I have been looking at some tilt/shift lens photos lately. I was somewhat intrigued. I photograph landscape/ flowers/abstracts. If you were to get a lens, which would you get. Nikon has 24mm f/3.5D ED, 45mm f/2.8D ED and 85mm f/2.8D ED. They all cost about the same and it is in the price range of 2 to 3 of my lenses combined. Which would you go for? Is it a gimmick or will i be able to extend my range significantly by using these lenses? I am curious not only in yes/no answers. but also the rationale - so please consider humoring me.

Thanks Pavel

I am far from an expert - but I *understand* that the primary reason for using a tilt shift lens is to correct perspective distortion - that is when you take a photo of a building, you can correct the tapering towards the top effect that you get with a normal lens. Its not a gimmick but it is pretty specialized - definitely a type of lens aimed at working professionals.

It is also used on other forms of photography to control more precisely the placement and the "plane" of focus. This could be useful in many photos. The photos I found interesting had an unusually well defined DOF. I sort of understand the tilt and I understand the perspective correction and I was looking at landscape photos to understand the rest. Written descriptions i have seen do not seem very clear

Well - you are way ahead of me then. maybe Matthew or Kombi can add some clarity...

A couple of photos on here explaining a bit. Forgive me if you have already seen them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilt-shift_photography

Sort of like a lensbaby, but more expensive.

I feel originally, it was to simulate a swing back or/and a rising front, as on the old speedgraphic plate type cameras.

Another article re shift
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View_camera

Pavel Wrote:I photograph landscape/ flowers/abstracts. … Nikon has 24mm f/3.5D ED, 45mm f/2.8D ED and 85mm f/2.8D ED. … Which would you go for?

I would go for the 85 - it's the one that I use. Which one you should go for is a little different. The wide is primarily an architecture and landscape lens, while the 45 and 85 both do the close-focus that helps for product, studio, and still-life work. (While Uncle Nikkor calls both the 45 and 85 Micro lenses, they're half-sized, not 1:1.) I'd be tempted to suggest the 45 for you, since it's a bit of a compromise between both extremes; you can make it longer (and increase its reproduction ratio) with a Sigma teleconverter, and you can make it wider by using it for essentially perfect stitching. Keep in mind that the Nikon PC-E lenses aren't super-rotators (like Canon or Hartblei) and you can't choose the shift and swing directions independently. They come out of the box set at 90 degrees, but can be realigned by Nikon Service.

Pavel Wrote:They all cost about the same and it is in the price range of 2 to 3 of my lenses combined. Is it a gimmick or will i be able to extend my range significantly by using these lenses? I am curious not only in yes/no answers. but also the rationale - so please consider humoring me.

A tilt-shift lens makes a huge difference. Massive. They're also huge lenses, and are a massive hassle to use. They're also far from being a magic solution - especially at the longer focal lengths, you won't be able to lay the plane of focus as far down as you'll want, and even on a crop body, you may see some mechanical vignetting from extreme movements.

A tilt-shift lens is nothing like a lensbaby. (Sorry to shout, and NT, it's not directed at you - I hear this almost everywhere.) Nothing, nothing, nothing - except that they're both manual focus, they're completely different animals.




For the rings photo, the camera is pointing downwards, so I've swung the front of the lens up to align the plane of focus with the vertically stacked rings. (For what it's worth, those rings are worth more than my entire camera bag.)



For the flute, the lens is swung as far to the side as I can get it without vignetting. You can see that the whole instrument is sharp, but that the fabric becomes OOF beside it. There's no way to do this without lens movements; focus stacking could work but would be a massive amount of effort.



This is a Jaeger LeCoultre 'Atmos' clock, which is powered by changes in ambient temperature. I used front fall (lens shifted downward) to keep the perspective in check, which is the same idea in the opposite direction as what would be used for architecture.



This is also a shift photo, but taken outside of the studio and without a tripod. I will use the 85PC-E hand-held, but it's tiring to handle such a complicated manual focus lens. In this photo I've shifted the lens sideways so that I can capture the sign, which is behind glass, without also catching my own reflection. I think I've posted this link before, but I also have a video on Vimeo of photos taken at the ROM entirely done with the 85 tilt-shift. (link here)



I have to confess that I actually have two perspective-control lenses. This is the older 35mm shift lens, which doesn't do swings to realign the focal plane, or have the electronic aperture control of the current PC-E lenses. I also don't use it much - it's mostly to let my GH1 work as a backup to my D700, and bought it used because the price was simply too good to pass up. I tend to accumulate camera gear that way…

Hi Pavel...

I have the canon 24mm TS-E f3.5 and I like it very much, but I don't use it too often. I bought it because as far as I know this is "the" lens for architecture photography, and in some point I was very keen on this kind of photography. I think this is the sharpest lens I have. I agree that this is not a magic lens, it helps with perspective but I always have to refine my perspective and lines in PS.

Here is my set in flickr with some pictures.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/perikita/se...792688600/

If you want to see original size, let me know and I can mail you the file.

Toad Wrote:Well - you are way ahead of me then. maybe Matthew or Kombi can add some clarity...

I knew that Matthew could tell you everything you needed to know...

I have the same lens as Irma but don't use it much as the business of a wedding doesn't suit the slow application needed for such a lens.

For me, currently selling all my lens except this one (TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II).
I'm keeping this because it's something my rangefinder can't do

Thank you all very much. I am still not sure if it is a lens for me.

Hartblei - would it be a better choice? I understand it is well built and it has decent optics, it is a lot cheaper and more flexible (I know it is a fully autistic lens, but that does not concern me overly. Even fully coupled lens is a fiddle to use, no doubt and so manual focusing and manual setting of exposure does not seem overly taxing. I would also gather that vignetting would be less of an issue with them.

Hi Pavel,

I have an Arsat 35mm f/2.8 Tilt/Shift lens which is very often mentioned in the same sentence as the Hartblei - both being Russian-made medium-format lenses adapted for 35mm and in the same price/quality ballpark. I've heard mentioned that they are optically identical, but I'm a bit suspect about that claim. Still, there's no denying they are similar.
It seems people prefer the Hartblei which has a more flexible tilt/shift mechanism over the Arsat, but the Hartbleis are rarely available while the Arsat's are much more widely available.

While there's no doubt my Arsat tilt/shift does what it is supposed to, it isn't particularly sharp, especially wide-open. When shooting at f/2.8 it feels like a cheap zoom lens and doesn't get really sharp until about f/8.
If you're looking for something to experiment with and expand your photography (ie do reverse tilt for the "miniture effect") then it's great, but if you want it mainly for serious architecture, landscape or product shots then I suspect you'll be disappointed. At least with my copy of the lens. You get what you pay for.

Do you need both tilt and shift? Perspective distortion can be easily done in photoshop. If you only need tilt then you can buy a 35mm tilt adapter from eBay and then pair it with any appropriate medium-format lens. That might be a cheaper, more flexible, and higher-quality route to take if you want something to experiment with.
Here's more info: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rawhead/3225184572/

And a discussion about the Hartblei vs Arsat lenses: http://www.flickr.com/groups/tiltshift/d...107662509/

Some experimental samples from my lens:

1. Reverse tilt for selective focus effect.


2. Tilt for perspective correction.


3. Reverse tilt for the "miniture effect"