tilt/shift photography!!!!!!!

[Josh66]

The two main things I can see it being useful for are architecture and landscapes.

For landscapes - you could use it to basically get more DOF without stopping down so much. For architecture - well that seems pretty obvious.

You can eliminate the perspective distortion without have to mess with it in PS (and thus degrade the IQ), and without the cropping that would be required to do it in PS.

I mainly want one for the things they were intended to be used for.
The other effects that people try to fake all the time, yeah it might be fun for a while - but that's not the real reason I want one.

This is what I've had my eye on (for quite a while, lol):
Canon - TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift Manual Focus - 3552B002 -

Even though it will take me a while to save up for it, I'm pretty sure that will be my next lens... There are no cheap (<$1000) toys left for me to buy, lol.

LOL, my "Lenses" wishlist at B&H is just over $16,000.


...One day.

 

[flyingember]

i tried it in manual mode, and it worked, but im not really getting the tilt/shift effect, the pictures just come out as they normally would, how close to i hold the lens to the body?

tilting requires an element of the lens to tilt and then for the light to end up hitting the image sensor the same way as a normal lens. taking the lens off would be close but you'd be missing that not every element tilts in a real tilt-shift

shift requires a single element of the lens to shift relative to the plane of focus. to simulate it you would effectively have to take the lens apart/modify it yourself

the lens babies don't do tilting or shifting in the same way so don't expect it. they're made for focus control

even the stacking doesn't work the same way.

tilt-shift actually changes how light is moved through the lens. you know how lenses flip the object upside down 1:1? in a tilt shift, using a building as an example, properly tilted/shifted the light from top of the building may now move through the lens on a shorter path and the light from what's closer now takes longer so they appear to be the same size.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

The two main things I can see it being useful for are architecture and landscapes.

For landscapes - you could use it to basically get more DOF without stopping down so much. For architecture - well that seems pretty obvious.

You can eliminate the perspective distortion without have to mess with it in PS (and thus degrade the IQ), and without the cropping that would be required to do it in PS.

I mainly want one for the things they were intended to be used for.
The other effects that people try to fake all the time, yeah it might be fun for a while - but that's not the real reason I want one.

This is what I've had my eye on (for quite a while, lol):
Canon - TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift Manual Focus - 3552B002 -

Even though it will take me a while to save up for it, I'm pretty sure that will be my next lens... There are no cheap (<$1000) toys left for me to buy, lol.

LOL, my "Lenses" wishlist at B&H is just over $16,000.


...One day.

Never heard of anyone using a TS lens for landscape and I'm not even sure why it would increase your DOF.

But more importantly, for the price of the lens you want you could probably get a nice 4x5 view camera and they have built in TS which can be used with any lens

 

[Josh66]

I guess I didn't explain it very good...

Instead of stopping down for more DOF, you could tilt the lens so that you didn't need as much DOF. More of the scene would be inside the DOF. You could have foreground detail and distant detail without having to stop down to f/22 or whatever.

Found this after a quick google - it does a much better job explaining it than I can:
Using Tilt-Shift Lenses to Control Depth of Field
Scroll about 1/4 of the way down. Just under the pictures of the rug.

 

[Josh66]

The tilt function built into view cameras is probably one of the reasons they're so commonly used for landscapes (not saying that's all they're good for, by any means) - not to mention the much larger film.

Makes me wonder how many of the great landscapes we've all seen utilized that...
And, properly done I don't know that you would even be able to tell easily.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I guess I didn't explain it very good...

Instead of stopping down for more DOF, you could tilt the lens so that you didn't need as much DOF. More of the scene would be inside the DOF. You could have foreground detail and distant detail without having to stop down to f/22 or whatever.

Found this after a quick google - it does a much better job explaining it than I can:
Using Tilt-Shift Lenses to Control Depth of Field
Scroll about 1/4 of the way down. Just under the pictures of the rug.

The tilt function built into view cameras is probably one of the reasons they're so commonly used for landscapes (not saying that's all they're good for, by any means) - not to mention the much larger film.

Makes me wonder how many of the great landscapes we've all seen utilized that...
And, properly done I don't know that you would even be able to tell easily.

As I said, I have never heard of anyone using a TS lens for landscape. Now, I may not be reading this quite right because it's the end of the day and I'm tired but I'm reading and looking and I see an example that as little to do with landscape photography.

1/ it is inside where you may have limited amounts of light, and 2/ the subject is right in front of the camera. Neither is the case with most landscape photos. Are you familiar with Akira Kurosawa? He was a movie director famous for "The Seven Samurais" and for his great DOF. If he could do it without a TS lens, I'm sure you can too.

It seems to me that a wide angle lens gives you all the DOF you could want. But that doesn't mean it has not been done. TS lenses are, as far as I know, used mostly for architectural photography. I have heard of them being used in product photography too but I have never seen the need for that myself so I have no experience with it.

And of course, a lot of product photos are done with view cameras where there would be no need for a TS lens.

 

[Derrel]

The two main things I can see it being useful for are architecture and landscapes.

For landscapes - you could use it to basically get more DOF without stopping down so much. For architecture - well that seems pretty obvious.

You can eliminate the perspective distortion without have to mess with it in PS (and thus degrade the IQ), and without the cropping that would be required to do it in PS.

I mainly want one for the things they were intended to be used for.
The other effects that people try to fake all the time, yeah it might be fun for a while - but that's not the real reason I want one.

This is what I've had my eye on (for quite a while, lol):
Canon - TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Tilt-Shift Manual Focus - 3552B002 -

Even though it will take me a while to save up for it, I'm pretty sure that will be my next lens... There are no cheap (<$1000) toys left for me to buy, lol.

LOL, my "Lenses" wishlist at B&H is just over $16,000.


...One day.

Josh... have you thought about another alternative, one which would allow you to use more than just one focal length,and at lower cost? http://www.zoerk.com/media/images/Fuji_S2_ProSA_MFS.jpg

Zörk Pro Shift adapter

 

[Josh66]

Interesting. Looks kinda complicated though.

 

[flyingember]

Interesting. Looks kinda complicated though.

tilt shift is, which is why it's not cheap

 

[AlexL]

very expensive for a specialized type of photography.

 

[Christie Photo]

I guess I didn't explain it very good...

Instead of stopping down for more DOF, you could tilt the lens so that you didn't need as much DOF. More of the scene would be inside the DOF. You could have foreground detail and distant detail without having to stop down to f/22 or whatever.

Well... sort of.

You really don't gain any more depth in your field (plane) of focus; you merely change what is in that field.

Go back to the images in the link you posted... the ones with the rug and the lenses. Imagine it's your landscape photo... the rug is the terrain and the lenses are trees. It would seldom be beneficial to have just the treetops in focus. Of course in a landscape scenario you would realize much more depth of field than in the rug photo because you are focusing on things much farther away.

I really don't see an application for this in landscape photography.

Now... couldn't you achieve what you want with a Lens Baby?

-Pete

 

[Josh66]

Interesting. Looks kinda complicated though.

tilt shift is, which is why it's not cheap

I meant that the link Derrel posted looked like a very complicated way to go about it.

Yes it may be cheaper, but I would need (1) a lens, (2) the T/S adapter thing, (3) an adapter (maybe 2 adapters?) to mount that adapter to my camera.

Or I could just buy a T/S lens...

Did you even read the post I was replying to?

I guess I didn't explain it very good...

Instead of stopping down for more DOF, you could tilt the lens so that you didn't need as much DOF. More of the scene would be inside the DOF. You could have foreground detail and distant detail without having to stop down to f/22 or whatever.

Well... sort of.

You really don't gain any more depth in your field (plane) of focus; you merely change what is in that field.

Yes, I know. That is what I have been trying to say the whole time.
By changing the field, you don't need as much DOF.

Go back to the images in the link you posted... the ones with the rug and the lenses. Imagine it's your landscape photo... the rug is the terrain and the lenses are trees. It would seldom be beneficial to have just the treetops in focus. Of course in a landscape scenario you would realize much more depth of field than in the rug photo because you are focusing on things much farther away.

Which is why your suggestion to go back to that picture and think of it as my landscape makes absolutely no sense at all.

I really don't see an application for this in landscape photography.

Couple landscapes taken with a T/S lens (not mine, so just links):
Loch Lomond Shores on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Matanuska River Spring View on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
_MG_0741 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Now... couldn't you achieve what you want with a Lens Baby?

-Pete

I don't really know. I'm not interested in getting a lensbaby. From what I understand about them you probably could, but I don't think it would be ideal, and long exposures would be pretty much impossible.

The only reason I even mentioned it was as a low budget alternative to an actual T/S lens (what this thread is about).



edit

I really do not understand what is so hard to understand about shooting a landscape with a tilt-shift lens.

 

[Jeff Canes]

russian option for under $400

Arsat Arax MC 2.8/80mm TILT/SHIFT lens for Nikon AI - eBay (item 150442787233 end time Jul-10-10 10:43:25 PDT)

 

[maris]

my friend showed me something called tilt/shift photography and went online to find a tilt/shift lens, but sadly they are around 1800 dollars, is there a way to simulate tilt/shift with a normal lens?

The Ukranian tilt shift lenses run $400 to $500 and work just fine on Canon, Nikon, etc. There is a variety offered on Ebay and also on the web sites of Eastern European traders who are working their way through the vast left-over lens inventory from the Soviet days.

 

[Christie Photo]

I really do not understand what is so hard to understand about shooting a landscape with a tilt-shift lens.

I have no trouble understanding, not even a little bit.

Now I have to ask... Have YOU ever made landscape images with a tilt-shift lens?

I've worked extensively with view cameras (which afford more movements than a field camera) and I can assure you that especially when working with a lens that short you gain SO little using a tilt.

I really do not understand what is so hard for you to understand about shooting a landscape with a tilt-shift lens. I suppose maybe if you used one, then you'd get it.

-Pete