Non-parallax adapter for Canon TS lenses

[Guillermo Luijk]

A friend has built a non-parallax adapter to fit a Canon TS lens (it works both for the new 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses) to the tripod, so shifting is free of parallax errors as in a digital back. It is now the camera body that moves when shifting the lens, keeping the entrance pupil in place.

This can be important when doing shifted panoramas containing objects close to the camera. He says the images overlap is now perfect.







Regards

[Mike K]

Since my camera bodies have an L bracket, I can easily counter shift the camera body opposite direction of the lens shift as described here

http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_58/essay.html

Current Kirk and RRS L plates have marks on both portrait and landscape orientations to account for this camera shift, as does the ballhead clamp.
Hartblei was to sell a lens/tripod mount as your home made example along with tilt/shift lenses that were Zeiss medium format glass in the super rotator body.  Does anybody know the status of those lenses and tripod mount?
Mike K

[MrSmith]

i contemplated buying the Zoerk shift adapter that would facilitate parallax free stitching but could not find enough info on how my zeiss 40mm would perform with a small sensor, so didn't take the plunge.
ended up buying a canon 45 ts-e which i'm thinking of selling and replacing with a 1.4 converter to add to my 24 t-se as it will be useful focal length for the interior work i do.
waiting to find out how the mkIII x1.4 works with the 24.

i like the look of the clamp but would need one for each lens and worry about the weight of the camera on the shift mechanism.

[uaiomex]

Agnos of Italy is selling such a device for Nikon PC lenes. People have wondered about the stress inflicted on the mechanism. Nikon seems to be endorsing this product. Your call.
http://www.nital.it/experience/jumbo-mbs.php

I think there's not much difference in weight from the heavy front end of the 17TS to the weight of a 5D(2). I have a rail but it's not quick enough and the extra step (I have totally forgotten to shift back the rail.)

I'm using the TC1.4XII with great success with my 17TS. I've heard it works even better withe 24TSII.
Eduardo

i contemplated buying the Zoerk shift adapter that would facilitate parallax free stitching but could not find enough info on how my zeiss 40mm would perform with a small sensor, so didn't take the plunge.
ended up buying a canon 45 ts-e which i'm thinking of selling and replacing with a 1.4 converter to add to my 24 t-se as it will be useful focal length for the interior work i do.
waiting to find out how the mkIII x1.4 works with the 24.

i like the look of the clamp but would need one for each lens and worry about the weight of the camera on the shift mechanism.

[sbay]

Can someone post an example of where the shift would cause parallax errors in stitching that can't be handled by photomerge in photoshop? I've been stitching with the 24mm, 45mm, and 85mm and have yet to notice any problems.

[MrSmith]

I'm using the TC1.4XII with great success with my 17TS. I've heard it works even better withe 24TSII.
Eduardo

i did a quick test in a camera hire shop with my 24 and a x1.4 mkII and the image quality was very good, some barrel distortion but this can be corrected when processing and is always central so not difficult to do (unlike shifted images). be interested to see how the mkIII performs.

Can someone post an example of where the shift would cause parallax errors in stitching that can't be handled by photomerge in photoshop? I've been stitching with the 24mm, 45mm, and 85mm and have yet to notice any problems.

it's more pronounced when objects are closer to the camera, you probably wouldn't notice it when shooting landscapes, I sometimes get problems with tables/glasses/furniture when shooting interiors.
currently i use a kirk/arca style clamp with mm graduations marked on it. so a shift of the lens is matched with a shift of the body in the opposite direction.
this only works in landscape mode but i rarely stitch in portrait.

[Kirk Gittings]

Can someone post an example of where the shift would cause parallax errors in stitching that can't be handled by photomerge in photoshop? I've been stitching with the 24mm, 45mm, and 85mm and have yet to notice any problems.

I'm sure there are potential problems but.........I can't post such an image because in three years of making my living shooting architecture with a DSLR and T/S lenses (that is after using 4x5 view cameras for 28 years) I have yet to run into a single problem that PS merge couldn't handle on flat shift stitches, horizontal or vertical, exterior interior or landscape. I shoot maybe 3-5 stitches on every job-maybe 15 a week during my busy season. Many with close objects too.

I would love to see a problem image too. Or is this a solution for a non-existent problem? I carry a rail mount for my camera-tested it-but have never actually used it. The only problem I have ever had was once not enough overlap with vertical merges (its possible at full shift, up and down, to end up with barely any overlap) or once lack of detail in the overlap area. That is problems with two images in three years. I merged them manually (a PINA!).

[MrSmith]

i had some out of focus wine glasses on a table in the foreground and some patterned fabric in focus behind that were a bit tricky.
not insurmountable but time would have been saved in post if the body had been shifted.
this was with CS3 so i expect the stitching is now better with cs5.

[Guillermo Luijk]

I'm sure there are potential problems but.........I can't post such an image because in three years of making my living shooting architecture with a DSLR and T/S lenses (that is after using 4x5 view cameras for 28 years) I have yet to run into a single problem that PS merge couldn't handle on flat shift stitches

The point of these gadgets is not having to use any merging software. If the two shifted shots shared exactly the same entrance pupil, there will be zero differences in perspective, vigneting, exposure or any other optical parameter in the overlapping area. Then you just need to put the two images face to face in the appropiate relative positions: the images will be virtually identical in the shared area, not needing any processing (and that means no interpolation) to carry out the stitching. Or at least this is the idea.

Regards

[Kirk Gittings]

Even if they match perfectly you are still going to have to feather the edges etc. It is a PITA. Give ma a good stitch program any day. On my machine-hardly state of the art-PS4 it takes all of like 30 seconds to make a perfect stitch.

[Guillermo Luijk]

Even if they match perfectly you are still going to have to feather the edges etc. It is a PITA. Give ma a good stitch program any day. On my machine-hardly state of the art-PS4 tales all of like 30 seconds to make a perfect stitch.

I am not defending the convenience of these gadgets, just explaining the reason for their existence. No need of interpolation and hence no loss of sharpness, no need of stitching software nor processing time for it, no uncertainty about how good the result will be, perfect matching just putting an image aside the other just like what you get in a digital back. If it is worth the mess (and the cost) or not, is everyone's decision.

Regards


 

[Ray]

I am not defending the convenience of these gadgets, just explaining the reason for their existence. No need of interpolation and hence no loss of sharpness, no need of stitching software nor processing time for it, no uncertainty about how good the result will be, perfect matching just putting an image aside the other just like what you get in a digital back. If it is worth the mess (and the cost) or not, is everyone's decision.

Regards

Guillermo,
The exciting thing about current stitching software, such as Photomerge in CS5, is the possibvility of seamless stitches of hand-held shots with a TSE lens.

I used to mess around with an L bracket on a tripod, using my old Canon 24mm TSE which unfortunately had lousy edge performance on the 5D. I found there was no need for it with CS3 or Autopano Pro. There's even less need for it with CS5.

The latest stitching software appears to be so good, you don't even need a tripod, if you're using a TSE lens.

[haefnerphoto]

Guillermo, I give one a try, how much is it?  Jim

[Kirk Gittings]

Here is an example of one of the problem stitches I mentioned, lack of detail in the overlap area confused PS and forced me to have to manually stitch the images. This was a flat stitch with the camera in the vertical position. The right example has been cropped in some already at this point. The merge area is between the chairs. Unfortunately I had to manually stitch a number of these before the art director decided which she wanted. More on this cover shoot in my blog. Left-the final published cover. Right-one of the rejected poses.