Italy Trip Lens Advice - wide angle

[t.linn]

For the TS-E 17 you will def need a tripod for about very shot as it is quite time intense to set up and you need to be quite precise when setting up ... This is one of worst lenses for handheld shooting ...   

As someone who owns and uses the 17 and 24, I can tell you that you are incorrect as it pertains to the OP's question.  If you are, for example, in a field of flowers and are trying to alter the plane of focus to achieve what appears to be infinite focus from near foreground to background then, yes, you absolutely need a tripod and preferably a DSLR with live view to aid with focusing.  This technique involves TILTING the lens.

If you are shooting architecture and simply want to avoid the obnoxious perspective distortion that comes with pointing an ultra wide angle lens up or down then no tripod is necessary.  You simply hold the camera level, SHIFT the lens up or down, focus like you normally would (manually, of course) and press the shutter button.  It is not an iterative process like tilting.  The only reason you would need a tripod is lack of light, a situation which affects non tilt-shifts as well.

You can correct perspective distortion in software but this isn't an ideal work around.  Correcting in software necessarily involves cropping away part of the original image.  This can dramatically reduce a lens' effective angle of view making it very difficult to compose in the field.  The more the lens is pointed up, the narrower the final angle of view becomes after correction.  (IOW, your 17mm lens may provide you with a post-correction 35mm angle of view.)  But you can always stitch multiple images together to compensate, right?  If you've tried you know that it's not as easy as it sounds if the images being stitched contain severe perspective distortion.  And I guarantee that the time you "save" by not having to turn a shift knob and manually focus is more than lost in front of the computer.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that everyone needs a tilt-shift but there are always misconceptions about them when a discussion like this one comes up.  They are a unique tool particularly well suited to photographing architecture. 

Another solution is to use the 16-35 and just leave the perspective distortion uncorrected.  Trey Ratcliff does this all the time with his 14-24.  It drives me crazy but there are many people that don't seem to notice or care.

[briansquibb]

For the TS-E 17 you will def need a tripod for about very shot as it is quite time intense to set up and you need to be quite precise when setting up ... This is one of worst lenses for handheld shooting ...   

As someone who owns and uses the 17 and 24, I can tell you that you are incorrect as it pertains to the OP's question.  If you are, for example, in a field of flowers and are trying to alter the plane of focus to achieve what appears to be infinite focus from near foreground to background then, yes, you absolutely need a tripod and preferably a DSLR with live view to aid with focusing.  This technique involves TILTING the lens.

If you are shooting architecture and simply want to avoid the obnoxious perspective distortion that comes with pointing an ultra wide angle lens up or down then no tripod is necessary.  You simply hold the camera level, SHIFT the lens up or down, focus like you normally would (manually, of course) and press the shutter button.  It is not an iterative process like tilting.  The only reason you would need a tripod is lack of light, a situation which affects non tilt-shifts as well.

You can correct perspective distortion in software but this isn't an ideal work around.  Correcting in software necessarily involves cropping away part of the original image.  This can dramatically reduce a lens' effective angle of view making it very difficult to compose in the field.  The more the lens is pointed up, the narrower the final angle of view becomes after correction.  (IOW, your 17mm lens may provide you with a post-correction 35mm angle of view.)  But you can always stitch multiple images together to compensate, right?  If you've tried you know that it's not as easy as it sounds if the images being stitched contain severe perspective distortion.  And I guarantee that the time you "save" by not having to turn a shift knob and manually focus is more than lost in front of the computer.

Anyway, I'm not arguing that everyone needs a tilt-shift but there are always misconceptions about them when a discussion like this one comes up.  They are a unique tool particularly well suited to photographing architecture. 

Another solution is to use the 16-35 and just leave the perspective distortion uncorrected.  Trey Ratcliff does this all the time with his 14-24.  It drives me crazy but there are many people that don't seem to notice or care.

I use my TSE-24 as much as a standard (and very sharp) wa as I do with tilt shift. Means I didn't have to buy a standard 24mm

[KeeKay]

Hi, I just came home from Italia and this is what I got from 16-35 2.8L on a 5D Mark II.
I have most of my files in RAW+M, but haven't post processing any files yet, so this is a Medium file.....
That lense was very useful to me.
Have a nice trip.
 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

Hi, I just came home from Italia and this is what I got from 16-35 2.8L on a 5D Mark II.
I have most of my files in RAW+M, but haven't post processing any files yet, so this is a Medium file.....
That lense was very useful to me.
Have a nice trip.
 

Hell of a lot of distortion there that building looks a little slopey. Couldn't you have fixed that in Lightroom? 

[KeeKay]

No problem.......
    

[kirispupis]

Just thought I would second that you do not need a tripod if you are using only the shift part of a TS lens.  With the 5D3 now having a leveler in the viewfinder, I find that it is not too difficult to make sure the camera is level when photographing handheld.

This shot is one example (look at the buildings, not the bridge - which is sloping downwards) - http://www.flickr.com/photos/calevphoto/6953968306/#in/set-72157629868907887

I'll be in Italy myself in a few weeks.

[1982chris911]

Just to remind you the OP said he wants to take interior pictures of churches. With an f4.0 lens like the 17mm TSE he would need a tripod in any case for this. Even ISO 3200 to 6400 is not enough to get handheld shots without motion blur if the places are quite dark like most churches there...   

[wickidwombat]

just get a shorty forty and stitch panoramas

[adhocphotographer]

My advice (for what it is worth):

You have the 16-35, and 24-105, i think you are covered! You've got a great set-up, you will be able to do 99% of the shots you want (barring wild-life)! If I was to suggest getting one thing, it would be a nifty-fifty of some sort, 1.8 or faster, for night time street photog, because that is when Italy tends to come alive (in summer anyway)!

Forget tripods etc...  You will always find something to rest your cam on a wall (vertical or horizontal), pew, font etc… They add bulk and weight!

I travel a fair bit, and have the general conclusion that less is often more!
You’re going to have a great time, enjoy!

[briansquibb]

My advice (for what it is worth):

You have the 16-35, and 24-105, i think you are covered!

+1

[ramon123]

The 24-105 is great for walking around, it's a "do it all" lens. Remember when going on holiday, one doesn't want to be carrying around so many things, so limit it to 1-2 lenses.