New Canon Tilt Shift Lenses

[Gary Ferguson]

US RRP's

17mm = $2499 (c.£1750)
24mm = $2199 (c.£1530)


UK RRP's

17mm = £2750
24mm = £2450

Lovely to see us get reamed yet again.

This is crazy, even with the battered British Pound.

The T&S lenses are the backbone of my Canon usage and I'll certainly go for these two, but I'll be buying them in the US or in Hong Kong rather than here in London.

[BJL]

Interesting: the 17mm is a very wide angle tilt and shift lens for use with sensors that have micro-lenses and which covers significantly more than the 35mm image circle, to allow for that tilt and shift. This is in striking contrast to the avoidance of microlenses in most medium format sensors, supposedly due to the inability to work with some short focal length lenses and/or shift lenses. (The 17mm covers a wider angular FOV than any non-fisheye medium format SLR lens, shift or otherwise.)

This and the very high prices of these new lenses suggests that Canon is in part chasing former medium format markets, and showing that it has some clear technological advantages in either lens design or micro-lens design, to allow these lenses to work without severe light fall-off away from the optical axis. Or will "micro-lens vignetting correction" be an necessary part of post-processing?

[Ray]

so that's around 2700 dollars  
wow,  
the price for the curent version of the 24L tse is around 1100$, so what's with the 150% price increase?
the 17mm on the other hand looks very interesting and could be a gift from god for interior shooting..

The current 24 TS-E has a red mark on each side of the shift scale indicating that shifting beyond that point produces unacceptable edge performance. I can confirm that this is indeed the case on  a full frame DSLR. Edge performance suffers badly at full shift with the current 24 TS-E. For this reason I prefer to use the 24 TS-E on one of my cropped format DSLRs.

The fact that these new lenses are significantly more expensive is encouraging. It suggests that Canon have got their act together and have at last produced a couple of good quality wide-angle lenses. However, if the new lenses still suffer from serious image degradation at full shift, there'll be reason to complain about the price.

[Gary Ferguson]

Interesting: the 17mm is a very wide angle tilt and shift lens for use with sensors that have micro-lenses and which covers significantly more than the 35mm image circle, to allow for that tilt and shift. This is in striking contrast to the avoidance of microlenses in most medium format sensors, supposedly due to the inability to work with some short focal length lenses and/or shift lenses. (The 17mm covers a wider angular FOV than any non-fisheye medium format SLR lens, shift or otherwise.)

This and the very high prices of these new lenses suggests that Canon is in part chasing former medium format markets, and showing that it has some clear technological advantages in either lens design or micro-lens design, to allow these lenses to work without severe light fall-off away from the optical axis. Or will "micro-lens vignetting correction" be an necessary part of post-processing?

I use a Phase One P45+ on a Linhof M679cs with Rodenstock lenses down to 35mm (and on occasions I use the camera's sliding back to stitch two frames, achieving an angle of view very similar to the 17mm T&S) I don't find there's a material difference in the vignetting issues I get with MF digital compared to using the current 24mm T&S, in that it's necessary to correct for vignetting on most shots!

However, when using shifts and tilts on the Linhof there's an additional step, involving taking a "blank" shot (using the current shift and tilt settings) through a diffusion screen, Phase One's RAW converter then uses this to adjust for differential colour correction across the frame. This problem gets worse the wider the lenses and the greater the shift/tilt. It'll be interesting to see if the Canon T&S 17mm has the same issues.

[Josh-H]

Just as a side note to the above I am pretty excited about these new lens's - as a user of the current 24mm TSE [now for sale on ebay :-)] on a 1DS MK3 I have been sweating an upgrade as I have not been happy with this lens performance on the 1DSMK3. Its soft in the corners - VERY VERY soft compared to the 24mm F1.4L MKII.

Looking at the images of the lens one of the most appealing visual upgrades looks to be much larger tilt and shift knobs. The current lens's are awkward as the knobs are too small [for my fingers anyway] - so very glad to see this has been improved. Likewise the user ability to shift the axis as required.

Regards the cost - its the price of admission tis all. Not much point in complaining about it - if the quality is there then its just worth it IMO. I have no idea what these will cost in Australia - but if they are around $2,500 US - then thats typically going to put them around $3,500 - $4000 Australian each.

[spotmeter]

Jeez, I'm already lusting after the 24 f/1.4 Mk 2...  does anyone know the prices or filter sizes (I presume the 17mm is internal)?  So many lenses, so little $$  :lol:

Paul

Filter sizes and MTF graphs can be found on the Canon EOS website.

The MTF graph for the new 24mm is just stunning. At f8, it looks like a top notch 85mm lens. I wonder if Canon may be exaggerating here a little bit.

Also, the front element is 82mm, while the old one was smaller. This was a good move on Canon's part. It will help avoid the soft corners that plagued the old model (which is one reason the MTF graph on the new model looks so much better than the old one).

It looks like Canon has been listening to our complaints about poor wide-angle Canons. Perhaps we'll see more new wide angles from Canon with better specs.

If the MTF graph is legit, it puts this lens ahead of any Leica lens at this focal length. As such, it deserves its new price.

Time will tell.

[NicholasR]

Fantastic.  As soon as I can offload the hassy kit a 5d2 and the new 24mm will be my bread and butter.  Do you hear that Hasselblad with your overpriced 1.5x adaptor?  I just hope it stands up to its promise.

Nice thing about moving from medium format, this all seems really reasonably priced

Oh, and the 17mm, amazing.  Can't justify it for its usage, as once i'm at 17mm I can get away with a straight shot, but still, kudos to Canon.

[Josh-H]

Fantastic.  As soon as I can offload the hassy kit a 5d2 and the new 24mm will be my bread and butter.  Do you hear that Hasselblad with your overpriced 1.5x adaptor?  I just hope it stands up to its promise.

Nice thing about moving from medium format, this all seems really reasonably priced

Oh, and the 17mm, amazing.  Can't justify it for its usage, as once i'm at 17mm I can get away with a straight shot, but still, kudos to Canon.

The really nice thing about the 17mm and the reason I will put one on my shopping list as soon as they become available is because even if the shot is straight on at 17mm it doesnt matter - just shoot it without any movements. the new 17mm MTF graph is miles better than any other option Canon have at that specific focal length - in fact the only other option at 17mm is really the 16-35mm MkII or 17-40, both of whose MTF is a mess by comparison.

I think the 17mm really is a wonderful option and I am really glad Canon have announced it. Unless someone really needs auto focus or that extra 3mm of wide angle the new 17mm TSE is a much better option than the 14mm MkII I would think.

[NicholasR]

The really nice thing about the 17mm and the reason I will put one on my shopping list as soon as they become available is because even if the shot is straight on at 17mm it doesnt matter - just shoot it without any movements. the new 17mm MTF graph is miles better than any other option Canon have at that specific focal length - in fact the only other option at 17mm is really the 16-35mm MkII or 17-40, both of whose MTF is a mess by comparison.

I think the 17mm really is a wonderful option and I am really glad Canon have announced it. Unless someone really needs auto focus or that extra 3mm of wide angle the new 17mm TSE is a much better option than the 14mm MkII I would think.

True true.  I didn't look at the MTF before.  It just pains me to buy such a pricey lens that I wouldn't really utilize much of what the expense is for.  To tell you the truth, a compact prime between 15-17mm around f/4 with outstanding performance for under a grand seems like what canon needs.   Too bad it's worried about f/1.4 wide angles, which don't matter much to me...

[James R]

You all might want to wait and see how they perform before wetting yourselves.  

[Josh-H]

You all might want to wait and see how they perform before wetting yourselves.  

Perhaps.. but MTF is an extremley good indicator of a lens's optical qualities. And the MTF graphs for these new TSE lens's are quite literally worth wetting oneself over.

[Anthony.Ralph]

US RRP's

17mm = $2499 (c.£1750)
24mm = $2199 (c.£1530)


UK RRP's

17mm = £2750
24mm = £2450

Lovely to see us get reamed yet again.

Whilst I agree that based on past experiences £:$ conversions have been outrageous, I just wonder if the price differences on these items have been influenced by the £:Yen conversion rate, as I have read that the pound has depreciated against the Yen by over 60% in the last year or so.

Still a lot of money though...

Anthony.

[NicholasR]

So, I know this is a stretch here, but away from the holy grail of lens performance....

How has the handling been modified?  It appears as if one can rotate the lens from a shift to a rise/fall without removing it from the camera?  Or is it just the ability to modify the direction of the axises, ie the angle of the shift to swing so they are inline or 90 degrees apart?

Sorry if that wasn't totally clear, but you get the point... hopefully

If the handling is far improved, this could be the real strength of these lenses.

[jjlphoto]

Interesting: the 17mm is a very wide angle tilt and shift lens for use with sensors that have micro-lenses and which covers significantly more than the 35mm image circle, to allow for that tilt and shift. This is in striking contrast to the avoidance of microlenses in most medium format sensors, supposedly due to the inability to work with some short focal length lenses and/or shift lenses. (The 17mm covers a wider angular FOV than any non-fisheye medium format SLR lens, shift or otherwise.)

The design is heavily 'retrofocus' meaning it is planted further away from the film plane than normal. So 'off axis' light is not that big of a deal as a result.
(And being retrofocus, it will most certainly exhibit barrel distortion.)

[Paul Roark]

Canon is using a new type of MTF chart.  The old ones had the stats for 10 lp/mm and 30 lp/mm, saggital and meridonial, wide open and f8.  The new format clearly does not have all this information.  So, the question is, what do these new charts show?  What lp/mm and what f-stop?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[BJL]

The design is heavily 'retrofocus' ... So 'off axis' light is not that big of a deal as a result. ... And being retrofocus, it will most certainly exhibit barrel distortion.

That is a natural explanation; or in other words, medium format wide angle and tilt-shift lenses maybe do not use such highly retro-focal designs (as high exit pupil was not so important for film), and up till now, MF sensors have needed to accommodate those "low exit pupil" lenses. This still raises the likelihood that Canon and Nikon, through their greater financial resources and thus an ability to modernize their lens designs more quickly, will continue to encroach significantly into what is currently medium format territory.

As to barrel distortion, is it so inevitable? I believe that the Olympus 7-14 f/4 ZD has fairly low distortion, despite its extremely retro-focal design, needed by the 38mm from lens mount to sensor. How about the Nikon 14-24/2.8, another highly retro-focal design?

[BJL]

Canon is using a new type of MTF chart.  The old ones had the stats for 10 lp/mm and 30 lp/mm, saggital and meridonial, wide open and f8.  The new format clearly does not have all this information.  So, the question is, what do these new charts show?  What lp/mm and what f-stop?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

And is it indeed the case that Canon is still using 10 and 30 lp/mm, along with only a single aperture? If so, does this not seem a bit inadequate when Canon sensors have about 80 "pixel pairs per mm" or more? Compare to the use of 60lp/mm by some MF lens makers, and by Olympus for 4/3, and the 40lp/mm used by some other MF lens makers.

[Paul Roark]

Note also, "Canon's MTF charts are based on theoretical calculations used in the design of the lens, while some other manufacturers use actually measurements."  http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/un...nding-mtf.shtml    

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[Daniel Browning]

Note also, "Canon's MTF charts are based on theoretical calculations used in the design of the lens, while some other manufacturers use actually measurements."

Note also that Canon excludes diffraction from their theoretical calculations. It would be easy for them to include it, of course, but it would make their MTF look a little worse.

[Misirlou]

Just a couple weeks ago, I was having a conversation with a well-known photo writer, and I mentioned that what the DSLR world really needed was about a 17mm tilt shift lens. We both agreed it would never happen...