![]() Perspective slightly adjusted, floor cropped, 29.2mp Here's another shot I took, keeping the camera almost horizontal, in portrait mode: In case Sony could do much better lenses than Canon this might be different though.īTW - you can completely forget about the Samyang 24 mm T/S - this lens is no even close to the Canon pendant - and my G 12.24 beats this lens easily in terms of sharpness. Even my leveled CV 15 beat the shifted TS-E 17 - simply no competition in the outer shift areas. The recent G(M) primes are so good that you really can make use of the individual pixels. I gladly gave the Tilt and shift lenses away for the smaller and lighter package while loosing some of my 60 MPs when I cut e.g. Photography is always about compromises - the only matter is which you'll have to make. Been there and done that - I am utterly glad that I have the tilt and shift lens days behind me owning a high resolutions MILC. Even the tilting effect can be done in post provided you've used focus stacking - which is less cumbersome in the field than finding the right tilt angle with a tiny button on the lens and no means to measure the right angle. Since I am not a film maker I could't care less for tilt and shift lenses. 100 MP sensors and last then these lenses won't make any except for film makers who can't do all in post processing. Additionally they are super big and cumbersome to carry. The quality of tilt and shift lenses once fully shifted is mediocre to say the least. On my 5D II I shot 15 shots with shifting and bracketing simply to overcome the limitations of the sensor and I got wonderful 45 MP high dynamic range images out of my trusty 5D II - now I need a single shot of my A7R IV to get a better image quality and I even don't need a tripod for that or I need only a tripod in case the light is a bit dimmer. I've owned the Canon TS-E 17 | TS-E 24 and TS-E 90 - sold them all since it doesn't make any sense in the field. ![]() With 60 MP this is not a big loss - with the above sample you'd probably have still 40 MP left. Or simply photography in horizontal orientation and cut away the parts you dislike. Finally, the APSC field of view is limiting, because for many subjects (e.g., Koln Cathedral) there isn’t a lens wide enough to do the job. Second, while your correction above is a simple one, not all are. First, in order not to lose essential parts of the subject when correcting perspective, it is necessary to use a lens much wider than necessary to the subject. Yes, that is my solution as well now that I no longer own a shift lens. , After straightening and perspective adjustment in software I'm not sure what that does that can't be done with a UWA and post-processing? Tilt is used to control and augment depth of field like a view camera. But it's easy to do.Īfter straightening and perspective adjustment in software Yes, you have to do the perspective correction in software, and crop, so you so need an ultra wide angle lens. With a shift lens, the perspective compensation can be built into the original photo. The amount lost depends on the amount of perspective correction. ![]() What you are missing is part of the frame. So I use my FE 12-24 G lens with my A7Riii and adjust in post. I've not used one, but I wonder what they can do that isn't possible using software in post-processing? It seems that DxO ViewPoint (and others) can achieve pretty much the same results. I believe some people have adapted Canon tilt-shift lenses for E-mount bodies. Are they any that work well with the mirrorless bodies? ![]() I’m interested in getting a Tilt shift lens for my a7riii.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |