Tilt-shift with Canon 70D worthwhile?

[Davejl]

I would appreciate some advice on tilt-shift. I am considering getting a tilt-shift lens to enable me to get better shots inside buildings, e.g. old churches, where space can be tight and I might normally resort to a hefty bit of perspective correction in pp.

It seems that for my Canon 70D the best option to give a wide enough view would be the Canon TS-E 17mm. This has a (to me) seriously hefty price tag but I would pay it if I am not going to be disappointed with the results. I see myself using the lens largely for its shift capability.

My questions are:

1) Is it even worthwhile pairing such a lens with a crop sensor camera?

2) Is it possible to use the Canon 24mm version (somewhat cheaper and possibly more useful for quite a few of the closer-in shots I also envisage taking) and include the same coverage that can be achieved with the 17mm by creating a stitched image in pp.

3) Is a hand-held light meter the best way to achieve good exposure for such lenses?
Dave

[Rent]

Is there any chance that you could hire one to see what suits you ?
Roy

[Davejl]

Is there any chance that you could hire one to see what suits you ?
Roy

Thanks Roy, I think that this is probably a very wise thing to do and will look into it.

[Manfred M]

Unfortunately, being a Nikon shooter, I can't give you any feedback on the specific body and either of the lenses you are looking at. I do shot the Nikkor 24mm f/3.5 PC-E lens fairly often on the full frame D810, so I can at least share some of my experiences shooting this type of lens.

1. At 24mm, I find this is a great lens for exterior architectural shots. Interior use is a bit limited unless the room is fairly large. A 17mm lens on 1.6 crop camera is going to give you a bit over 27mm FF equivalent; so a fair bit less wide (at these short focal lengths, every mm makes a difference).

2. To use a shift lens effectively, you are looking at using it on a tripod and equipping your camera with a 2-axis bubble level. I find that using a physical level works better than using the camera's built in level (more accurate). I have developed a technique that lets me hand-hold, but I get a lot of missed shots with that technique.

3. These lenses are manual focus, so you are going to have to work within the limitations of how your camera handles manual focus. Some have a focus indicator, others will force you to use live view.

4. The lens has controls and locks for both shift and tilt. These work fine in horizontal / landscape orientation, but in vertical / portrait orientation (the lens has to be physically rotated while on the camera body), I find that I can use the lens this way with my FF body, but with a crop frame body (D90) I cannot use the locking screw. You will either need to check with Canon on any compatibility issues or follow Roy's suggestion and rent one to see how things work.

5. Using a 24mm lens on a 1.6 crop camera is going to give you a 38mm FF equivalent. That's pretty long for interior work. If you think you can get away with that focal length, look at the Samyang 24mm f/3.5 shift tilt lens. It's a lot less expensive than the Canon and reports suggest it is quite good. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...ft.html?sts=pi One word of caution; I think you have to stop this lens down manually when shooting.

6. If you are going to go through the bother of trying to stitch together images from a shift / tilt, Why not just use a normal lens and PP the image (stitched or otherwise).

7. Best way to meter is use the camera's built in meter. Technically one should take a light reading of the scene you want to photograph and then use those settings (on manual) for optimal exposure, but I have found taking a light reading after shifting the lens seems to work well for me. My lens lets me shoot in either manual or aperture priority mode. All other shooting modes are disabled.



Here are a couple of recent church interiors done with my shift / tilt lens:


1. Kaunus Cathedral, Lithuania





2. Lutheran Church in Kuldiga, Latvia

[loosecanon]

I use tilt shift, have 17, 24, 35, and 45, and use with full frame.

Perspective correction with software such as lightroom seems quick and easy, but more difficult is the linear distortion which corrected images have. Whenever perspective is corrected in software you effectivly loose resolution as you stretch the image and cut other pixels.

You can get the same effect as a shift lens by using a wide angle lens and cropping it.
You have to decide between correcting images and loosing image quality. The 17mm lens is big, heavy and vunerable front element.
To me the other advantage of a pc lens is the ability to get a different viewpoint. To use a church example one has a tomb, you can take an image of it at head height, but wiithout the distortion one gets pointing the camera down. It is a different look.

The second advantage is the tilt function which slopes the plane of focus. To give another church example, a grave slab in the floor. The shift function will partially help, but with tilt one can put the plane of focus along the slab so it is all in focus. This is an effect that cannot be achieved in any other way other than focus stacking which provides a sort of solution.

At the end of the day you have to decide - would a higher resolution camera and wide lens and software provide the solution? Would the sigma 8mm-16mm .and cropped image provide sufficient quality?

Certainly for general interiors a full frame camera and wide angle would be my first step. All shift lenses are designed to be used with full frame. I only get my shift lenses out for specific tasks, even my Sigma 12-24 stays home most of the time.
They are heavy and slow to use equipment.

[DanK]

I don't have any of these lenses, but just a datapoint: for a crop-sensor canon, you can get shift but not tilt with the Laowa 15mm macro, which costs about $500.

[Davejl]

Thanks to all for your replies, there is clearly a lot to think about and I need to do a good deal of research before parting with any cash. It does seem that a tilt-shift would be ideal for what I want to do and shooting church monuments and grave slabs would be some of them. Maybe I should think about quality second hand equipment, because it does make sense to pair such a lens with a FF camera. I think that anything else would probably be too much of a compromise. I think I should try to hire both an FF and a PC lens together and give them a trial.
I love your shots of the church interiors, Manfred.

Dave.

[William W]

Manfred and Yes have addressed the key functionalities of T/S lenses. I concur with all that they wrote.

With Canon DSLR I use the TS-E 90, and that lens I mainly use for (outdoor) Portraiture: I have experience with Studio Monorail and Field and View Cameras (all of which have ’movements’) and it is from that experience I address the following -

1) Is it even worthwhile pairing such a lens with a crop sensor camera?

No.

The premise of TS-E Lenses is to bring to (a limited extent) a replication of CAMERA MOVEMENTS. If not already understood, then researching a broad brief of Camera Movements would be my suggestion, because if you do purchase a TS-E Lens, firstly having a more detailed knowledge of the applications of the Fundamental Principles of Camera Movements is well worthwhile.

A TS-E Lens used on a 135 Camera Body (aka “full frame”) when contrasted to a Studio Monorail or Field/View Camera is ‘limited’: using the same TS-E lens on an APS-C Format Camera adds only more limitations.

Additionally, the limitations of a TS-E Lens on and APS-C Body might not only comprise FoV issues: If I recall correctly, the shape of some Canon APS-C Bodies creates a physical barrier which restricts the full scope of movement of (some/all) the TS-E Lenses.

*

2) Is it possible to use the Canon 24mm [TS-E] version (somewhat cheaper and possibly more useful for quite a few of the closer-in shots I also envisage taking) and include the same coverage that can be achieved with the 17mm by creating a stitched image in pp.

[I have assumed you mean the TS-E 24mm lens, not just any 24mm lens]

Yes, it is "possible". I would not choose to do it that way.

Assume you make only TWO shots:

1. > the function will be that you will set TILT and SHIFT for the first shot, then you will change the CAMERA VIEWPOINT for the second shot

2. > (most likely) issues are that you will not be able to re-set the Tilt and Shift such that the Plane of Sharp Focus’s angles relative to the Camera and Lens Axes and the Perspective Vanishing Points will concur with those of the first image

Whether or not any misalignment will be detrimental to your final stitched composite image, is arguable: my point however is, similar to the premise of my response to your first question, why spend a truck load of money on a TS-E 24mm with the idea of getting ‘pristine excellence’ SOOC and then have to stitch stuff later, as a compromise.

Bottom line: you need to assess what FL is the best for the majority of your shots. Arguably with more investigation you will find that a TS-E 24 on a 135 Format Camera will be the best suited for the majority of the work that you seek to do. My experience with "Church Interiors" - I make often but I don't use a TS-E Lens - is that a 24mm Lens on a 5D Series is more than adequate nearly all the time.

*

3) Is a hand-held light meter the best way to achieve good exposure for such lenses?

No.

5D Series, 6D Series and 1 Series Bodies all have excellent TTL Meters which can be utilized when using TS-E Lenses.

(one of my pet topics) There are many Photographers who do not understand how the various METER MODES work and also do not know how to interpret the information provided; secondly there are also Photographers who do not understand their digital Camera’s HEADROOM the fact that PICTURE STYLES (and other settings) have an affect on the HISTOGRAM and BLINKIES, in Canon DSLR Cameras.

Having stated that, I find my Hand Held Light Meter an invaluable tool when I am shooting Interior scenes in Available Light. The reason that it is invaluable is because often I like to use the SPOT METER and then compute the exposure manually.

It is critically important to note that the above is mainly habit:

a) borne from shooting Sheet Film we didn’t have the luxury exposure bracketing

b) doing it that way is fun for me

c) I already have a couple of Hand Held Light Meters – I won’t sell them and I like using them

Bottom line – if you get a TS-E lens you will be using a DSLR and a Tripod and Head and will spend hours setting up the shot; by comparison it will only take a few more moments to bracket up and down in third stops: one could mount a case that you need no light meter, at all.

Don’t buy an Hand Held Light Meter for these tasks UNLESS you are contemplating setting a Flash Lighting Rig, in that situation an Hand Held Light/Flash meter will be of benefit to you.

WW

[William W]

Meant to mention - Hey Manfred - "Kaunus Cathedral, Lithuania" is a absolute cracker shot. Fantastic. Bravo. Bill

[DanK]

Again, I have no first-hand experience, but just based on my own reading, while thinking about buying the 15mm Laowa: unlike the Canon lenses, the shift function on this lens actually works better on APS-C cameras, according to reviews. See https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ven...ns-and-samples. That's one reason I still haven't bought one; the shift function would work on my old 7D, but not well on my 5DIII, which I much prefer for most uses. In addition. there is no tilt function, and as that review indicates, the shift function is a bit crude.

[rpcrowe]

I am wondering if a Samyang 24mm Tilt shift lens AND a used 5D Mark-ii camera might not be an alternate way to go? The price might be lower than a 17mm Canon TSE lens...

[Davejl]

Thanks to William, Dan and Richard for more very helpful points. Plenty for me to ponder and thanks to all for cautioning against a leap in the dark.

Dave

[loosecanon]

or even a mark I version of the 24mm TS - Though the relationship of tilt and shift to each other are effectively fixed,

[William W]

or even a mark I version of the 24mm TS - Though the relationship of tilt and shift to each other are effectively fixed,

You can undo the back of the (original TS-E24) lens and reset the physical relationship between the TILT and SHIFT MOVEMENTS - but there are only two positional options, that is ether perpendicular or parallel.

This is so for the three older TS-E models - the 24 45 and 90.

Canon service centres will do the job too, but it is not a difficult mechanical operation.

***

As you (loosecanon) alluded - the newer TS-E 24 MkII has a feature Canon label "TS Rotation" and this feature allows the TILT MOVEMENT rotate independently of and therefore allowing various physical relationships to the SHIFT MOVEMENT.

I am not sure is this feature "TS Rotation" applies to the TS-E 17 or to the recently released TS-E 50, TS-E90 and TS-E 135 lenses, but it seems logical that it might: it would be easy to check on a Canon website.

The main reason I know details about the TS-E 24 vs TS-E 24MkII, is because (as I mentioned) 24mm (on 5D Series) is what I use the most for interior architecture, especially Churches: I have been thinking about buying a TS-E 24 for a long time, the release of the MkII version and with that particular additional feature, in addition to the other refinements and improvements has made me closer to buying one.

The reason I haven't bought one yet, is because most Churches and other places of worship that I get into, is mainly when I am on holiday - and I don't carry a tripod and anyway many of these places won't allow a tripod to be set, anyway, so I have valued Image Stabilization and good quality High ISO camera and thinking about the camera position carefully and then my labour in Post Production, mainly making corrections of the converging lines.

There is no doubt in my mind if I were to buy a Tilt Shift Lens, it would be the Canon TS-E24 MkII which would suit my particular uses for Interior Architecture and also my technical critique for quality and performance. It is a vast improvement on the original TS-E24 and, IMO, is light years ahead of any other Tilt Shift 24mm lens in both Optical Quality and Build.

(BTW I am not anti-third-party-lenses: I recently bought a Samyang 14mm F/2.8 and it is a very good lens and holds up well compared and contrasted to the EF 14/2.8 - and is a lot less expensive.)

That's why I mentioned to the OP, that if he (firstly) decides that any TS-E will be of most value on a 'full frame" camera, then is is very important to choose which Focal Length TS-E lens will provide the most bang for the buck - for the majority of pictures that he wants to make.

I have not used the TS-E 17, but its reviews and some of the images made with it, that I have seen (and judged), are simply spectacular: but those mainly all have been landscape works, not interior architecture: I don't know why and maybe it is my perception, but anecdotally, for the bigger interiors, such as Churches and the like, a 24mm seems to be the choice of most - but the OP should not be swayed by that comment as it is only my observations and/or my intrinsic bias.

WW

[Manfred M]

Bill - the TS-E 17 seems to be well regarded by high end commercial real estate photographers for interior shots of small spaces. I know that Mike Kelley uses on in some of his work.

http://www.mpkelley.com/gallery/

[William W]

... yes, for real estate interiors very useful ...

it is unclear to me exactly what and in what size location the OP intends to use the proposed TS-E lens.

I glean that he was originally thinking of a 17mm specifically because he was thinking of using it on an APS-C body ... in which case a 24mm might be better suited for his purposes IF he moves to a 135 Format Camera.

WW

[Manfred M]

... yes, for real estate interiors very useful ...

it is unclear to me exactly what and in what size location the OP intends to use the proposed TS-E lens.

I glean that he was originally thinking of a 17mm specifically because he was thinking of using it on an APS-C body ... in which case a 24mm might be better suited for his purposes IF he moves to a 135 Format Camera.

WW

Agree 100% Bill.

[Davejl]

... yes, for real estate interiors very useful ...

it is unclear to me exactly what and in what size location the OP intends to use the proposed TS-E lens.

I glean that he was originally thinking of a 17mm specifically because he was thinking of using it on an APS-C body ... in which case a 24mm might be better suited for his purposes IF he moves to a 135 Format Camera.

WW

Thanks Bill. Sorry not to get back sooner but I've been busy with a funeral.

I was thinking originally of the 17mm TS-E lens to try to get wide enough with the crop sensor. Most of the interiors (mainly churches) I envisage shooting aren't particularly large but sometimes it isn't possible to move back far enough to photograph e.g. a tomb without (with my present gear) tilting the camera up, because some of the tombs are large and the churches quite narrow.

Fortunately there is no issue normally with using a tripod. I usually find I am alone in the churches I visit and have space to move around at will. (I tend to steer clear of cathedrals here, because much as I'd like to photograph in many of them, the steep entrance charges, crowds of visitors and restrictions on photography put me off).

I think what I need to do is have a proper trial of my 10-20mm lens to see what focal length I find most useful and then see which PC lens that focal length would best equate to. 17mm on my crop sensor would equate to approx. 27mm FF. I am assuming that since you generally feel 24mm FF is more useful than 17mm FF, that the difference between 24mm FF and 27mm FF (equivalent, achieved by 17mm on APS-C) is too significant to ignore?

I have taken lots of shots in churches, but most of my photos have tended to concentrate more on details and close-ups and I have less experience of the "bigger picture".

Dave

[William W]

. . . Most of the interiors (mainly churches) I envisage shooting aren't particularly large but sometimes it isn't possible to move back far enough to photograph e.g. a tomb without (with my present gear) tilting the camera up, because some of the tombs are large and the churches quite narrow.

Fortunately there is no issue normally with using a tripod. I usually find I am alone in the churches I visit and have space to move around at will.

If you have that freedom, then take a step ladder?

***

I am assuming that since you generally feel 24mm FF is more useful than 17mm FF, that the difference between 24mm FF and 27mm FF (equivalent, achieved by 17mm on APS-C) is too significant to ignore?

Yes, I do.

27 to 24 is a recognizable and useful difference.

As a rule of thumb - (ON “full frame”):
> at around 30mm each 3mm is noticeable and usable
> at around 20mm each 2mm is noticeable and usable
> at around 15mm each 1mm is noticeable and usable

(Not withstanding that I also think that a 17mm TS-E is wasted money if bought for use ONLY on an APS-C Camera)

WW

[William W]

. . . I think what I need to do is have a proper trial of my 10-20mm lens to see what focal length I find most useful and then see which PC lens that focal length would best equate to. . .

Absolutely, unequivocally, resoundingly - YES

WW