I've been thinking about the 45mm TS-E lens and why I won't buy it, but realized there were several TS-E upgrades that in general I would like. Specifically:
i) Sharpness into the corners. The 45mm is a good example of this, can't sharpen across the frame even when stopped down a long way. I know there's field curvature with TS-E designs, but geez! The 24mm TS-E ii performs much better in this regard. IMHO this should be mandatory for landscape and architectural work.
ii) Wider maximum aperture. With the 45-55mm range, I would like an f/2 or f/1.8 if possible. Yeah, that may push the filter size beyond 82mm and therefore out of range of the Cokin P style filter systems which are widely used. Yeah, I could adjust to that (up to a Lee 150 system) and the higher price. One of my uses for TS-E's in landscape is focus slicing across the frame, and shallower depth of field could enhance this.
iii) Put a tripod ring on the darned thing! Sheesh! Users should be shifting the camera relative to the lens anyway for pano stitching and the like. Start making the feet on these rings Arca-Swiss compatible, too, please. [All lens feet for lenses over 2 lbs. should have multiple threaded mount points, too!]
iv) I would still like a longer TS-E with macro or near-macro focus capability (maybe to half life size if 1:1 isn't reasonable). Yeah, I love macro work.
The original TS-E 24mm has been upgraded well even though the mark ii lacks the integrated tripod ring. But both the 45mm and 90mm have been around a long time (though the latter seems reasonably sharp and contrasty in tests and perhaps therefore is less due for an update). The 17mm is more recent than the first TS-Es. Anyone have other thoughts about possible improvements, particularly for different applications like product photography or video which I don't do much of? How about other focal lengths for the set?
i) Sharpness into the corners. The 45mm is a good example of this, can't sharpen across the frame even when stopped down a long way. I know there's field curvature with TS-E designs, but geez! The 24mm TS-E ii performs much better in this regard. IMHO this should be mandatory for landscape and architectural work.
ii) Wider maximum aperture. With the 45-55mm range, I would like an f/2 or f/1.8 if possible. Yeah, that may push the filter size beyond 82mm and therefore out of range of the Cokin P style filter systems which are widely used. Yeah, I could adjust to that (up to a Lee 150 system) and the higher price. One of my uses for TS-E's in landscape is focus slicing across the frame, and shallower depth of field could enhance this.
iii) Put a tripod ring on the darned thing! Sheesh! Users should be shifting the camera relative to the lens anyway for pano stitching and the like. Start making the feet on these rings Arca-Swiss compatible, too, please. [All lens feet for lenses over 2 lbs. should have multiple threaded mount points, too!]
iv) I would still like a longer TS-E with macro or near-macro focus capability (maybe to half life size if 1:1 isn't reasonable). Yeah, I love macro work.
The original TS-E 24mm has been upgraded well even though the mark ii lacks the integrated tripod ring. But both the 45mm and 90mm have been around a long time (though the latter seems reasonably sharp and contrasty in tests and perhaps therefore is less due for an update). The 17mm is more recent than the first TS-Es. Anyone have other thoughts about possible improvements, particularly for different applications like product photography or video which I don't do much of? How about other focal lengths for the set?
) , it doesn't look there's much space for a tripod ring in the actual design. Maybe a detachable tripod "foot", yet it should leave enough space for controls, even when rotated, and still avoid to introduce vibrations. Still, it looks it would require a lens re-design.
