Does anyone still use shift lenses?

nikon_sam said:
I've never used a PC lens on an SLR but I did buy a 4x5 view camera to have the option of doing just that...
Click to expand...

The biggest problem I've had with buying tilt or shift lenses for 35mm and digital SLRs, is that there's no reason to when a 4x5 camera costs the same or less and offers full movements with any lens you put on it, as well as a better field of view (in my opinion at least) and much higher image quality.
 
I have a Contax RTS bellows setup that is often mounted on a Canon DSLR. Main use is tabletop @ 100mm where tilt/swing is valuable to increase focus depth (selectively, of course). Below is the Leitz Tele-Elmar 135 in Visoflex mode - note plane of focus, if you can. :)
te135c.jpg
 
You can't replicate everything in photoshop. I do architectural photography as a career and I find digital just doesn't stand up as well to a full frame shot composed and shifted correctly. Even with a 5DmkII and larger sensors, correcting a file for distortion forces you to crop heavily. Maybe for web that is ok, but for printing I lose the benefit of a large sensor. I use large sensors so I start with a large file size for printing. It also makes extra work later. I can compose a correct image on location much faster than it takes me to sit and adjust lines until they are straight. It is a waste of time when the longer I spend on a shoot devalues the amount I've made in that time frame.

I have comparison shots of the Leica and the 5DmkII on the same exact subject with the same final view. Leica just tilted and adjusted later, and the 5DII with a new 24-TSeII. The images look identical for the most part, but the canon file is way larger. If you are going for look alone, yeah digital works.

However, you cannot shoot right into a mirror and not see your own reflection without a shifted lens. No fixing that in photoshop!
 
With my 35mm 2.8 Nikkor there is shift but no tilt, of course. Tilt capability would be a great asset if one is looking for full image control. I have never seen a tilt mount for a Nikon PB-6 rail setup which I use with my D70. I liked Rico's demonstration of this.

I too see the brightness fall of toward the edge of the image circle on the 35mm 2.8 lens. I believe this is a characteristic of the lens and not any limitation of acceptance angle at the sensor.

A real advantage of a shift lens over PS would be preservation of resolution and depth of focus. I don't have a tech sheet on the Nikkor 2.8 but I was curious about the dof across the larger image circle.
 
Tony Pio said:
... I have never seen a tilt mount for a Nikon PB-6 rail setup which I use with my D70.
Click to expand...
For tilt, you want PB-4. Actually, it's technically swing (on the front standard), but you can rotate camera on the rear standard. Depending on the camera, you may need a small extension tube to clear various body projections. As usual, your needs will dictate the optimal image circle: my lens covers 645.
 
Perhaps this should move to a new thread but Nikon says that neither the PB-4 nor PB-5 can be used with the D70 and other Nikon DSLR's because the mount will damage the electronic contacts on the bodies. This would leave out use of the PB-4 with DSLR's and leave me without a tilt function.

However, I have seen comments on other sites that dispute this claim by Nikon, so I am still without a resolution to the tilt-shift question.

My problem is that I have several hundred slides (maybe thousands) that I would like to digitize for screen viewing but the PB-6 crops out a significant portion of the frames and scanning would take a significant portion of my remaining life. Most of the slides are of architecture and would greatly benefit from T-S functions. I suppose it boils down to problems of having a cropped sensor.
 
Tony Pio said:
... Nikon says that neither the PB-4 nor PB-5 can be used with the D70 and other Nikon DSLR's because the mount will damage the electronic contacts on the bodies.
Click to expand...
Issue is moot because you will use a (short) extension tube anyway.
 
I don't use an extension tube on the PB-6 setup since it would make the cropping factor much worse. The D70 mounts directly on the bellows mount. I've never worked with the PB-4.
 
I've used my Nikon 28mm PC lens for architectural photography in the past (especially for the English Heritage 'Images of England' project, photographing those buildings that were 'listed' in the year 2000) and will continue to do so. I've also used it on my Hasselblad Xpan instead of buying the mega-expensive 30mm Hasselblad lens and intend doing the same with my Leica. I've thought about using the lens with Fuji S£ Pro digital, but I would have to measure the exposure with an external meter (unless someone knows better); the lens would then act as if it was really a 35mm lens due to the sensor factor which will limit its usefulness somewhat.

Regards

Andrew More
 
I bought one to use on m4/3, but have since sold my GF1. Somehow, I just can't get around to selling the Canon FD T/S—it fits in so nicely with the rest of my FD collection.
 
I've got the distinct feeling that I really don't know how to exploit the shift lens yet. It's more subtle than just straightening lines on buildings.
 
The OM 24/3.5 shift is a great lens, no doubt. For a long time it was the widest. But now the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4 is wider by a whole lot. The OM is still a jewel and betters the Canon 24 mk1 by a noticeable margin.

I mainly use the RZ67 75mm shift when I need shift capability. I wish it was a 50 or 65mm though. I have the 75mm short barrel too, along with the TS adapter, for tilt situation. Sadly, you need both to maximize the options. the straight shift lens will shift 20mm, while the SB version only shifts 10mm on the TS adapter (and of course 10 deg. of tilt).
 
alfredian said:
Oddly, the temptation is to overdo the shifting, and end up with upside-down keyholes.
Click to expand...


i suppose you mean keystones.
I know what you mean, i have seen such things:)

Odd enough, that the "keystone" where the name of the effect comes from, IS actually upside-down i.e. the top part is wider...
 
I have just purchased a Corfield WA67 just because it has a shift lens! And it is a heck of a lot cheaper than an Alpa:D
 
The WA67 is a very fine camera - just thought I'd mention that.

I miss the tilt function on my PC Nikkor. Nikon only made one with tilt, an 85mm lens that I would love to have.

David
 
kram said:
I have just purchased a Corfield WA67 just because it has a shift lens! And it is a heck of a lot cheaper than an Alpa:D
Click to expand...

Gorgeous camera, isn't it? And as you say, the only real competitor is an Alpa -- though the Alpa does allow bigger formats and wider lenses. I thought the WA 67 was expensive until Alpas came out!

If it's not a rude question, what did you pay or it? (Feel free to tell me it's none of my business.)

Cheers,

R.
 
My Leica ( Schneider) 35 and 28 now have Nikon mounts on them. They work fine on Full frame and APS Nikons.

I have read the 28/35 Nikor pc do not do well on digital. The T/S Nikors do not swing in the direction I want, but they can be fixed with surgery. Then they do not work in the other direction.

4x5 is indeed best. Issue being you need to hauled a large camera and film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top