The physics are absolutely no different than a regular lens. Without doing anything, your lens is always bringing objects in the field into focus. Your sensor (or film) is simply in the wrong spot until you move it into what you consider optimum focus. For *some* subjects, more DoF can gained by tilting the lens, tilting the sensor or moving the camera or all 3. Shifting just means you are capturing a different part of the image circle because the light cone exiting a TS lens is bigger than a regular lens.
I own these, they are wonderful to use, they are REAL photography, everything else is snapshots. Some points: 1. The link Serge Broslavsky posted right below is useful. 2. While we have here a tilt shift LENS, this style lens is a substitute for the features found on all classic large(r) format VIEW CAMERAS, wherein the hinged parts of the body do the tilting and shifting, and the lens stays put on the front board. The lens then projects onto the film plane which is a ground glass focusing surface and you "view" that ground glass from under a black cloth. So my friendly advice to those who wish to learn about the principles at work here is to back up and review the functions of the view camera. The ideas are basic optics projected onto a flat plane, which you need to know anyway if you really love photography. One of the best books on the subject is Vol 1 of the Ansel Adams Photography Series "The Camera." It's under $10 used at Amazon.
@@johnsmith1474 So if it is not a T&S lens, it is not "real" photography. What a galactically ignorant and stupid statement. And you forgot raises and lowers on a view camera as well. I bet you have never even used one, you are just mouthing off trying to impress people. Here's a hint, it didn't work. My Sinar P 4x5 and all of my Rodenstock APO lenses are in the equipment safe in my studio. I often use it on commercial shoots. Nothing digital, not even my D850, can even approach a 4x5 image on Portra 160, Ektar 100 or T-Max 100 film.
You don't need a Tilt Shift lens until you try one. And then you want them all. I started with a 90mm one, and I cannot wait to get my hands onto a 24mm one. It is a prime lens that can do just so much more. I agree, it is very expensive, but once you have used it a few times, you never regret to have gotten it.
Tilts and shifts were used very effectively in the film days as 'banquet cameras'. They could bend the depth of field to cover a whole room of sitting people, and just their heads would be sharp.
Had this lens for years. Even use it on my Sony. My best landscapes have been made on it. Even when I don’t use the large format like TS features which are cool, it’s the most razor sharp stunning lends I’ve ever owned.
Excellent video that should have been titled "Basics of Tilt-Shift Lenses". I used a 17mm TS lens in Siem Reip (Angkor Wat) to get some fantastic shots that would have been impossible otherwise. An alternative is to use a fisheye lens held level and then do it all in post processing. Works well for posting on Facebook, but quality really suffers in the edges. Unfortunately Canon no longer makes the f2.8 fisheye. If you can get one used, lots of fun and very useful if you post process for distortion. The shift feature is also useful for panoramas. Take three shots at the extreme shift as well as the middle and then stitch them together in post. The 90mm macro TS is one of the more interesting lenses Canon has put out because it allows one to increase the apparent depth of field at wider apertures. I don't have the Canon lens, but I have an aftermarket TS adapter for Pentax 645 120mm macro to Canon that works really well on APS-C. I have also used the 45mm TS lens handheld to get interesting portrait shots, but takes a great deal of practice to do.
They are also useful for two more reason that I think of right now. On the artistic side, they allow alternative ways to bring the attention over a subject blurring its surrounding then just direct focus at it. If for exemple two subject or more are of interest, then only those can be put in focus even without having them side by side and straight in front of the camera. The other advantages is the ability to have a large distance in focus ( fake depth of field) without increasing the f-stop. You can photograph a large surface in focus without a small aperture which in turn may need to long of an exposure time. For exemple a field of flowers in the wind, a train...
I got to meet architectural photographer Mike Kelley at a Canon seminar and he let us try out his various tilt shift lenses. They're pretty cool and an absolute must have for that type of work. You did a great job explaining why they're so expensive.
Some people use tilt-shift lenses to stitch together photos into ultra-high-res portraits. Everyone can benefit from these kinds of lenses, not just architecture and landscape photographers.
@@ddegn No, computers can't do everything that tilt-shifts can. For example, you can use the shift feature to take 3 separate photos of something in order to stitch together one ultra-high resolution photo. for instance, I have a sensor that captures 4000x6000 pixels. By using shift, I can create an image that goes maybe 10000x6000 pixels, for a total of a 60 megapixel image. When you make an enlarged print like this, it's like going from an 11x14 portrait of someone to a life-size photo-quality reproduction from the waist-up. You can't do that with a computer.
@@AtomicArcherGuy Thanks for letting me know some of the tilt-shifts capability. It sure sounds like an interesting tool. I don't really have a need for one (at least that I know of) but I find myself wanting one to try out.
Because the expensive ones last a lifetime and have a good warranty, the cheap ones will break and cost you your gear. It's reasonable to spend $1,200 on a Gitzo when you're putting $30k worth of gear on it.
@@CinemaSteve Exactly. I'm a musician, tech guy, car guy, gun guy, tons of hobbies...when I got into photography, I was like, "WTF!?" All my other hobbies, which are quite expensive, pale in comparison to photography/videography when it comes to cost. I could get an entire turbo kit installed on my car, AND TUNED, for what ONE lens costs...or what a few lights cost...or whatever. Photography is STUPID expensive.
Adapting a manual lens with a tilt-shift device has potential, for way less $$$. I used a lousy one a while ago that acted as a ball joint where the lens connected to the camera mount, and results weren't half bad. Foto-Diox makes an adapter I think that serves the same function.
I LOVE this lens. I use the 17mm tilt/shift to photograph buildings on a constant basis. When I bought it ten years ago, it was just out and I felt lucky to find such a lens. At the time it cost $2,500. The images it produces are fabulous, not just because of how straight but also how sharp and with beautiful image contrast. Using overlapping photos and Photoshop you can stitch very large photos, both horizontally and vertically easily.
Well done! Minor critique: @0:48 please use larger font for text on screen.... that size is practically impossible to read on a small phone screen 📱 but could be!
Thanks for this. 👌 They are by no means overpriced, although for a while out of my reach. I own two such gems, both being Schneider Super Angulons. One is the PC-Shift 28mm, which was mostly seen with Leica R mount, and only available from Leica. I found one on eBay with an M42 mount. Contacting Schneider in Germany, they had two Nikon F mounts in stock. Needless to say, I bought one. It does not have tilt function, but with that focal length, shooting architecture, at f5,6, at least f8, the delth of field is extraordinary. Tilt is not needed. I also carry it around as a 28mm prime. Superb. ☆☆☆☆☆ The other is also Super Angulon, but 55mm and it is a Tilt/shift lens. Magnificently built, it is a rare beast, having been fitted with a Hasselblad mount for the 2000 series of cameras. It was in the Rollei 6000 lens lineup, but never in a Hasselblad catalogue. Magnificent - ☆☆☆☆☆ Both worth every penny.
There are "cheaper" alternative in Tilt-shift lenses... have a look at Samyang's 24mm f/3.5 TS ... you can get one around a 3rd of the price of Canon's 24mm TS. And it even comes in multiple compatible mounts. By the way, thanks for taking the time to talk about these specific lenses.
Thanks for the great video! But the lens cannot change one fact: You can still look under the canopy on the ground floor. So the horizon is still in the same position ;-) That's nice because the viewer doesn't stand higher on the street either. However, if you want a different view (it's always a vanishing point perspective with a vanishing point), you basically have to climb halfway up the building, and then shoot at 0% tilt
I wish they'd made a 35mm, like the old FD version was. A friend who was studying architecture had the 45 version and said it wasn't quite wide enough for what he needed.
Thanks. That was superiority interesting and very professionally done. You didn't have to cough or clear your throat right after you started talking like so many other lower-class youtube videos. An easy thumbs up.The only problem now is I want a tilt-shift lens.
It's not entirely evident that a larger image circle is what makes the lens more expensive: plenty of large and medium format lenses have huge image circles and are not particularly costly. The challenge is to make a large image circle and a higher resolution lens for a short focal length and a fast aperture (compared to LF and MF). This likely requires better design, more optical elements for correcting aberrations, finer tolerances and better polish. Secondly, I'm not sold on the greater difficulty in machining the TS mechanism. Yes, this requires precision but if Laowa can put out a cheap shift lens (15mm macro), then it can be done at a reasonable cost. More likely the pricing really reflects "what the market will bear". Few people will buy these puppies but the ones who do, are likely willing to pay top dollar. I have a few of these myself, acquired used. Lastly, now that anyone can fake TS miniatures in Photoshop and focus stack to get infinite DoF, there's even less justification dor buying one.
Every use case for the tilt shift lens can be simulated in photoshop. For shifting the depth of field, you could use multiple exposures for different focal planes then stack them together - similar to macro photography workflows. For tiny cities, you can simply apply a blur over the top and bottom of the frame. For architecture, vertical lines can be simulated in photoshop pretty easily. These lenses are for people who don't want to mess with a post workflow or prefer the more organic look of the optical tilt shift.
I have this lens, found in in like new condition for $1300. I've been using it for a few years now and I absolutely love it. I'm now thinking seriously about buying the TS-E 50mm for a walk-around lens.
I've own TS-e 24 F3.5L I. It is not cheap, but much cheaper than renewed II version. It feels like using medium format pancake lens with movement capability. Using 67 lens or 645 lens with TS adapter is possible option, but the price of the adapter is quite high(-$300), so it is not that cheap either.
Captivating video as usual, thank ya. I would love to see a video on old Minolta lenses that can be adapted to current Sony emount. Lens Library sounds like the coolest play to hang-out.
Who needs autofocus anyway? I’ve learned to take photos on my uncles old SLR made by Minolta (XG9). For me it became natural to focus manually. Even during my apprenticeship as a web designer, where digital photography was a major part, I’ve always used manual focus (what infuriated my teacher) After these 25 years of photography I’ve still own this old Minolta XG9 which my uncle gave me after mastering it. In addition to it I’ve bought many Lenes and a X700 as my workhorse and a big Mamiya RB67pro. Of course I also own two digital cameras an cheap one for travel and an Eos400D which I use with an adapter for Minolta Lenses but I’ve always been a analogue photographer and still taking pictures on film with old heavy glass lenses and of course only with manual focus.
Why micro 4/3 lenses are expensive. I recently bought a sigma 17-50mm f2.8 for around $300. Just out of curiosity I checked the micro 4/3 lenses with roughly equivalent focal lengths and they are more then double the price!
I have two of them - 90mm TS-E 2.8 (original) & 24mm TS-e 3.5L II - and would like more. I like the challenge of them and well executed results compelling. I would like to get something in the 50mm range.
Yes, would be great to watch in-depth explanation of using TS lenses (since i personally didn't think i will be able to touch one of those for now) ((so if in far future i able to hold or try one of those i will able to use it right of the bat))
I have a feeling tilt and shift functions, while not difficult to understand in principle, remain a bit mysterious, even daunting to those who have always used fixed cameras, while those of us who have been using view cameras for years ( or decades) feel positively constrained without having these functions available. Of course these movements are much easier to implement on a view camera, but it’s still great these lenses do exist, with excellent lens formulae to boot, so at least it is « possible » to achieve these functions which seem necessary and indispensable to those of us who have always used them.
Oh no it's manual focus...……..wah, wah! Are they worth it? Only if you do a lot of architectural work and maybe some esoteric studio work that would normally be done with a view camera. For tilt and shifts using a view camera, there are a few backs out there that can mount a DSLR.
I love the TS lens I have for my FD film Canon. I want one or two for my digital bag. Could you please do a comparison of all the lenses from 17mm to 135mm so I can see what each does so I can choose which ones would benefit my camera style best? Thank you!
Don't make any money with my photography - I have the PC-E NIKKOR 24mm F3.5D ED - the most wonderful lens that I have in my collection - it makes you think about photography. Don't use it daily but it is worth having. I use this on a Nikon D4, D300s that has been converted to 590nm infrared & a Fuji X-T2 with an adapter. Thanks for making this video.
I agree with the fact that a TS lens will be more expensive, because of the larger image circle (good glass isn't cheap), but the tilt and the shift mechanics are not that complex (basically a geared mechanism moving the front part either on straight or curved tracks). These lenses also aren't new (the oldest models are from 1991!), so not even the novelty factor is applicable. Hence, as I voted, they're way overpriced.
Hi, dear. I am shawn just want to share my opinion with u ; as matter fact I do like tilt shift lens but because I am a sky user and it’s difficult for me to find one tilt shift Len for myself. I do understand how it cost pricing. Please give me some advises. Thank you Shawn Sincerely
The Samyang is decent. It is $700. Why the Nikon and Canon ones are expensive is the same reason as why their 70-200 are expensive for results similar to those from the Tamron ones: not a good reason.
Well people who need tilt shift lens are going to make money from it more than they could with 24-70mm. But for majority yea 24-70mm would be better choice. But for 2000 i would get tamron 24-70mm g2 instead of canon one and spend money on 85mm and 14mm.
tilt-shift is expensive? free solution: 1. use crop sensor camera and full frame lens 2. put it against the mount and do so called "lens whacking" 3. ???? 4. profit
@@HesselFolkertsma theres a whole category of style with lens whacking and light leaks in particlar. But wll if youre really serious go ahead and spend $2000 I dont mind
IGnoTon - I can’t imagine any serious paid photography being achieved by only lens-whacking. It’s a bit of a gimmick in my opinion, for novelty and some portraiture where shot-to-shot consistency isn’t of importance. While with a lens with perspective and DOF control I can imagine interiors, architecture, product, reproduction and panoramic work. All I’m saying is lens whacking is not a solution to a TSE lens.
I own a realestate photography business and never ever "needed" to use my TS lens. It's a fun lens but 99.9% of the time a leveled wide angle lens will do and you can adjust the photo in post. Http://adaptandcreate.com
Except buying this would be cheaper than buying a mirrorless camera, a fullframe lens and an adapter and would probably produce a better quality image.
