Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: tandlh on October 30, 2009, 07:05:36 pm
-
Hi all,
I wondering if any of you use the Canon 45 TS-E (or equivalent length in other brands) lens for landscape images routinely. I've reviewed my images and find that about 60% of my landscapes are taken at about 60 mm. That's what fits style best. I've normally used the 28-70 2.8L and 70-200L lens for my work, but I want to milk the last drop out of 1Ds III sensor and am thinking of getting a top of the line prime in the 45-60 range. the Canon TS-E intrigues me, but I'm not sure that it's best for landscape work. I'd appreciate hearing what fellow landscape photographers think of the 45 TS-E and what other options you can think of in the 45-60 range that would give me the color, pop, low CA, and resolution that is top notch. Also, when I do pano's I prefer to take images in the portrait mode and capture about 5-6 across. So the TS-E doing double duty as a pano lens really doesn't fit that bill with just the shift feature.
Thanks,
Ted
-
Hi all,
I wondering if any of you use the Canon 45 TS-E (or equivalent length in other brands) lens for landscape images routinely. I've reviewed my images and find that about 60% of my landscapes are taken at about 60 mm. That's what fits style best. I've normally used the 28-70 2.8L and 70-200L lens for my work, but I want to milk the last drop out of 1Ds III sensor and am thinking of getting a top of the line prime in the 45-60 range. the Canon TS-E intrigues me, but I'm not sure that it's best for landscape work. I'd appreciate hearing what fellow landscape photographers think of the 45 TS-E and what other options you can think of in the 45-60 range that would give me the color, pop, low CA, and resolution that is top notch. Also, when I do pano's I prefer to take images in the portrait mode and capture about 5-6 across. So the TS-E doing double duty as a pano lens really doesn't fit that bill with just the shift feature.
Thanks,
Ted
Actually, the TS-E 45mm does make a really good pano lens with the shift feature. I have used it often in Yosemite in portrait mode, shifted up. so that I can capture Half-Dome, El Capitan, etc. With the lens shifted up, I don't have to tilt the camera up and get distortion. I then shoot as many panned shots as I need to stitch together.
The resolution of the lens is excellent. I print all my photos 40 x 60 or larger and have no complaints in that department. It will be much better than the zoom you are using now.
The tilt feature is something else I often use to get everything in focus.
The only lens that I have found that is sharper is the 50mm Zeiss ZF macro, but it has no shift or tilt.
-
i think you'll notice a difference with any good prime, even 50 1.4, compared to the zooms
the TS will give you the possibility of additional depth of field which may be desirable. optically, i'm not sure how it stands up to the excellent 90TS
how about the Zeiss Makro-Planar 50?
the good news is that if you're in the U.S. it's pretty painless to rent from lensrentals.com and try before you buy
-
Thanks guys. I'm leaning towards the 45 for it's versatility. It's good to hear an opinion from someone who uses it for what I'm looking for.
I appreciate the insights,
Ted
-
The tilt feature is also very handy in some situations- I use three tilt lenses for my work and I feel myself a different photographer altogether
The idea of using Tilt and Shift will become part of your thoughts with every photograph you make.
Canon recently ntroduced new 24 and 17mm TSE lensesn that are hugely improved- so I would find out if if a new 45mm tse is coming.
Since it is in fact a wide angel lens ( about 28mm) I would think also this lens could use some improvements in the corners and coating,
Futhermore the new TSE Canon lenses use a brand new design making it possible to use tilt and shift combined in every direction.
But on the other hand- if you only would like to take panorama images I would go for the macro Zeiss 50mm planar d2
It is rocksolid and the optics are among the best- also-then you do not have to worry if the tilt and shift is set to zero before making each shot-.
-
Thanks guys. I'm leaning towards the 45 for it's versatility. It's good to hear an opinion from someone who uses it for what I'm looking for.
If I only take one lens with me it's the 45 TSE.
What it can give you, too, when combining shifted captures is a wider view with a longer lens. So, the feel of it can be similar to moving up in format. I'm not talking about only necessarily shooting panoramas. Shifted this way you end up with a file that is about 18"x 24" at 300 dpi.
Almost all of the photos in the personal work section of my web site (http://www.jonroemer.com/) were shot with the 45 TSE and almost all of them are 2-3 frame captures. In some cases I've used the tilt, too, in other cases not.
The current image on the home page is a three-frame capture with the 17 TSE.
--
Site (http://www.jonroemer.com/) | Blog (http://www.jonroemer.com/blog/)
-
I use the 90mm T/S for about 75% of my landscape work, and it is a superb peice of glass. I also own the origional 24mm, and use that occasionaly for single shot work, however I actually find that 24mm is either not wide enough, or too wide, so I am looking at the 17mm in the future.
I find the 90mm best, as I use it to create stitched panoramics, Normally shooting in Portrait mode, Either left/center/right Shift, or more normally using Shift and tilt to frame the shot, and entrance point rotation for the pano.
My current lightweight 'travel' kit, is a 50mm 1.4, and the 90mm TS-E with a 1DS mk III.
I have not personally used the 45mm T/S-E, but I doubt you will be disapointed. Tilt and shift is incredibly usefull.
Regards
Mark
-
How exactly are you using the 90T/S. Can you describe the methodology, please ?
-
The current image on the home page is a three-frame capture with the 17 TSE.
Which of the images do you consider 'the' home page image, since the images change ?
I'm curious because I just started shooting with the 17 TS-E.
- - - -
The 45 TS-E is a wonderful lens.
-
As someone who uses the T/S 90mm almost every day and wanting the 45mm, I was most interested to see if a revised one might coming after the release of the new 24 &17mm lenses. I was reliably informed (no names, no pack drill) that there are no replacements for the 45 and 90 in the foreseeable future. The 45 is a pretty good lens. Not quite as sharp as the 90, but then very few lenses are.
-
Which of the images do you consider 'the' home page image, since the images change ?
I'm curious because I just started shooting with the 17 TS-E.
- - - -
The 45 TS-E is a wonderful lens.
I moved to a whole new web site since I wrote that post on 10/31.
My home page now has a slide show of architecture work shots since May.
In the Personal Work section the New Mexico (http://www.jonroemer.com/#/PERSONAL%20WORK/New%20Mexico/1) and Cape May (http://www.jonroemer.com/#/PERSONAL%20WORK/Cape%20May/1) galleries are all multi-frame captures with the 45 tse with only a couple of exceptions.
The first image in the Commercial Architecture (http://www.jonroemer.com/#/ARCHITECTURE/Commercial/1) gallery is a three-frame capture with the 17 tse. Three horizontal frames. I also have a few three-frame captures with the 17tse in a blog post about the lens (http://www.jonroemer.com/blog/2009/08/longer-look-canon-17mm-f4l-ts-e-lens/).
Web Site (http://www.jonroemer.com) | Blog (http://www.jonroemer.com/blog/)
-
I moved to a whole new web site since I wrote that post on 10/31.
Thank you Jon. Nice work and I appreciate the information.
I now own the 17 TS-E and 90 TS-E and will have the 45 next month. I'm trying the 17 with the 1.4 adapter for now, eventually I buy the 24.
Moving from an Arca Swiss 6X9 it's amazing how much you can do with an even smaller kit.
-
Now that I'm shooting full-frame, the 45mm PC-E is probably my most used landscape lens. I find it a very useful field of view, since I often prefer a normal to slightly wide field of view. That's not to say I don't occasionally shoot wider or telephoto, but the normal to slight wideangle range tends to best fit how I see things. So yes I can definitely see it being a good landscape choice. On the other hand, you say most of your images are around 60mm; so if your preference for that FOV is really strong you might find yourself getting frustrated with a 45mm. (Or maybe you'll find that getting just a little closer to your subjects can help you compositions, who knows).
The tilt/shift gives you lots of flexibility. The tilt can be useful for extending DOF, of course. Shifting isn't just useful for shooting buildings or other tall objects, there are lots of times when keeping the camera level and using shift to get the desired vertical framing will often lead to a more pleasing image than if you had to tilt the camera up/down. The shift can also be useful for stitching. A couple of images shifted on the short axis can give you the option of a 4:5 or square format, without throwing away so much resolution as you would cropping a single frame (it also expands your FOV rather than contracting it as a crop would). And shooting 2 shifted horizontals can give you a quick and easy way to get a panoramic image (just a little bit of cropping gives me the 2.5:1 ratio I often prefer for panos).
I also have the 24 PC-E and 90mm PC lenses, and those 3 lenses cover a pretty significant majority of my landscape shooting nowadays (unless I have to travel light with just a zoom or two). Those three along with the Zeiss 35mm and 100mm are my essential 5-lens prime kit.
-
Thanks for the info guys. I just picked up a practically new used one for a good price. I'm headed up to Toroweap in 2 weeks and am anxious to see what it can do for me. Early practice tells me that I need a lot more practice and a whole new way of thinking to understand how to get the most out of it.
Thanks again,
Ted
-
Thanks for the info guys. I just picked up a practically new used one for a good price. I'm headed up to Toroweap in 2 weeks and am anxious to see what it can do for me. Early practice tells me that I need a lot more practice and a whole new way of thinking to understand how to get the most out of it.
Thanks again,
Ted
Using these T/S lenses can take some getting used to, especially if you're not already used to using MF lenses. But even if you are, the T/S adds some extra steps to the process of shooting (assuming you want to actually use the tilt and shift, which I assume you do). Live-view is critical for getting accurate focus IMHO, especially if using tilts. You just can't tell what's really in focus through the viewfinder, even with DOF preview.
One thing to watch out for when getting the hang of this, don't over-do the tilts. It doesn't take as much as you might think unless you're really close to your subject. There is an article here at LuLa about using tilt/shift lenses that gives a good overview of this and also has some handy charts that give you an idea how much tilt you need for a given subject distance and focal length.
Here's my shooting 'workflow' when using a tilt/shift lens. Keep in mind I'm a Nikon shooter, so the interactions between the TS-E lenses and Canon DSLR's may be a little different.
1) Double-check that shift and tilt controls are in their centered/default orientation.
2) Level the camera, not only side-to-side, but also front-back. I try to start with the camera level and then decide if I want to use shifts to frame my composition, rather than angling the camera up or down. It really just depends on the perspective I want for the image.
3) Initial composition is through the viewfinder, which gives me a wide-open view through the lens. If I'm using shift as part of my composition, I'll do that as well.
4) Engage live-view, and open the lens aperture all the way (on D3/D3x. live-view is always stopped down to the aperture you set, so you have to open the aperture to get a wide-open view).
5) If I'm using tilt, I'll apply it now. Then I zoom in to 100% and focus manually on my subject.
6) Next I stop down the lens and check the focus throughout the frame (again at 100%) to make sure I have enough DOF and that the tilt had the desired effect.
7) Switch out of live-view to mirror-lockup mode and take the exposure.
It's a little tedious at first, but becomes second nature after a while.
-
I've shot a bit of personal work over the past few weeks and I found myself gravitating to the 24 TSE II more than the 45 TSE. Don't know if it was the subject matter, my mood, or the lens. I did do some photos with both the 24 TSE II and the 45 TSE and the 24 TSE II ones are pushing the 45 TSE to the side. Less CA, sharper overall, etc.
The 45 TSE was always fine in the past and I dealt with the CA as needed, etc. I think Canon has stated that 45 TSE is not due for an update but now I'm hoping they do update it. They raised the bar with the 17 TSE and the 24 TSE II, they need to do it with the 45 TSE.
These images (http://www.jonroemer.com/blog/2010/02/on-the-scent/) were all shot with the 24 TSE II and are composites of three frames per image. Click images to enlarge them. The one panorama format stands up better even larger, the 1024 px. width can't do it justice.
This blog post (http://www.jonroemer.com/blog/2010/02/quick-before-the-snow-is-gone/), the first five are three frames composites, the last five single frame 24 TSE II images. Again, click images to enlarge them.
-
Jeff, why switch out of live view to take the exposure?
-
Jeff, why switch out of live view to take the exposure?
So I can use mirror-up mode.
-
but isn't the mirror already up in live view?
-
but isn't the mirror already up in live view?
Yes, but it will briefly go down and then up (in most default implementations) for exposure (to allow a reset of the sensor, and allow to follow subject motion between exposures), thus potentially adding camera motion blur.
Cheers,
Bart
-
i'm confused then, as i don't hear the mirror when shooting in liveview
-
Jeff, why switch out of live view to take the exposure?
If you use live view your sensor will heat up. This may degrade image quality as moire noise becomes visible. Maybe it is not a problem for you...
-
If you use live view your sensor will heat up. This may degrade image quality as moire noise becomes visible. Maybe it is not a problem for you...
I'll second this. Maybe it's not an issue with newer camera models (since they can shoot video?) but it's certainly the case with the 1DsM3. Leave live view on too long and you'll get stuck pixels.
I have never seen it when using live view on the camera's screen but in that case I have live view on only for short infrequent bursts. I have seen it when I tested live view tethered to my laptop and the focusing was done via the feed to the laptop. Then live view can be on for a few minutes or more.
I would tend to think the same thing would happen when using it in camera. It's fine to set focus but leave it on for extended periods and you'll probably get stuck pixels.
-
i agree that sensor heating may be an issue - particularly in hot weather, however i'd like to hear some knowledgeable advice/experience with the 5D2.
i tend not to use live view for extended periods, but in many instances, e.g. flowers, i want to watch the image at 10x and trip the shutter when motion stops. or for hdr i want to compose and imediately take 3 bracketed shots
i'm really not convinced that sensor heating on the 5D2 and 7D are a big problem - there are a lot of people making movies that are very critical of image quality
the other question i'd pose is that if sensor heating is really a problem, how long do you have to turn off live view to let the sensor cool?
I'd still like a clear answer on when - if ever - the mirror moves when shooting in liveview
-
i'm confused then, as i don't hear the mirror when shooting in liveview
I shoot Nikon, and with their Live-View implementation the mirror doesn't stay up when taking the exposure. It essentially turns live-view off, drops the mirror, and then takes the exposure as normal. So the mirror is definitely in play. I think Canon may be different in that regard.
On the heat issue, I'm not sure how big a deal that is. But even if it is, I figure turning off live-view and going to M-UP mode gives the sensor several seconds to cool off just in case.
-
To get to the original question, I shoot with the Nikon 45 t/s lens and love it. One thing I didn't note mentioned was the use of a t/s lens in the creation of panoramas. Fabulous. See the latest issue of Outdoor Photographer for how Jack Dykinga does it...
-
To get to the original question, I shoot with the Nikon 45 t/s lens and love it. One thing I didn't note mentioned was the use of a t/s lens in the creation of panoramas. Fabulous. See the latest issue of Outdoor Photographer for how Jack Dykinga does it...
I touched on that in post #13. I find it a very useful technique when I don't have the time or desire to do a larger stitch the traditional way. The 45 PC-E and 85 PC-E are particularly good for this, the 24 PC-E somewhat less so on full-frame.
I couldn't help but chuckle at the way the OP article makes it sounds like Dykinga had invented some ground-breaking new technique though. I've been using shift lenses to stitch for a few years now; and I certainly wasn't the first, as I'm sure people have been doing it for as long as DSLR's have been around (and probably folks were doing it with film even before that). The one thing I find strange is that Dykinga's example photos all were captioned as being a combination anywhere from 5-7 shots. That makes no sense to me, because there is no reason to take more than 3 shots with this technique. Maybe he thinks extra overlap helps with parallax issues, but it's not a complete solution. A far better way is to move the camera in the opposite direction you're shifting the lens, so that the net effect is that the lens is stationary and you get the equivalent of a rear-standard shift.
-
I agree. Very confusing article. I've been doing that since I got my first dslr, a 10D.
The popular way is the cross-format shoot. (3 verticals for a stitched horizontal or viceversa). This technique gives you a 4:3 ratio (aprox.) that some prefer. However, you can use the non cross-format method to keep the 2:3 ratio of all dslr's. You shoot 5 horizontals for a stitched horizontal or 5 verts for a stitched vert. You do the shifting at 45 degrees instead of up-down or left-right. You can start at center, then shift to 10:30, to 1:30, to 4:30 and finally to 7:30. It is a lot more complicated than the cross-format method but yields a 2:3 ratio picture with slightly more pixels.
I wonder how Dykinga manages 7 stitches with a TS!
Best
Eduardo
with I touched on that in post #13. I find it a very useful technique when I don't have the time or desire to do a larger stitch the traditional way. The 45 PC-E and 85 PC-E are particularly good for this, the 24 PC-E somewhat less so on full-frame.
I couldn't help but chuckle at the way the OP article makes it sounds like Dykinga had invented some ground-breaking new technique though. I've been using shift lenses to stitch for a few years now; and I certainly wasn't the first, as I'm sure people have been doing it for as long as DSLR's have been around (and probably folks were doing it with film even before that). The one thing I find strange is that Dykinga's example photos all were captioned as being a combination anywhere from 5-7 shots. That makes no sense to me, because there is no reason to take more than 3 shots with this technique. Maybe he thinks extra overlap helps with parallax issues, but it's not a complete solution. A far better way is to move the camera in the opposite direction you're shifting the lens, so that the net effect is that the lens is stationary and you get the equivalent of a rear-standard shift.
-
The one thing I find strange is that Dykinga's example photos all were captioned as being a combination anywhere from 5-7 shots. That makes no sense to me, because there is no reason to take more than 3 shots with this technique.
Makes no sense to me either unless he's trying to use the central slice of each image and stitching with PS's 'perspective' or 'cylindrical' options. I prefer the 'reposition only' option which I find best suited for panos created with shift lenses.
Maybe he thinks extra overlap helps with parallax issues, but it's not a complete solution. A far better way is to move the camera in the opposite direction you're shifting the lens, so that the net effect is that the lens is stationary and you get the equivalent of a rear-standard shift.
Agreed. This is the technique that I use. dave
-
There is allot wrong with this article and knowing Dykinga, I suspect it comes from a bad reviewer who took lousy notes. I routinely do architecture and landscape 2, 3 and 4 frames stitches with Canon 24, 45, and 90 t/s lenses and occasionally with 4x5 view cameras. On the 24 a 4 frame stitch would be up and left, bottom and left, top right, bottom right, which yields a stitched frame with allot of overlap and somewhat less linear and a larger file than a simple left right flat stitch.
-
There is allot wrong with this article and knowing Dykinga, I suspect it comes from a bad reviewer who took lousy notes. I routinely do architecture and landscape 2, 3 and 4 frames stitches with Canon 24, 45, and 90 t/s lenses and occasionally with 4x5 view cameras. On the 24 a 4 frame stitch would be up and left, bottom and left, top right, bottom right, which yields a stitched frame with allot of overlap and somewhat less linear and a larger file than a simple left right flat stitch.
It wouldn't surprise me if it was shoddy reporting on OP's part. I like some of the monthly columns and often enjoy the photography, but the feature articles and how-to tips in that magazine are often just fluff (at best).
I have done some experimentation with 2x2 stitching, but found it was more trouble than it was worth in most cases, unless it's the only option to get the FOV you need. The bump is resolution over a 3-shot stitch is not much, and it makes composing and shooting more tedious.
-
I have done some experimentation with 2x2 stitching, but found it was more trouble than it was worth in most cases, unless it's the only option to get the FOV you need. The bump is resolution over a 3-shot stitch is not much, and it makes composing and shooting more tedious.
Agreed. By far 90% of my stitches are flat-side to side horizontals with the 24, or 3x vertical or horizontal with the 45.
My point though about Dykinga, from knowing him a bit, is that he is a pretty straight forward guy, no b______T. If he said it he means it. For example there is a suggestion in that article that Dykinga invented shift stitching-he would know better and not make such a claim. Just didn't sound like the Dykinga I know.
-
I recently acquired a Nikon 45 PC-E, after renting both the 24 and 45. I have used 4x5 cameras for the past thirty years and really looked forward to being able to use shift and especially tilt with my D700. My most commonly used lenses for the 4x5 are 150 and 210 so a "normal" tilt shift lens seemed quite appealing. Most of my images are nature, landscapes, and some architecture. The 45 is a blast. I have not done much stitching, yet, but the 45 has transformed my work in the field. I also have done a couple of workshops with Jack Dykinga and admire his work. He can set up and expose three sheets of 4x5 film while I'm still roaming about with my viewing card. I agree with Kirk that he is a straight shooter, pun intended.
Eric
-
I shoot with a D3x, and I own all 3 of Nikons PC-E lenses, The 85mm is the top performer, much better then the 24 or 45mm.
I found when I use to shoot with the D700 all 3 lens performed very well, but when I moved up to the D3x, 24mp starting showing the short comings of the 24 and 45mm lenses. I believe it's the same with canon. Same story. The 90mm is stellar but the 45mm on the 1Ds MKIII and 5d MKII is not as good as the zeiss 50mm macro, take a lppk at diglloyd.com he has done extensive testing.
I just rented the 35mm and 50mm zeiss and will be doing some tests this week.
Yes I love having the shift option for framing purposes, works great, but.... on my D3x the files are not what I call "crackling" when I use the 45mm PC-E lens.
What I have found is purchasing lenses for 24mo FF DSLR, you have to have the absolute best lens in front or your wasting your money on the higher MP.
I am also pretty sure it's the same way with canon, and to be honest it will be very interesting to see when the IDS MKIV is releases with even a higher mp what lenses will actually be up to the call for this body. I can't imagine any of the current zooms will fair to well. Will be interesting for sure.
Steven