt/Shift lenses is non existent but I do know that they would be beneficial to my photography.

In the press release for the new 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses it is mentioned that the Tilt and Shift rotate independent of each other. What I would like to know is what is the usefulness of having this and if this is any different from the previous tilt shift lenses.

Also, is this new design feature beneficial for landscape photography?

Thanks,

Dave

Well, I guess you've not used one, but you know what each mechanism will do, right?

So, imagine yourself doing a product shot laid out on a surface and your lens is tilted downwards to get all the products on the desk in focus. Now, you are in a situation where any time you would want to use shift/swings on a non-tiltshift lens equally applies.  Let's say there is one product that is just hitting the top of the frame (or outside of the frame), but you have room at the bottom.  Easy, shift upwards; won't change the focus, it'll just bring everything in the frame "down".  Your frame not covering everything you want?  Easy, shift up/down/left/right, and stitch in PP.

What about "miniature" tilt photography?  It can help there, too.  Basically, anybody can "tilt" the plane of focus with a standard lens by simply pointing the camera at an angle to your subject.  With a shift lens, you can point the lens at an angle, and still bring the subject to the center of the frame, by shifting back in the direction of the subject; in effect, you've introduced a little "tilt" effect (with significant amount of perspective distortion, I might add) by using nothing but the shift mechanism.  Then, you can tilt in the opposite direction (i.e., away from your subject), introducing your usual amount of focal plane tilting.  You have effectively "added" more tilt to your image than you could have with just using the tilt mechanism.

Both these examples are possible *only* if the tilt axis and the shift axis are aligned, not at 90 degree angles.

[davewolfs]

Well, I guess you've not used one, but you know what each mechanism will do, right?

So, imagine yourself doing a product shot laid out on a surface and your lens is tilted downwards to get all the products on the desk in focus. Now, you are in a situation where any time you would want to use shift/swings on a non-tiltshift lens equally applies.  Let's say there is one product that is just hitting the top of the frame (or outside of the frame), but you have room at the bottom.  Easy, shift upwards; won't change the focus, it'll just bring everything in the frame "down".  Your frame not covering everything you want?  Easy, shift up/down/left/right, and stitch in PP.

What about "miniature" tilt photography?  It can help there, too.  Basically, anybody can "tilt" the plane of focus with a standard lens by simply pointing the camera at an angle to your subject.  With a shift lens, you can point the lens at an angle, and still bring the subject to the center of the frame, by shifting back in the direction of the subject; in effect, you've introduced a little "tilt" effect (with significant amount of perspective distortion, I might add) by using nothing but the shift mechanism.  Then, you can tilt in the opposite direction (i.e., away from your subject), introducing your usual amount of focal plane tilting.  You have effectively "added" more tilt to your image than you could have with just using the tilt mechanism.

Both these examples are possible *only* if the tilt axis and the shift axis are aligned, not at 90 degree angles.

Good examples and thank you for the explanation, I believe from what I have read most have the axis aligned on these fixed style t/s lenses.  What would be some examples where you would want the tilt and shift axis not to be aligned?

[phila]

Good examples and thank you for the explanation, I believe from what I have read most have the axis aligned on these fixed style t/s lenses.  What would be some examples where you would want the tilt and shift axis not to be aligned?

While it is obviously advantageous to be able to have both adjustments easily switchable, it is not terribly difficult to change the "old style" lenses from the standard set up to having both tilt & shift in the same plane.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article...tilt-shift.html

Personally, despite using TSE90 just about daily for 4 years (and buying a 45mm last week) I haven't found the need to change the standard orientation as yet.

[Tyler Mallory]

Good examples and thank you for the explanation, I believe from what I have read most have the axis aligned on these fixed style t/s lenses.  What would be some examples where you would want the tilt and shift axis not to be aligned?

As others have mentioned, using the tilt function to control depth of field is a handy capability. It is usually applied by tilting the lens up or down. Depending on which direction you'd be wanting to shift, having an immediate choice of left/right, or an up/down option is a great convenience. Here's an example: A common use for the left/right shift is shooting an interior scene with a mirror, where you need to keep the mirror perspective appearing straight on, but want to avoid your own reflection in that mirror. You would position yourself out of the reflection, then shift your framing to the desired composition. You could then continue to manage your depth of field with the up/down tilt, if desired.

[JeffKohn]

I believe from what I have read most have the axis aligned on these fixed style t/s lenses.

I can see how you might get that impression, since the folks who prefer having them on the same axis tend to be pretty vocal about it. But both Nikon and Canon have always sold their tilt/shift lenses with the axes at 90 degree to each other, presumably because they feel there's some benefit to this configuration. While the configuration can be swapped on these older lenses, I'm guessing those who have done so are in the minority.

Personally, I've never felt the need to have them swapped for shooting landscapes; I often use both functions together in the default configuration. Which configuration you prefer is strictly a matter of personal preference. One thing I like about the default configuration is that I can use shift for a 3-image flat stitch, while still using tilt to increase DOF.

Having said that, the fact that the new Canon TS-E's are not fixed one way or the other is certainly preferable (unless it were to compromise the mechanical soundness of the lenses I suppose). Flexibility and choice are always a good thing.