Talk me into or out of the 45mm PC-e

[trevarthan]

I own the 24mm PC-e and the 85mm PC-e. For product photography (something I admittedly don't do a lot of), I love the 85mm. For landscape photography, I find myself using the 24mm almost exclusively. Here's an example of a scene taken with both lenses (on different days with vastly different light):

Here's the 24mm:

Glass Pedestrian Bridge and Aquarium at Sunset 24mm by Trevarthan, on Flickr

And here's the 85mm:

Glass Pedestrian Bridge (person merged out) by Trevarthan, on Flickr

Let me be clear: I'm absolutely NOT interested in the miniature effect. I see a lot of reviews around the net written by people who seems to think the only reason to buy a tilt shift lens is the miniature effect. I view the miniature effect a lot like over processed HDR: meh. I would use this lens to place the focal plane in line with my subject at f5.6, expanding what is in focus, not isolating it. I'll be using this lens exclusively on a tripod with a D810 and live view. I don't understand why everyone wants to hand hold these things.

Anyway, I picked these two focal lengths back in 2010 because I loved the way they lied to me. 24mm is wide and exaggerates the foreground and expands space. 85mm is telephoto and exaggerates the background, compressing space. 45mm is just normal. I've found a few scenes recently where I can't take the shot without 45mm. 24mm is too wide to be interesting, and with 85mm I don't have enough room. Sitting here typing, I realize maybe I could do an 85mm panorama, but the light changes so fast after sunset and the exposures are so long, I'm not sure how that would work.

I mostly want to take cityscapes and landscapes. Should I bite the bullet and buy the 45mm PC-e, or not? What's your opinion?

[MrSmith]

it’s a nice focal length to have, i wish canon would update theirs as it’s so poor (i sold mine) i make do with 24+1.4x converter to get 33mm
it’s also great for getting your verticals straight 

[trevarthan]

it’s a nice focal length to have, i wish canon would update theirs as it’s so poor (i sold mine) i make do with 24+1.4x converter to get 33mm
it’s also great for getting your verticals straight 

I've got a 50mm 1.4 AF-D too. I've never used it for landscapes. I might use it sometime once the D810 SDK comes out and I can do focus stacking with helicon remote. I guess that's my hang up. Do I really need to spend $2k for a focal length I already have?

[langier]

Not sure what body you are shooting with your PC-E lenses. I've got the same combo and use them in the studio and field on my D800s.

Here's another idea…

When I use the 24 PC-E on the D800, I've got three lenses-in-one with the three the three crops--24mm with 36x24, 29mm with 30x20 (1.2x) and 36mm with 24x16 (DX).

When I need a little more reach, I use my self-modified TC-14E on the 24. This now gets me a 36mm on FX, 43.2mm on 30x20 (1.2x), almost the same as the 45mm PC-E and now the bonus of a 50mm equivalent on the 24x16 (DX). One lens, different crops. I started using this combo years ago on my film cameras and my 85-PC-E quite successfully.

Of course the D800 has enough res that you could also crop to get the same FOV as the 45mm.

Give this a try (or rent one) and see if it works for you!

[trevarthan]

Not sure what body you are shooting with your PC-E lenses. I've got the same combo and use them in the studio and field on my D800s.

Here's another idea…

When I use the 24 PC-E on the D800, I've got three lenses-in-one with the three the three crops--24mm with 36x24, 29mm with 30x20 (1.2x) and 36mm with 24x16 (DX).

When I need a little more reach, I use my self-modified TC-14E on the 24. This now gets me a 36mm on FX, 43.2mm on 30x20 (1.2x), almost the same as the 45mm PC-E and now the bonus of a 50mm equivalent on the 24x16 (DX). One lens, different crops. I started using this combo years ago on my film cameras and my 85-PC-E quite successfully.

Of course the D800 has enough res that you could also crop to get the same FOV as the 45mm.

Give this a try (or rent one) and see if it works for you!

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm a purist though. Digital zoom just bugs me. I am intrigued by the teleconverter idea, but I think I'd rather just buy the 45mm lens than compromise. I just don't think 36mm would be enough. I might change my mind if I had a teleconverter to play with. Hrm.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Here's an example of a scene taken with both lenses...

Isn't one of the main purpose of those lenses to get verticals straight?

[trevarthan]

Isn't one of the main purpose of those lenses to get verticals straight?

Ouch. Maybe I should have used some shift. I'm bad about that. I mainly use tilt for increasing DOF.

When I need a little more reach, I use my self-modified TC-14E on the 24. This now gets me a 36mm on FX

I'm reading about the TC-14E II now. It says it gains 40% focal length. I didn't realize it would be so much. Is the attached image a good idea of how much focal length I would gain over 24mm? (I put .6 x .6 into the custom crop tool in lightroom to do this) Because that might actually work for me.

[trevarthan]

I'm actually seeing people say it's a bad idea to use a teleconverter with a wide. I guess a DX body or the 45mm are my only options.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I mainly use tilt for increasing DOF....

In the OP examples, no amount of tilt would result in increased DOF.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... I'm reading about the TC-14E II now. It says it gains 40% focal length. I didn't realize it would be so much...

The 14 in the name stands for 1.4x. That would be a dead giveaway

[trevarthan]

In the OP examples, no amount of tilt would result in increased DOF.

Are you being serious?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Are you being serious?

Yes.

[trevarthan]

Yes.

That's twice you've posted information that is not helpful on my threads. This was the first time: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=92153.msg749440#msg749440

I don't appreciate it.

[MrSmith]

i dont think SB is trying to get personal, just that there are railings close to the camera and mountains at infinity, so tilting has given you the tops of buildings OOF in the long lens shot and the tops of the railings. to get more depth of field and have the top to bottom sharp railings and buildings you would have no tilt and just stop down or use focus stacking. this way you would have more areas in focus and ‘greater depth of field’  although you could argue that having the nearest part of a railing even just a tiny bit at the bottom and the mountains was technically more depth of field by distance.
i think this is where the difference of opinion lies 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I wasn't the first, nor the only one pointing out the futility of your approach in that thread.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

i dont think SB is trying to get personal, just that there are railings close to the camera and mountains at infinity, so tilting has given you the tops of buildings OOF in the long lens shot and the tops of the railings...

Exactly.

It is known as Scheimpflug principle. You can have only one plane of focus in focus, either horizontal or vertical, not both.

[JohnBrew]

Back on topic. The Nikon PC-E lenses suffer from sample variation. My experiences with the 24 & 45 demonstrated this very well as I tried several copies of each. Since you already have the 24 and if you are happy then the 45 should suit you perfectly. At least the 45 has better corners than the 24.

[trevarthan]

I wasn't the first, nor the only one pointing out the futility of your approach in that thread.

Futility according to whom? You? Who are you and why should I care?

[trevarthan]

Back on topic. The Nikon PC-E lenses suffer from sample variation. My experiences with the 24 & 45 demonstrated this very well as I tried several copies of each. Since you already have the 24 and if you are happy then the 45 should suit you perfectly. At least the 45 has better corners than the 24.

I just went out and shot some test shots with my 50mm. I do think the 45 would be a nice addition. I'd like to know more about using a teleconverter with a 24 though. My test shots indicate I would also enjoy a focal length between 50mm and 24mm. Why do people say using a teleconverter with a wide is a bad idea? I can't seem to find much information about that on google. Maybe I'm not looking properly.

[MrSmith]

you are enlarging the centre of the lens so any flaws are going to show and you need a high quality converter. i use the latest canon one and it is a big improvement on the previous 1.4x, a little barrel distortion that is easily fixable, i find its best to use the optimum apertures for the lens you are using with it. it’s still better than my copy of the 45 which was poor, i will buy a 45 tse as soon as canon produce a new version that is as good as the 17, 24 and 90. however if i had a very good 50mm i would consider using that and correcting in photoshop (would test to see which gave the best results)
i only ever use the 1.4x/24 combo when i have to.