Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L

[dolina]

This is shipping in limited quantities worldwide so post your samples here.

Mention what body you used it on and if you used LiveView.

[dandig]

perhaps whoever happens to be lucky enough to have the first example to post here could also check to see whether it is compatible with the 1.4 tC as the older TS-Es were.
I'm thinking if you get a 17mm and throw a 1.4 tc on there you have a 24mm too.....

[waynema]

had a chance to play with it last Thursday. I wish I knew what I was doing with tilt shift.. shot at 1/40 F4.
It didn't look deep enough from the back to fit a TC.
*edit: and also more samples here (http://www.pbase.com/georgh/17mm_tse_test)...

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/552536106_xwn8g-X2.jpg

[Telkin]

I'm thinking if you get a 17mm and throw a 1.4 tc on there you have a 24mm too.....

I'm pretty sure TC's aren't compatible with wide angles.

[Gabe63]

Looks like you were in Palo Alto. Wait until the new to market price is worn off. I bought the 200 F2 the first week it was out, should have waited a year...

[dandig]

I'm pretty sure TC's aren't compatible with wide angles.

The TCs worked fine with the original 24mm TS-E, that's why i was asking and in fact my question was answered on another site. The photographer tested the new 17mm using a 1.4 TC and it looked pretty good! His samples of 17mm ts-e + 1.4 TC were much sharper than the original 24mm ts-e.

scroll down for TC comparison http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1029&message=32001803&changemode=1

[bunyarra]

A few - boring housing from a recent shoot sadly :) Note : virtually no distortion and so little CA that I did not bother to correct a single image.

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/568389065_odCHY-L.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/568387362_iRjun-L.jpg

One with a Kenko 1.4 TC attached

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/568387782_3YTYf-L.jpg

A 2 image shot - one shifted left , the other shifted right then merged in Photoshop.

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/568406584_PmdRR-L.jpg

[thejager]

this lens looks awesome... more shots please!

[OiPaz]

A few quick tests. This lens has impressive sharpness and chromatic aberrations, very very good geometric correctness and flare resistance, excellent focal length for street architectural photography. It's a real pleasure to use!

Canon EOS 5D, TS-E 17/4 @ f/11, 13 sec, ISO 100

[OiPaz]

Canon EOS 5D, TS-E 17/4 @ f/10, 13 sec, ISO 100

[OiPaz]

Canon EOS 5D, TS-E 17/4 @ f/11, 15 sec, ISO 100

[The Ghost of FM]

Wow!

There are some amazing shots here from this new lens!

Now, I just have to make a trip to my local lottery kiosk in order to have any chance of ever owning one too! :D

Cheers!

[OiPaz]

Canon EOS 5D, TS-E 17/4 @ f/11, 30 sec, ISO 100

[Meista]

more shots please :)

[dolina]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2567/3969478852_8205a44849_b.jpg

How is the colors?

[The Ghost of FM]

How is the colors?
The colors look good in spite of the front step being blown out a bit from the flash/exposure.

Looks nice!

Cheers!

[bunyarra]

A few from a recent commercial shoot of a school in Swansea, Wales. Used in conjunction with the 1.4 TC. For me, there was no commercially important degradation in resulting image quality.

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/656077089_DdCW9-M.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/656063701_ZMxs2-M.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/656107302_k68hm-M.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/656105790_nTT6t-M.jpg

[dolina]

Still trying to figure this all out

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2529/3979970576_f750b2770c_b.jpg

[bigcountry]

I LOVE THIS LENS.

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/669653536_QaNBc-L.jpg

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/669653399_PvpFG-L.jpg

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/669653552_Xxdeg-L.jpg

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/669653515_vPH2o-L.jpg

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/669653438_uLcZ4-L.jpg

[djharmonix]

just got the call! I might receive my copy this week!!!!!!!! :cool:

[dolina]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2596/3989133773_337b3c1aa8_b.jpg

[dolina]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3288/3991800477_24a9c3be11_b.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2605/3989928330_7aa4d8e526_b.jpg

[Gel]

Most of these shots look like they could of been done with something like a 14mm L prime, (apart from the married couple behind the fence, nice work btw).

Or am I missing something?

[dolina]

On a 14 or any wide angle you'd get converging lines. Look at post #21 for shifting. #22's 2nd shot was tilted and shifted

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2438/3989967550_0cd063899c_b.jpg

Above shot was tilted shifted and rotated.

[SOX 404]

this forum is bad............ bad.......

now i'm tempted to spend more and more money.......... aish.........

more photos pls!

[The Ghost of FM]

Most of these shots look like they could of been done with something like a 14mm L prime, (apart from the married couple behind the fence, nice work btw).

Or am I missing something?
The 14L will only give you straight vertical and horizontal lines when you keep the shot perfectly level and parallel to the subject. As soon as you tilt up or down, you will get major key-stoning distortions. Granted, those distortions can be corrected in post but then it will eat up a lot of real-estate of the frame once you correct the perspective.

If the TS-E17mm wouldn't have been so expensive, I probably would have bought one instead of the 14L but I did end up the 14, and now I'm making the best of it.

Cheers!

[dolina]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2490/3989633565_eb0b59a24e_b.jpg

[bunyarra]

A few from a standard UK housing scheme

This was a seriously crap day. The first is a blended 8 exposure shot - the overcast sun was behind the houses and everything in front was almost totally in the shade. Not great but a darn sight better than the normal images :)

All the rest are also blended exposures - no interior lighting used.

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/627905360_g6eQH-M-1.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/627921503_rbAyZ-M-1.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/627926682_J2kGx-M.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/627931519_fCJpw-M.jpg

[dolina]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2660/3995617968_727cfbcd6e_b.jpg

[The Ghost of FM]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2660/3995617968_727cfbcd6e_b.jpg
Nice post processing effect! It really suits the shot!

Cheers!

[dolina]

Thanks! Difference between the previous front church shot is more steps. I wanted it to look like something from 1896 so there. :)

[Hmood]

taken in Milan with Canon 5D (Not Mark II).

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2473/4033427199_f7a9fb07fe_o.jpg

[treblekicker]

Here are a few that I've taken. There's some more on my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebble

This is a very interesting lens to say the least, and quite versatile.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2429/3994946462_f73f75b790_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/3994946462)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2584/4020388739_19d700c8e2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/4020388739/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2431/4005575939_1c42733e8d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/4005575939/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2536/3994964080_ac634fb894_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/3994964080/)

This last one was handheld with a 1/15th shutter. Still quite sharp, so you can even use this lens handheld at night, which opens up a lot of cool possibilities.

[bigcountry]

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/photos/689565953_iLjy5-L.jpg

[Hmood]

More :

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3495/4045982556_a683cc4c7d_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2666/4045982444_462429b24f_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3535/4045238109_08792a2a18_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2583/4045238013_3fba9fb45f_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3535/4045237799_fab1101a81_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2605/4045237895_1966fa231d_o.jpg

[bigcountry]

http://holzphoto.smugmug.com/Other/Calena-and-Seth/253Q0650a/684963580_teBAn-O.jpg

[Kramer80]

amazing shots on this page

[kloodee]

wooooow bigcountry that shot looks like a Cartoon,, amzing just wooow,,

[Hmood]

one more:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2711/4105466986_1a171e1d5b_o.jpg

[djharmonix]

Snow hit pretty hard today!

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/120162185/original.jpg

Handheld, no crop, 1/20th F4 ISO3200

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/120162208/original.jpg

Same but 1/15th

[djharmonix]

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/120162445/original.jpg

sharpest wide-angle lens corner to corner I have ever used. And I've used many.

[ken2000ac]

Those who own this lens - don't be shy! Post more of your examples!

This lens has so many drawbacks for me that I won't consider purchasing, but I don't mind lusting after its capabilities!

Even more curious - where is the thread for the TS-E 24mm MkII?

[LLL]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2771/4143519650_bf55fb21a0_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2715/4142776693_09fdd70d37_b.jpg

[mrfourcows]

^

pretty neat work from the 17L on your flickr.

[ken2000ac]

^

pretty neat work from the 17L on your flickr.

IMHO, everything here so far has been fantastic to view. :)

[LLL]

This lens has been pretty amazing so far. The only thing I dislike is the front lens concave out & no hood. A little unprotected. Afraid of hitting it while walking (Has to take extra precaution).

[brownbugger]

I love the pictures here, I cant for the life of me decide between the 17tse & 24tse

[djharmonix]

get both! :cool:

[Hmood]

to brownbugger

the link below containes a comparison between ts-e17mm with 1.4 extender and ts-e 24mm II.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/798748

I hope it will help you make your decision.

[Marloon]

is there much to learn with a tilt shift?

[brownbugger]

is there much to learn with a tilt shift?

Yes , there seems to be a huge learning curve, and that IS the fun part. Creative possibilities seem endlessness with this lens !

[brownbugger]

to brownbugger

the link below containes a comparison between ts-e17mm with 1.4 extender and ts-e 24mm II.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/798748

I hope it will help you make your decision.

I have more or less made my decision on the 17mm primarily as it will be the widest lens Id own on full frame .

[dolina]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2734/4187332052_0644605610_b.jpg

[djharmonix]

wow you nailed the focus on that one! nice shot

[dolina]

Using a 5D at that!

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2493/4187343100_ef188a1aa2_b.jpg

[treblekicker]

I love this lens. I've been doing a lot of handheld night shooting with it lately.

I mean, I've used for the standard fare as well, but I find it incredibly versatile. Street, fake miniature, architecture, landscape, this lens does it all, and does it well. I didn't expect to use it for night time street photography, but with the long shutter speed due to the ultra wide focal length (and the high ISO capability of the 5d mk II) this lens consistently surprises me. I find myself reaching for it more and more.

Here are some examples:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2746/4126638812_6156c0a24b_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2778/4125865925_ff2514dc0c_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2654/4124180126_8690f68d3b_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2565/4204453428_2031769704_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2497/4113439299_3162627a41_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2689/4110877242_0ce3483844_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2493/4196956300_eab57c44b7_b.jpg

there's a bunch more at my flickr: www.flickr.com/photo/trebbble

[EdBray]

Looking forward to receiving mine, it's on order and will arrive next week.

[djharmonix]

Pbase rapes the sharpness...

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/121460190/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/121460387/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/121460499/original.jpg

[djharmonix]

Fooling around with the 17 on a crop sensor yesterday:

click here for the full res: http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122049367/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122049367/large.jpg


2.
http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122049541/original.jpg

3.

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122049551/original.jpg

4.

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122052631/original.jpg

I use this lens 99% of the time to remove distortion for work but when I use it for fun I distort the heck out of everything!

[djharmonix]

Man! this thread is dead!!

I wanna see some pics now that more and more people own this lens!

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122274286/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122274237/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122274234/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122274236/original.jpg

[bunyarra]

Dang .. is no-one shooting with this?

A few from Saturday. Many were with a Kenko 1.4 TC ; can't tell which (the lens and TC combo is that good).

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/810771383_Jmqyo-L.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/810760481_ND99z-L.jpg

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/810774946_KiCjz-L.jpg

[treblekicker]

Hah, I'd love to post more, but mine's in the shop for the second time due to the same problem: the tilt lock knob has seized! Really annoying, especially with the cost of this lens. You'd think the build quality would be a bit better :(

Here's one from a street series I did with it a week or two back:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4030/4407876058_8de2961fa1_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/4407876058/sizes/l/

More here: www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble

[bunyarra]

Hah, I'd love to post more, but mine's in the shop for the second time due to the same problem: the tilt lock knob has seized! Really annoying, especially with the cost of this lens. You'd think the build quality would be a bit better :(

Ouch ... did it get knocked? It feels like a brick though the front element makes me worried every time I take it out.

[treblekicker]

Ouch ... did it get knocked? It feels like a brick though the front element makes me worried every time I take it out.

Nope :(

Trust me, it hurts because I saved up for a couple of months for this lens. I absolutely babied it from the get-go, but the same problem has happened twice now. I'm hoping when it comes back this time, it's fixed for good!

Anyways don't wanna derail, this is a unique lens that can produce amazing images. Which is why everyone comes to the thread, so here's another (just imagine what someone with some real talent can do! :)) :

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2725/4412801114_2168312d7e_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trebbble/4412801114/

[LLL]

A view from Mount Sibayak.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2770/4438592178_5e54ba9c8c_b.jpg

More pictures can be found on my Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lucianlewis/sets/72157623635746032/)

[djharmonix]

Nope :(

Trust me, it hurts because I saved up for a couple of months for this lens. I absolutely babied it from the get-go, but the same problem has happened twice now. I'm hoping when it comes back this time, it's fixed for good!


It happened with 2 copies of the lens as well. I think that the front element is too heavy for the locking system.
Now I cannot send it because I use the lens everyday for work.. I guess I'll keep it like that until I can afford a backup unit.

Anyway, here's the monster on the 1DsIII, my setup for real estate photography.

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/122800753/original.jpg

[bunyarra]

Anyway, here's the monster on the 1DsIII, my setup for real estate photography.

As an aside, what are you using for getting levels right? I am currently balancing a digi-pas digital spirit level on the hotshoe mount - I find the bubble levels too inaccurate for close-work with walls etc.

http://photosignals.smugmug.com/photos/516738581_Rtq9C-M.jpg

[djharmonix]

I use a bubble level and Iam getting ok results.. How much does a digital level like this cost?

My tripod is bad also, I might have to change that first...

[frankchn]

http://www.stanford.edu/%7Efrankchn/photo/20100320/5_small.jpg

Full shift left + full shift right stitched. Stunning lens.

[djharmonix]

wow nice shot!, this is only composed of 2 shots?
did you crop anything?

[frankchn]

I cropped out about 10% of the photo (some of the buildings on the right was cut off half-way so I cropped them out) and yep, only 2 shots.

[I Simonius]

A few quick tests. This lens has impressive sharpness and chromatic aberrations, very very good geometric correctness and flare resistance, excellent focal length for street architectural photography. It's a real pleasure to use!

Canon EOS 5D, TS-E 17/4 @ f/11, 13 sec, ISO 100

where is that gorgeous town?:cool:

[chonhzilla]

WOW!

[Ricardo222]

Beautiful shots here. This is the most incredible lens...I have had mine for a few weeks and can't rate it highly enough.
There are, however, some tricks to using it that I have had to learn. I offer these not for the people who took the above photos because you guys are already doing it right, but for those who may have similar experience to mine.
The first is to watch the focus! Moving (shifting) the lens off axis naturally alters the true focus and while the 5d Mk2 responds with a beep when it feels the image is at it's sharpest, I've found that this is not always the case.
Solution? This is where live view comes into it's own! And because even with the magnification available my old eyes have difficulty nailing it, I have created the perfect answer.... I bought a $9.00 35mm slide viewer (remember those?), took the slide holder off and it acts as a perfect Loupe for examining the screen for sharpness.
The second point is much more subjective.
There are times when using the shift with the camera back vertical is absolutely the right thing to do, but there are times when it looks over-done, and the buildings appear to be leaning out at the top. I suspect that its an illusion, but it's there all the same. The ancient Greeks knew a thing or two when the designed their temples...the columns taper towards the top and lean in ever so slightly to give the impression of being vertical! Otherwise they would appear to lean out....interesting isn't it.
Am I being pedantic, or has anyone else noticed this in some photos taken with shifting lenses of any sort?
Anyway, I love my TS-E 17 and will be learning from it for a long time. Will post a picture soon.

[djharmonix]

I know what you mean Ricardo, I find that there is a sweet spot where the buildings dont look like they are coming towards you but often I have a slight angle that produces that effect.

Here are some shots from yesterday in NYC, handheld for the most part.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/[IMG]http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031062/original.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031074/original.jpg

[IMG]http://photography-on-the.net/forum/3.%20http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031074/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031062/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031072/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031066/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031065/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031063/original.jpg

[djharmonix]

And here's my favorite from yesterday:

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031071/original.jpg

[Ricardo222]

Thanks djharmonix...your pics are fabulous....you've obviously got the focussing well under control. There's an ethereal quality about that last one (your favourite) that I really like. I wish I lived in a city with such imposing buildings!
I include a couple of test shots taken recently...the sharpness in the originals is stunning.

[aureliandan]

Is there any shooting technique in order to avoid the deformation from the top of the buildings, on the above picture that enlargement of the roof ?

[Ricardo222]

Aureliandan, no matter how clever the lens is, how sharp or how free of optical distortions it is, there are two things that can cause problems.
The first is bad technique, and the second is the rules of perspective.
The first I'm working on...I may have broken my own advice and corrected too much for the verticals, which can make buildings look top heavy.
The second is more complex. Onyone who uses ultra-wides will know that elipses, as in the oblique view of circular objects, near the corners of the frame will be distorted. This is not so much to do with the quality of the lens but is because you are bending light in an extreme way and the relative distances of each side of the elipse are bent differently.
Same goes for the perspective of rectangular objects...it's to do with your viewpoint and not the lens per se. If you were to carefully draw the building from the same viewpoint correctly using the laws of perspective and the correct scales, you would draw the same image. (With vertical lines, of course, and in a sense, that is a distortion as well! You can't win.)
To answer your question, watch your technique and pick the best viewpoint you can.
One more thing...it may be the architects fault...he may have designed it to look like that. It's a pretty awful building really.

[djharmonix]

Is there any shooting technique in order to avoid the deformation from the top of the buildings, on the above picture that enlargement of the roof ?

I agree with Ricardo, I think it's all about technique and vantage point.

You have to keep in mind that you need to use heavy shifting and/or tilting to make the top of the building bigger, otherwise the building perspective will be like a cone.

The way to do it is to make sure you are absolutely leveled, then you shift parallel to the building plane.

I'm having a hard time explaining this in english (pardon my french!)

[aureliandan]

ok, thank you for details, I ask this because I've seen this deformation on many pictures taken with TS-E lenses, but there are also others that are ok.

I've just ordered a TS-E 17 mm in order to use it with my 40D (soon 7D) and I want to be prepared ... at least theoretical :)

[The Ghost of FM]

I'm very happy to report that after selling off a couple of infrequently used lens and striking a decent deal with my local retailer, I am now a very happy TS-E17 owner! ;)

I just got it earlier today and haven't had a chance to play with it outside but did give it a quick indoor test and everything seems to be in order!

I'm not sure if this subject is an appropriate one for this lens but I needed something to try out the controls over perspective and focus and was pleased with the results!



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8351small.jpg



I assume I'll be equally pleased when I get outdoors with it too!

Cheers!

[EdBray]

Nice picture.

I have just put my 17L TS-E up for sale as I find the 24L TS-E MkII suits me better on FF.

[The Ghost of FM]

Nice picture.

I have just put my 17L TS-E up for sale as I find the 24L TS-E MkII suits me better on FF.
Thanks!

I was thinking quite hard about the 24 vs the 17mm and as the majority of my shooting is outdoor landscape type stuff, the 17 seemed like the best fit for my needs.

Here's one more test shot just off my balcony. Ordinarily, I'd have to keep the horizon line in the center of the frame to keep thing straight. But now a turn of the shift control and a 90 degree rotation of the tilt and adjustment of the knob and every thing's nice and straight! :D Amazing!

This was handheld too, just to see how tricky it would be to work without a tripod.



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8365small.jpg



Cheers!

[EdBray]

Nice image. I suspect it would look fantastic large and on a wall, but find the detail too small in the foreground and the impact is lowered.

Whereas, with architecture the 17L comes into it's own as it allows much more to be included in the shift at a shorter range.

Nothing wrong with the 17L TSE, and if I did not already have the 24L Mk2 I would be more than happy with it. I just found that for general landscapes (as opposed to cloudscapes) the 24mm offered more foreground.

[djharmonix]

This is a relatively small, very simple appartment, viewed through the 17!
Simply the best tool for this type of photography.

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142944/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142938/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123143157/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142946/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142942/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142941/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142939/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123142943/original.jpg

[The Ghost of FM]

Good real estate series, dj! ;)

It really shows the space nicely and accurately.

Cheers!

[Ricardo222]

Brilliant shots and great technique, djharmonix...this is certainly where the TS-E 17 comes into it's own.
Tell me, do you need a focussing aid or do you just use live view? Whatever you do, it works!
Regarding the 17/24mm debate, I went through the same questions myself. Consequently I find myself sometimes a bit far away and unable because of highways etc. to get closer. Then I saw some posts that suggested that the 1.4 Canon extender could be used so tried it with great scepticism. It works! Not without a miniscle loss of sharpness, but when I post the results on this site you wont know the difference. So I now can bridge the gap with less loss than just cropping.
To The Ghost of FM...great guitar shot...works for me.

[The Ghost of FM]

Brilliant shots and great technique, djharmonix...this is certainly where the TS-E 17 comes into it's own.
Tell me, do you need a focussing aid or do you just use live view? Whatever you do, it works!
Regarding the 17/24mm debate, I went through the same questions myself. Consequently I find myself sometimes a bit far away and unable because of highways etc. to get closer. Then I saw some posts that suggested that the 1.4 Canon extender could be used so tried it with great scepticism. It works! Not without a miniscle loss of sharpness, but when I post the results on this site you wont know the difference. So I now can bridge the gap with less loss than just cropping.
To The Ghost of FM...great guitar shot...works for me.
So the Canon EX1.4 II safely inserts onto it without touching the rear element? That's great news and will now completely put to rest any remaining question I had about getting the 24 instead!

And thanks for the kind words on my guitar test shot! ;)

Cheers!

[djharmonix]

The TC is on top of the list, I shoot at F8-13 all the time so max aperture is no big deal.

I need very very wide angle for work but for landscape I find that 24 is a better view.

[The Ghost of FM]

One more test shot...


This one just playing with the shift control to bring more of the ground into the picture and a 90 degree rotated tilt to correct the outer vertical lines.



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8389small.jpg



A slight paint effect was added in post to the shot just for fun.

Cheers!

[EdBray]

One more test shot...


This one just playing with the shift control to bring more of the ground into the picture and a 90 degree rotated tilt to correct the vertical lines.


I think you may be mistaken with that, Tilt/Swing only affects the plane of focus, not perspective control which is only controlled by shift!

[Ricardo222]

Here is a shot with the TS-E 17mm , along with an image with the 17mm lens plus TC 1.4 extender . You can see by looking carefully at the background right on the comparison shots that the camera hasn't moved so the perspective is the same and only the magnification has changed. Even the overlap of the leaves on the barge-board is the same.
So all of you 17mm owners, at least for less than totally critical work, join the 24mm club.
Actually, that TS-E 24 is so incredibly sharp you probably would notice a difference, but only in big pics I think. (Certainly not, as in Ghost of FM's last image, if you're going to use the "Paint effect"!.)

[Ricardo222]

Here's another with the 1.4 extender...in full resolution it is very sharp. I didn't help matters by leaving the ISO on 800 for all three of those pics so they should even be a little better, though the 5d2 does pretty well with moderate ISOs.

[The Ghost of FM]

I think you may be mistaken with that, Tilt/Swing only affects the plane of focus, not perspective control which is only controlled by shift!
Within the plane of focus range, there is movement of the objects in the field of view and those objects on the outer areas of the frame have the most amount of movement. So, outer edge vertical lines can be affected by use of the tilt control. I have also noticed that when shooting centered and squared to a room, this same control adjustment will effect the squareness of the far end of the room's wall that the lens is facing and within that adjustment, the top and bottom horizontal roof and floor lines do teeter/totter away from true as the control is adjusted.

I should have included the word, outer, in my original post though, when I was describing the adjustment so apologies for any confusion of what I meant to say.

Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

Here's another with the 1.4 extender...in full resolution it is very sharp. I didn't help matters by leaving the ISO on 800 for all three of those pics so they should even be a little better, though the 5d2 does pretty well with moderate ISOs.
That looks acceptably sharp to me.

Good stuff! ;)

Cheers!

[bunyarra]

The TC is on top of the list, I shoot at F8-13 all the time so max aperture is no big deal.

I need very very wide angle for work but for landscape I find that 24 is a better
view.

The only annoying thing is that the addition of the TC is not recorded in the EXIF of any images. You have to take notes or guess when you use it :) It says a lot about the lack of any real world drop-off in quality that, most of the time, I really can't tell if my 17mm has the Kenko attached.

And given me other half has nicked my new 24mm TS-E II .. it is a darn good job it does work!

[djharmonix]

95% of my work is for real estate agent, they use the pictures in 1000x1000px resolution on the web. As I am shooting on tripod at F11, I'm pretty sure the quality stays the same for that kind of work.

I'll go for the new kenko 1.4x I think.. And I couldn't care less that it doesnt show in the exif!

[The Ghost of FM]

I got a chance to sneak off to the river this morning and do a bit more testing for the type of shooting that I love to do; natural landscapes.



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8454small.jpg



This shot was hand-held and shifted down all the way.

Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

A practice shot on a local apartment building, shifted up all the way to get it in the frame...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8462small.jpg



Cheers!

[thatkatmat]

Wow, impressive shots.....I want one.....So you can use this for the "toy train" effect too right?

[djharmonix]

I don't find it's the best for miniature effect, perhaps the 24 would be better for that.

[thatkatmat]

right right, "miniature"...That's where I was headed:)
Thanks, that's great info for me.

[Ricardo222]

Bunyarra...you're right. Even my fully electrically connected Canon TC 1.4 doesn't register in the EXIF data with the TS-E17mm. Strange that, when the EF300 f4 and other lenses do.

To the Ghost of FM...keep laying those great pictures on us...that hand-held shot of the stream is a delight...interesting how the shift lens adds a dimension to the reality of a scene even when there aren't obvious verticals to straighten out. The super sharpness helps too.

[The Ghost of FM]

To the Ghost of FM...keep laying those great pictures on us...that hand-held shot of the stream is a delight...interesting how the shift lens adds a dimension to the reality of a scene even when there aren't obvious verticals to straighten out. The super sharpness helps too.
Thanks very much! :)

Trees are generally the obvious verticals in landscapes along with horizon lines looking right when the shots are level so even nature photography can benefit from a TS lens and the disciplines behind using one.

I think this lens and me are going to become good friends very quickly! I had been doing a lot of my landscapes with my 14L as I really loved it's ability to behave very much like a tilt/shift lens when held perfectly level but I was finding that many of the subjects I want to capture can be impossible to catch under that discipline and ended up doing a ton of perspective corrections in Photoshop in order to preserve the original geometry I saw with my eyes. I also ended up losing large sections of the original frame in order to get those corrections and it was that issue specifically that drew me to the 17L. I suppose too if I were to drag along my tripod, I could make the actual shooting duties a bit more enjoyable and also be able to do more longer exposures and real HDR shots with the multiple exposures needed from the same spot. I guess I really need to drag along my tripod. ;)

Cheers!

[aureliandan]

@ The Ghost of FM, from the EXIF I see that the above picture is taken with a FF camera and 17mm, did you crop that picture ? I would like to figure out if the same shoot from the same distance was possible wit a 1.6x camera and a 17 mm TS-E lens.

Thanks

[The Ghost of FM]

@ The Ghost of FM, from the EXIF I see that the above picture is taken with a FF camera and 17mm, did you crop that picture ? I would like to figure out if the same shoot from the same distance was possible wit a 1.6x camera and a 17 mm TS-E lens.

Thanks
That picture did have a very small crop off the bottom of the frame for compositional purposes and slightly larger crop on the sides as there was some uninteresting details that I wanted out of the final presentation. But, those crops wouldn't come anywhere near the reduction in working area that a 1.6 crop body would use.

I was standing approx. 100 feet back from the building as that was as far back as I could get without standing in traffic or being obstructed by trees. But, I suppose if I could have stood 160 feet back and only had a 1.6 crop body, that would have worked.

The thing to consider though is that this lens is really expensive and to pay for all that glass and not be able to use a major percentage of it would seem like a real tragedy. Especially so when you also consider that in many real world situations, you won't have the opportunity to back up far enough. That old Flintstones cartoon of Barney stepping backwards off the edge of a cliff while trying to take a picture of Fred and a whale is forever etched into my mind as the perfect example of that! :D

Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

One more from yesterday's walk about...with an up shift to get all of the trees.



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8448small.jpg



Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

Took a drive out into the countryside earlier today in search of an old barn or two...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8502small.jpg



Cheers!

[djharmonix]

That's my favorite of your shot so far!

[The Ghost of FM]

That's my favorite of your shot so far!
Thanks for the feedback! Much appreciated!

I'm really enjoying this lens and its ability to do what I used to only be able to simulate in post with extensive perspective correction in Photoshop. Now, a couple of quick adjustments on the lens save me tons of time in post! ;)

Here's one more of that same barn from a different angle...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8496small.jpg



Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

This one was a bit trickier to shoot because I was shooting into the sun, so I had to process it as an HDR. Caught a bit of lens flare too but respectable enough considering there's no hood or filter in play here.



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8567HDRPSsmall.jpg



Cheers!

[zone555]

Did someone say barn? :)

Rented this lens a few months back. Fun times.. but I think I'll be purchasing the TS-E 24mm MkII.

Handheld, 7D, viewfinder + electronically leveled, upward shift (? degrees), f8.0, 1/160s, 100 ISO

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2550/4207720700_6bacf8d274_b.jpg

[djharmonix]

I just destroyed my old crappy tripod and got a brand new Manfrotto kit with the 410 gear head!!! WHOOHOO!! this is gonna save me soooo much time

[Ricardo222]

Zone 555, Great barn picture...very sharp as one would expect from this lens. However, the first impression is that you may have overdone the correction and had the camera slightly tilted forward. (I don't know how accurate the 7D electronic levelling device is, specially when hand holding. Actually, I think this picture is exceptional for a hand-held.) If you look at the left side of the barn you'll see that it is not vertical but is leaning out a little. Even with all the lines vertical building pics often look as if they're leaning out....just an optical illusion I know.
When you look very closely tou'll see that the hoizon is actually slightly skewed so ALL the verticals lean a bit to the left, but more so on the left side! Just being pedantic, but its worth looking out for!

[djharmonix]

I don't know how accurate the 7D electronic levelling device is, specially when hand holding.

The fact is you might have the best level sytem in the world, handholding the shot is almost impossible to get 100% straight composition most of the time. If you do it either takes a tremedeous amount of time or you get lucky!

The problem is, with such wide angle, the slightest tilt of like 0.01 degree changes the whole perspective (almost!)

[Ricardo222]

I just destroyed my old crappy tripod and got a brand new Manfrotto kit with the 410 gear head!!! WHOOHOO!! this is gonna save me soooo much time

That, and the discussion about "diverging" verticals raises an interesting discussion...the need for a better tripod head. I have been using a reasonably competent Chinese made ball head on a good solid carbon tripod but am finding it awkward for accurate architectural work.
The TS-E lenses deserve better, so the geared Manfrotto head may be just the answer. Please let us know how it works out.

[djharmonix]

It's the best tool you can have for this type of photography, 1 minute of work with this head will convince you.

[The Ghost of FM]

I know I should be using my tripod and 3 way bubble level but I've been hand-holding all of my shots so far and seem to be faring pretty well. My last one, I was off by 0.3 degrees on the horizon line and just rely on my D grid focusing screen and my eye on my 1DsMkII to make a quick check of the vertical lines to ensure I'm not tilted forward or backward. With bright daylight, I can shoot at f/22 and still have fast enough exposure times.

If I was shooting under darker conditions, the tripod and bubble level would be a must. Otherwise, my eye is close enough.

Cheers!

[aureliandan]

Did someone say barn? :)

Rented this lens a few months back. Fun times.. but I think I'll be purchasing the TS-E 24mm MkII.

Handheld, 7D, viewfinder + electronically leveled, upward shift (? degrees), f8.0, 1/160s, 100 ISO


zone555 did you find 17mm to wide on 7D, why do you consider buying the 24mm version, this will be ~ 38mm on 7D

[zone555]

Zone 555, Great barn picture...very sharp as one would expect from this lens. However, the first impression is that you may have overdone the correction and had the camera slightly tilted forward. (I don't know how accurate the 7D electronic levelling device is, specially when hand holding. Actually, I think this picture is exceptional for a hand-held.) If you look at the left side of the barn you'll see that it is not vertical but is leaning out a little. Even with all the lines vertical building pics often look as if they're leaning out....just an optical illusion I know.
When you look very closely tou'll see that the hoizon is actually slightly skewed so ALL the verticals lean a bit to the left, but more so on the left side! Just being pedantic, but its worth looking out for!

Oh yes, I think I know what you're saying. It's very possible I overcorrected it. When shooting handheld, I'll first try to dial in the amount of shift I think it needs, then I'll hold the camera up to my eye to frame the scene. Sometimes it's a trial and error method until I think it looks good. With a tripod this is not an issue as you'll see the adjustments in real-time on the LCD.

Thanks for the compliment! I was striving for a natural look when shooting architecture (just shy of perfect correction with a minute amount of perspective distortion), but it seems I went over that threshold by a fraction :p. I guess this is what makes using a TS-E so fun.. endless experimentation!

zone555 did you find 17mm to wide on 7D, why do you consider buying the 24mm version, this will be ~ 38mm on 7D

For crop, the wider the better of course, but the front element of the 17mm scares me. During the few days I rented it, I touched the front element several times accidentally (probably when capping and uncapping). Also, in areas where dust is significant (e.g. my barn pic), I don't want to risk wiping the front element during a photo shoot. I've used the 24mm MkII as well, and was equally pleased with the results. The 24mm has the ability to attach filters, and that's some peace of mind I'd like to have. Just in case my goofy fingers touch the lens again :oops:

[The Ghost of FM]

... the front element of the 17mm scares me. During the few days I rented it, I touched the front element several times accidentally (probably when capping and uncapping). Also, in areas where dust is significant (e.g. my barn pic), I don't want to risk wiping the front element during a photo shoot. I've used the 24mm MkII as well, and was equally pleased with the results. The 24mm has the ability to attach filters, and that's some peace of mind I'd like to have. Just in case my goofy fingers touch the lens again :oops:
I've owned the EF-14L f/2.8 USM II for close to a year now and it too has a protruding, bubble-like front element so I'm totally used to dealing with the perceived danger of such designs and is why the the 17 ts-e didn't scare me in the slightest. In reality, the glass is fairly robust and even if you were to scratch it, odds are it wouldn't affect the image because what you're normally focusing on is several feet or more away, so the scratches don't show up in the image. Same thing goes for dust on the front element. It's a non-issue.

Your best defense against not damaging your lenses is to be aware of what you're doing when you're using them and treat them like you would any other prized and expensive piece of property. Also, carefully put the lens cap back on the moment you are no longer using the lens. I follow this regime with all my lens and have never had a problem following that mindset.

About the 24mm focal length and use of that lens on a 1.6 crop body, I'd really hate to work with such a restrictive focal length unless I was exclusively shooting larger subjects, like the one you posted, from very healthy distances. Also; Think about image composition for a moment and compare the picture you just posted verses the one I just posted. Your image shows virtually no context of what's around that building and you probably stood a good 40 to 50 feet back to shoot it, right? My last image was shot from about 25 feet away from that barn and still had lots of detail of the barn's surroundings. It tells a more complete story, picture-wise, in my opinion, and we generally want our pictures to tell a story, right? I'd strongly suggest you rent the 24 TS first, to see if that focal length is really usable for you before you buy it. ;)

Cheers!

[djharmonix]

Oh yes, I think I know what you're saying. It's very possible I overcorrected it. When shooting handheld, I'll first try to dial in the amount of shift I think it needs, then I'll hold the camera up to my eye to frame the scene. Sometimes it's a trial and error method until I think it looks good. With a tripod this is not an issue as you'll see the adjustments in real-time on the LCD.

Okkk! that's the problem!

The way to do it is to first, while framing the shot, make sure all the vertical lines are straight, then you will see probably the top of the building cut off. So without moving the camera position, you shift the lens so you get the top part of the subject in the shot.

The key is to start straight to get a reference point, then shift.

[The Ghost of FM]

One more processed from yesterday's outing...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8514small.jpg



I spent quite a bit of time cloning out power lines that were running right across the entire frame and wanted it to be brick by brick accurate so it was a fairly tedious task to pull that off.

Cheers!

[aureliandan]

beautiful !
Did you use some HDR technique ?

[The Ghost of FM]

beautiful !
Did you use some HDR technique ?
Thanks! ;)

Nope! No HDR processing on this one was needed as the sun was to my left side so it only needed a bit of a bump in the shadows to brighten it up decently.

I do think I should of done this one on tripod though as I messed up my original hand-held camera positioning and had to tweak the levelness of the shot in post and that only showed me issues on the other axis' of the building.

Lesson learned; the tripod will be taken on the next adventure! :cool:

Cheers!

[Ricardo222]

One more processed from yesterday's outing...

I spent quite a bit of time cloning out power lines that were running right across the entire frame and wanted it to be brick by brick accurate so it was a fairly tedious task to pull that off.

Cheers!

Well done on cloning out the power lines...I wouldn't have had a clue they were there! And yes about using the tripod...a nuisance at times but necessary for precision in set-ups like this. (I remember setting up the old Linhof 4x5, checking verticals of the inverted image on a groundglass grid while enveloped in a black cloth. Try that in public now and someone will dob you in as a lunatic or worse!)

[The Ghost of FM]

Well done on cloning out the power lines...I wouldn't have had a clue they were there! And yes about using the tripod...a nuisance at times but necessary for precision in set-ups like this. (I remember setting up the old Linhof 4x5, checking verticals of the inverted image on a groundglass grid while enveloped in a black cloth. Try that in public now and someone will dob you in as a lunatic or worse!)
LOL! :D

Yeah, I like to be discrete out in public...especially when I'm toting around enough gear to buy a house in Detroit with! :cool:

But, I did just now try out an on-tripod, 5 shot HDR and must say it really helped to get everything nice and straight right out of the camera! This shot is essentially as shot, with just a bit of levels corrections after the HDR merge in Photomatrix...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8584_0_1_2_3_HDRsmall.jpg



Cheers!

[djharmonix]

I really like the look of that HDR style, any tips on how to get natural results like this?

Were the windows very very strong compared to the interior lighting?
In very harsh contrast scenes I have issues with HDR, they never look natural enough for my taste.

[Ricardo222]

I really like the look of that HDR style, any tips on how to get natural results like this?

Were the windows very very strong compared to the interior lighting?
In very harsh contrast scenes I have issues with HDR, they never look natural enough for my taste.

Me too...how do you do it? HDR has been a bit of a mystery to me as well! Would be grateful for any tips about keeping it natural.

[The Ghost of FM]

Thanks guys!

I don't have any real secret process when it comes to HDR's but for indoor shots like this one, there were 5 shots taken all 2 stops apart from each other and started off by looking for an exposure that would catch the outside details first without any blown highlights showing up on the camera's screen and then worked forward from there, brightening each progressive shot by 2 stops and that covered the range of light to the point where almost the entire last shot was blown out except for the darkest shadows of the scene.

Then in post, first in DPP, I set the white balance, sharpness and color saturation and copied and pasted those setting to all 5 shots and saved them as jpegs.

Then in Photomatrix, started off with the default setting and started tweaking the controls until there was a good blend of the 5 shots and here is where there is a point which can not be universally copied as it really takes a ton of trial and error achieving that balance. Generally, I could only recommend that you start at the top of the control panel sliders and work your way down slowly and patiently seeing if the change you just made helped or hurt the image and then move on to the next control once you've gotten the previous one as good as its going to get. Once that "black art" stage is completed, I then save it again as a jpeg and then open it up in Photoshop and start tweaking it all over again to better balance out the image for best light balance and color balance and also to clone out any dust spots or other stuff that needs addressing. Then, a final resize to the 1024 limit here at potn and occasionally a dab of sharpening for the resized image.

This is what works for me and obviously, every image is going to require its own unique tweaks to get it right. You can try these steps I've outlined or you can invent your own! That's the fun of this wonderful art form. ;)

Hope that helps.

Cheers!

[Ricardo222]

Thanks guys!


This is what works for me and obviously, every image is going to require its own unique tweaks to get it right. You can try these steps I've outlined or you can invent your own! That's the fun of this wonderful art form. ;)

Hope that helps.

Cheers!

Thank you very much...nothing for it but to download Photomatix Pro and start playing!

[snowboarder]

One more processed from yesterday's outing...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8514small.jpg






To me this is just awkward.

[Ricardo222]

To me this is just awkward.

Notwithstanding the architecture, which the photograph is portraying, and the rather close viewpoint, which may or may not be forced on the photographer by circumstances or the "geography" of the location, it seems to me to be an accurate portrayal of the building. You will no doubt have your reasons for this comment. I would be keen to hear them.

[The Ghost of FM]

To me this is just awkward.
I was shooting for disturbing but I guess I can live with awkward too. ;)

Cheers!

[The Ghost of FM]

Notwithstanding the architecture, which the photograph is portraying, and the rather close viewpoint, which may or may not be forced on the photographer by circumstances or the "geography" of the location, it seems to me to be an accurate portrayal of the building. You will no doubt have your reasons for this comment. I would be keen to hear them.
I suspect its the flatter light and the straighter lines that is evoking his comments. I took a look on his website and he has shot many churches in much better light and with extreme keystone lens effects on the majority of them. I can see why he said what he did, looking at it through his eye so its cool by me. ;)

Cheers!

[snowboarder]

Notwithstanding the architecture, which the photograph is portraying, and the rather close viewpoint, which may or may not be forced on the photographer by circumstances or the "geography" of the location, it seems to me to be an accurate portrayal of the building. You will no doubt have your reasons for this comment. I would be keen to hear them.

This is just not a natural perspective our eyes see. I don't care about the flat look.
I don't like it, but some might. I think this lens' rendering is typical for Canon,
nothing really exciting. But the perspective is wrong, that's all.
I can see this lens work in a small scale interior situation, but the large scene
like this simply doesn't work. I would correct it just a little bit, but going
to the extreme to make all vertical lines parallel? Why? Because you can?

[The Ghost of FM]

This is just not a natural perspective our eyes see. I don't care about the flat look.
I don't like it, but some might. I think this lens' rendering is typical for Canon,
nothing really exciting. But the perspective is wrong, that's all.
I can see this lens work in a small scale interior situation, but the large scene
like this simply doesn't work. I would correct it just a little bit, but going
to the extreme to make all vertical lines parallel? Why? Because you can?
Many people actually feel that a TS lens will actually allow one to produce images with perspectives that are in fact far closer to how our eyes see shapes and angles but they are not perfect devices, nor are all our perceptions of reality the same. Some might argue that extreme key-stoning lens effects are extremely different then how our eyes see and even still, many people love that effect. I guess the bigger picture of all of this is to consider the fact that we all have our own tastes and preferences that make perfect sense to us but not necessarily to everyone else. I can happily like with that.

Cheers!

[windpig]

The Ghost of FM
That HDR is most excellent.

[The Ghost of FM]

The Ghost of FM
That HDR is most excellent.
Thanks and glad you liked it! :)

Cheers!

[Ricardo222]

This is just not a natural perspective our eyes see. I don't care about the flat look.
I don't like it, but some might. I think this lens' rendering is typical for Canon,
nothing really exciting. But the perspective is wrong, that's all.
I can see this lens work in a small scale interior situation, but the large scene
like this simply doesn't work. I would correct it just a little bit, but going
to the extreme to make all vertical lines parallel? Why? Because you can?

Snowboarder, it's all a matter of perspective, if you'll forgive the expression. You don't like it, and that's cool for you. The lens' rendering is nothing to do with it being a Canon or any other brand, except that it's the sharpest and widest available at present for conventional DSLRs. And Nikon has been making very fine shift lenses for longer than Canon, but away beyond that era we used a 65mm Super Angulon or wider on a 4x5 view camera, again for the same effect.
I acknowledge that the perspective sometimes looks odd to our eyes, and sometimes we "over-cook" the effect a little, but in all truth the result is more accurate, and more pleasing to the eyes of many, than pictures with madly converging verticals, except of course when that effect is being done deliberately to emphasise the height of a building.
I have seen countless pictures of cities or old European towns where there is little room to back off and get a decent perspective, where the buildings seem to grow grotesquely out of the ground at 60 degrees or even less. And pictures of vast interiors where the intentions of the architect were ruined because the photographer didn't understand that all scale and proportion would be lost because the super-wide lens was pointed up in the air and has altered the building beyond recognition.
I totally agree that not all buildings need to be photographed with "vertical" verticals, but I absolutely believe that to ignore the benefits of a shifting lens is to throw away one of the best and oldest tools that the photographer has in their arsenal. Just think, if you will, how Ansel Adams' pictures of Half Dome would have looked had he not had a rising front on his view camera....leaned over like a hill!

[bunyarra]

And pictures of vast interiors where the intentions of the architect were ruined because the photographer didn't understand that all scale and proportion would be lost because the super-wide lens was pointed up in the air and has altered the building beyond recognition.

I totally agree that not all buildings need to be photographed with "vertical" verticals, but I absolutely believe that to ignore the benefits of a shifting lens is to throw away one of the best and oldest tools that the photographer has in their arsenal. Just think, if you will, how Ansel Adams' pictures of Half Dome would have looked had he not had a rising front on his view camera....leaned over like a hill!

Indeed - it is a matter of the right lens for the right job. For my architecture clients, they insist on absolutely perfect verticals even if it looks a little odd. However, dialling in a 1 degree under correction can sometimes make all the difference - tilting in a tiny bit seems to make thing's "right".

The major issue with the 17mm is getting too close to a building that you correct - the subsequent perfect vertical lines do look most ... odd. And the same internally, chairs and sofas suddenly look like they are made for giants :)

Overall, it is a magnificent lens that I'd not be without now. Even as a normal 17mm lens it is outstanding - no CA and no distortion means my old 16-35mm II rarely seens any light.

[The Ghost of FM]

The major issue with the 17mm is getting too close to a building that you correct - the subsequent perfect vertical lines do look most ... odd. And the same internally, chairs and sofas suddenly look like they are made for giants :)
Yes, I noticed that on that last HDR shot I posted, with the near recliner chair looking outrageously elongated! With that in mind, I tried the shot again from a greater distance to see if it could be tamed a bit and think that it came out a bit better this time...though I couldn't get the image to pop quite as much due to the daylight being a bit grayer today...



http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h250/thefontmeister/VV4G8636_37_38_39_40_HDRsmall.jpg



Cheers!

[djharmonix]

This is just not a natural perspective our eyes see. I don't care about the flat look.
I don't like it, but some might. I think this lens' rendering is typical for Canon,
nothing really exciting. But the perspective is wrong, that's all.
I can see this lens work in a small scale interior situation, but the large scene
like this simply doesn't work. I would correct it just a little bit, but going
to the extreme to make all vertical lines parallel? Why? Because you can?

Although I think the church posted by ghost of FM wasn't geometrically pefect, it's definetly closer to reality than the shots you took in Firenze.
Don't get me wrong, I really like your shots and everything. But they are so distorted and far from what your eyes see, it's totally different work altogether.

Go in front of any building and tell me your eyes see this (if your eyes work like this you need serious glasses)

http://www.lightandpictures.com/Italy/pictures/5dii_8081.jpg

Now this is a shot I took with the lens shifted almost all the way:

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123031071/original.jpg

Again that's exactly how my eyes saw the building when I was standing across the street from it, the only way to get this look is with a tilt/shift lens.

[Ricardo222]

Indeed - it is a matter of the right lens for the right job. For my architecture clients, they insist on absolutely perfect verticals even if it looks a little odd. However, dialling in a 1 degree under correction can sometimes make all the difference - tilting in a tiny bit seems to make thing's "right".


Well said Bunyarra...it's about what the eye "thinks" it sees as correct.

Djharmonix illustrates it perfectly with those two pictures of buildings. His skyscraper shot looks majestic and real while the street-scape of Florence is a parody. The good folks of Pisa will have to look to their famous tower!

A quickly and not very well done alteration in photoshop, which of course reduced the wide-angle effect by having to crop a lot of the photo away, to my mind demonstrates a good compromise. From the same viewpoint that Snowboarder used for his picture a more real capture could be made using a shift lens, but not necessarily to it's full limits. I totally agree with Snowboarder that always striving for perfect verticals is not either necessary or desirable, but that's where judgement comes in.

[djharmonix]

fooled around yesterday while waiting for the sun to set!

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123278744/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nicolasshapiro/image/123278704/original.jpg

[snowboarder]

Well said Bunyarra...it's about what the eye "thinks" it sees as correct.

Djharmonix illustrates it perfectly with those two pictures of buildings. His skyscraper shot looks majestic and real while the street-scape of Florence is a parody. The good folks of Pisa will have to look to their famous tower!

A quickly and not very well done alteration in photoshop...


Sorry, I like my original shot 100x better...

[Ricardo222]

Sorry, I like my original shot 100x better...

But of course, why wouldn't you?

[aureliandan]

Sorry, I like my original shot 100x better...

snowboarder I don't know what to think, the tower from Florence has the same inclination like the tower of Pisa ? I will be there this summer to see with me eyes but I think your picture does not reflect the reality, it could be an artistic one but far from reality.
Nikon or Canon these lenses are created to do what our brain do ... reflect the reality ... your eyes lies ... on your cornea you see the image of the tower upside down and tilted but your brain act like photoshop telling you .. hey, this is not the reality, the tower should be vertical ... and this is your final perception :)

[snowboarder]

But of course, why wouldn't you?

In addition to everything you also destroyed my colors, which I don't like at all.