Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: JimT1 on May 21, 2018, 11:27:42 pm
-
I'd like to see what others say on which of these two lenses would most likely be utilized for landscape shooting. The focal length is key since my main want for these lenses is to make stitched panoramas using the shift function along with a pano head. I guess ideally I'm looking for lots of detail for large prints.
-
if you're going to use a pano head, i'm not sure why you care about the shift. Shift alone doesn't give you an enormous number of extra pixels. I tried it with my old 90 ts and found it much less useful than a properly set up pano head.
i'd choose the 50 for landscapes for the great edge resolution and flat field but probably never use the shift - but might well use the tilt for increased DOF shooting single row with vertical orientation
the shift can be used for stitched close ups, but that's pretty specialized and not landscape
-
if you're going to use a pano head, i'm not sure why you care about the shift.
The tilt will be useful though, even with pano stitching.
And to answer the OP's question, it depends on the type of landscapes one shoots. With a 50 mm you can achieve great depth of field even without tilt, but it also helps with tilt when there are close objects with height. A 90mm will be more useful for more distant panos or closer panos with relatively modest DoF requirements.
For my type of shooting, which besides landscapes also includes large interiors, the 50mm would be ideal as a replacement for my TS-E 45mm for maximizing resolution and at the same time keeping the number of tiles needed to an acceptable number (also when HDRI comes into play).
Cheers,
Bart
-
My thoughts are to shift vertically, making 3 rows for every horizontal pan (however many pans it would take to capture the scene. This would include exposure bracketing and focus stacking/or tilt. I know it sounds like a ton of work as I've become obsessed with detail. Maybe I should buy a canon 5dsr and see if all those megapixels would solve my need for detail. This way I wouldn't have to get excessive with all the stitching.
I do have a 24mm TS-E Mark II and it's great for closer to the subject shifted panos.
-
My thoughts are to shift vertically, making 3 rows for every horizontal pan (however many pans it would take to capture the scene.
Hi Jim,
While that is doable with proper stitching software, like PTGUI, it would (for the best results at closer distances) require a mechanism to keep the entrance pupil stationary, in the vertical direction. That is, in my view, too error-prone and it will slow down shooting (which might cause issues with moving clouds).
I do have a 24mm TS-E Mark II and it's great for closer to the subject shifted panos.
I also have that one, and it is even very useful for close-ups, I mean really close. Due to its DoF and the large angle of view, it allows to emphasize near subject matter, and at the same time keep the connection with its surrounding environment.
Cheers,
Bart
-
I've never liked using the shift capability for higher detail. It does work but sharpness suffers noticeable at the edges. My experience is with the 24tse II and 45mm. The newer TS lenses might be better though.
-
It does work but sharpness suffers noticeable at the edges.
I've taken a closer look at a recent horizontally shifted image of mine taken with the 24mm TS-E II and the foreground edges are not anywhere near as sharp as the center stitched image. The image worked for me before as the edge of the scene was perceived as a point of distance from the center. I'm now leaning toward the 50mm. I can shoot vertically stitched shots on a panhead with the option to tilt and not have to worry about the unsharp edges form shifting.
Bart,
Do you ever use a 16mm for interiors when you need a wide angle or shift the 24mm?
-
I use both the 50 and 90 about 50/50, it depends on the landscape. I use the shift to take 3 images to stich togehter and get aprox 80-100 Mp after cropping some with my 5DsR.
ANd I use tilt to get the focus plane where I want it.
Here is an example with the 90:
TS-E 90 example (https://www.ronnynilsen.com/picture.cgi?img=Print4/20121108-5420-Master)
A short tele let me get near/far compositions whitout the "far" par becoming to small.
And here is a example withe old 45:
TS-E 45 example (https://www.ronnynilsen.com/picture.cgi?img=Print4/20131108-7924-Master)
Ronny
-
Bart,
Do you ever use a 16mm for interiors when you need a wide angle or shift the 24mm?
Hi Jim,
16mm is a very short focal length, which will lead to projection distortion and an exaggerated perspective. So I'd try to find another solution or vantage point. However, if space is cramped and there is no other solution, I'd use a rotational panorama with my 24mm TS-E (I don't have a 17mm TS-E) if I have that gear with me. That allows me to use the center of the image circle, and offers maximum flexibility for a crop.
The second choice would be a shifted 24mm, but edge resolution would be lower.
The third choice would be using a fisheye, with distortion correction to get a rectilinear image.
Cheers,
Bart
-
i would opt for the 50mm.
Tilt is useful so you don't have to use focustacking as much - saves you a lot of moved details and work.
you can use the lens also for normal stitching if you need to go wider than 30mm (the shifted angle).
the 85mm is within you 50mm image. Less detail but it is there.