Canon will introduce new tilt-shift lenses with a high-megapixel camera [CR2]

[David - Sydney]

We're talking about E-commerce. No shelf. Canon USA does not sell it's prosumer cameras, lenses, or Cine equipment via a "Distributor". Buyer, Seller, Shipping, Warehouse management. For e-commerce. (preorders and first come first serve selling e-commerce is NOT brick and mortar). Period. it is precisely how automated inventory (WMS) and warehousing (ASRS) works in large vendor warehousing. With Incoterms rules being the standard for shipping and delivery, NOT the old "brick and mortar" chain methodoloy that you are familiar and refering to. Consumer purchases directly from the warehouse inventory via online e-commerce. Automated warehousing (WMS) has become a staple for mass inventory in North America. The seller may or not be responsible for the purchaser's "Distributor" beyond the point of deliver determined by the Incoterm coding. The number purchased and WMS has nada to do with the shipping/distribution. Warehousing and Inventory management are the growth drivers of e-commerce.
A familiarization with the Incoterms rules may help you differentiate before assuming incorrectly any similarity.

Incoterms® 2020 - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce

Features an in-depth introduction to help users select the appropriate Incoterms® rule for their sale transaction and incorporates expanded explanatory notes for users at the start of each Incoterms® rule.

iccwbo.org

I'm familiar with Incoterms and international logistics and distribution but I am not sure about your point is linking Incoterms and distribution model.

Incoterms don't care about which model is used. They only define shipping costs and risk/insurance between buyer and seller with IoR and EoR in different scenarios. They specifically do not cover transfer of title ie who owns the item or holds a lien on the item at any point in time or whether the item is on consignment with the seller.
Incoterms are generally not used for domestic shipping within the US in any case but of course can be. The common use of FOB within the US is incorrect except in very specific circumstances not related to shipping cameras

WMS and ASRS can be used for different distribution models from centralised warehouse per country or hub/spoke/edge stocking points or even build to order. Forecast models for inventory management can be from a simple reorder point system to AI based.
E-commerce just means buying online whether B2B or C2B and independent of stocking models.
Minimising inventory is cheaper for everyone but there is always a risk the just-in-time manufacturing will break down due to political, disaster, Covid, shipping (Evergreen's Ever Given) or bottlenecks (eg global semiconductor fab constraints) or a combination of these

 

[symmar22]

The idea that autofocus for TS lenses is a great feature is nearly idiotic unless the autofocus they employ takes into account the changes in the plane of focus manipulation afforded by these lenses. The use of TS lenses requires a slow and careful tuning of the tilting “front standard”. To make the new models AF lenses, just for non-tilt use, is senseless overkill, and the careful process of tilting and shifting a lens clearly invites manual focus.

I am with you here, I am afraid the trend is into going über-everything. All lenses must be 1.2, or full of features most people don't need. But as the market is shrinking, I guess manufacturers need to sell innovation at any cost. Though I am sure it's a good lens, the 100mm macro R seems a bit over-engineered too; while 1.4:1 macro is not a bad idea, the SA control (a copy of what Nikon made in 1990 with the 100mm and 135mm f2 Defocus Image Control), is IMO a gimmicky feature that leads to over complicated and expensive lenses).

About the fact that it could attract new user, I don't agree, TS-E lenses are expensive specialized lenses, and most people don't even know how to use them. I don't thing adding AF and selling them for 4000$ will actually attract more people. You invest in these lenses when you work with a tripod, which means you have time to compose ,focus and shift carefully. Lousy focus by wire is the last thing you need on these lenses.

When I started working as an assistant my boss was using a Horseman LX-C 4x5 view camera with integrated computer that was giving you the required DOF based on the lens you were using; though it didn't seem a bad idea at the time, he ended never using it, since it was in fact just a gimmick. None of the major view camera manufacturer of the era ever copied the idea since it was just plain useless. I still work sometimes with a 4x5 and it's not a feature I miss.

 

[Antono Refa]

A tilt-shift lens with a focal length of 14mm and auto focus? Dayum!

 

[JohnC]

A tilt-shift lens with a focal length of 14mm and auto focus? Dayum!

While this will be a great lens regardless, I'm very interested to seeing if there is a method of accepting filters (drop in or other-wise). The use of ND filters and CPL filters is almost a necessity for certain kinds of photography, and helpful in many others.

 

[Del Paso]

AF would make these new TS lenses more practical when used as a ‘normal’ lens and therefore more attractive to a wider audience.

You are basically right, the rub is that a "normal" audience - not really in need of TS features- won't accept to pay as much as for instance the TS Nikon 19mm costs. The Canon will also have AF, so, I'm afraid it could be very very $$$$$$$. On the other hand, a non-TS 14mm plus the 17mm TSE aren't inexpensive either...and one lens is lighter than two in an already crammed backpack.
But for pro users, the RF 14 TS will become a fascinating and useful tool.

 

[Hector1970]

I have a 24 mm TS-E II and chose it because it was a more flexible focal length and could easily take filter. The bulbous 17mm and a more complex filter set up pushed me infavour of the 24mm. Can I ask the owners of a 17mm whether a 14mm is attractive and where would it be used to best advantage. Is it interiors or would it also be desirable for architecture?

 

[NKD]

I dont think i can wait til 2022.. Unless we get some prelim specs announced.
Then, the 5dsR's will have to keep going strong.

AF on a 14 & 24, inst that helpful, as I am generally on a sturdy tripod, styling shots, shooting archi,
Imagine AF will be useful,, especially if you can hand hold this megapixel monster with IBIS & AMAZING HDR, with only 1 exposure needed! Not 2-3 exposure on the 5dsR's

I would make my switch now to the R5, terrible battery life... and feels tacky
IF there was a ... 35 - 90mm TS ZOOM lens coming! OR ANY 35mm SHIFT LENS..

GFX 100 / 100s / 50s2 may be on the cards with all the EF Tilt shifts.
Using it with the 35mm crop mode enables, so the Canon glass is like for like...
..Except for the Red / Orange tinting Canon apply to their lens element, that only works with their sensors.

Perhaps Canons new MP monster will have crop features inbuilt.
- Possible MF larger than FF sensor? = 100+MP with 4:3 ratio
- 35mm FF Sensor mode = standard ratio. ~80mp
- Crop modes (1.4 / 1.6), where the 14mm becomes 17mm & the 24mm becomes the much desired 35mm ~ 50mp being still usable.

 

[NKD]

I have a 24 mm TS-E II and chose it because it was a more flexible focal length and could easily take filter. The bulbous 17mm and a more complex filter set up pushed me infavour of the 24mm. Can I ask the owners of a 17mm whether a 14mm is attractive and where would it be used to best advantage. Is it interiors or would it also be desirable for architecture?

Heya, I have the Laowa 12mm.. (24mm is wide enough - 17mm for when you cant fit it in.)
The 12mm comes on most half / full day architecture shoots, it gets used for ~1 shot for every ~6 photo shoots.
Then the image is generally cropped to a 3:4 ratio / insta ratio;
My other reason was for the odd astro use.

Could even get the same shot with the 17 with a few shots stitched,
Although I have it because of the desire not to stitch in post & only realize I dint get the image, that I cant go back to shoot..

I shoot for designers / architects. Imagine it would be used for real estate.
The 12-24mm would be the best for run an gun real estate, keeping 1 lens on with AF.

Laowa also have some other lens I believe that are cheaper an F4, instead of F2.8. + they are small

Further, I have a Nisi s6 adapter kit with the 105mm CPL and all of their 150mm GRADS..
..They just sit in my car, never really used.. I did like the night filter, thought this was great, once you figure out how to neutrilize the color cast in post.
Very cumbersome to attach any GRADS or large CPLs to both the 17 & 24mm filter threads.

 

[jam05]

It will be interesting to see how autofocus would work on a seriously tilted lens. With the current 24mm and 17mm, I used the manual focus to get something focused, and then adjusted the tilt to get everything else I wanted in focus. If you motorized the tilt and had serious computing power in the camera, that could work. Or at the other extreme, it might just work as autofocus in situations with little or no tilt, just so they could say it was autofocus for advertising purposes.

Maybe some time this will bring the TS-E models down to my price range.

For portraits it shouldn't be complicated for the user. Not much to overthink. Shoot and compose as normal except use the Eye AF algorithm that Canon has exceeded in to do the AF while concentrating on composition and TS Scheimflug. Should not take long to master. Certainly not as long to master than TS using total manual focus.

 

[jam05]

The fear and tedius time consuming adventure of using TS, learning Scheimflug principles and while manual focusing has kept many from purchasing TS lenses and shy away from the art. Even with knowledge, fast tethering setups, practical application may not often award the user with an in focus subject to their liking. This may soon change.

 

[Ozarker]

Ah, I wish... that would be the publishers.
The last involvement I had with the book was checking proofs last year.
The US launch of the book was delayed quite a bit.

I'll be getting your book, Keith, for my birthday next month. Just now pre-ordered on Amazon USA. Now I just need to figure out which tilt/shift lens to get when the time comes.

 

[Del Paso]

I'll be getting your book, Keith, for my birthday next month. Just now pre-ordered on Amazon USA. Now I just need to figure out which tilt/shift lens to get when the time comes.

Easy!
For "Bear State" you need a TSE 1200mm.

 

[Ozarker]

Easy!
For "Bear State" you need a TSE 1200mm.

Are you in Arkansas?

 

[privatebydesign]

The more I see the price and complexity of these new tools the more I appreciate being stuck in the EF world!

 

[stevelee]

I am with you here, I am afraid the trend is into going über-everything. All lenses must be 1.2, or full of features most people don't need. But as the market is shrinking, I guess manufacturers need to sell innovation at any cost. Though I am sure it's a good lens, the 100mm macro R seems a bit over-engineered too; while 1.4:1 macro is not a bad idea, the SA control (a copy of what Nikon made in 1990 with the 100mm and 135mm f2 Defocus Image Control), is IMO a gimmicky feature that leads to over complicated and expensive lenses).

About the fact that it could attract new user, I don't agree, TS-E lenses are expensive specialized lenses, and most people don't even know how to use them. I don't thing adding AF and selling them for 4000$ will actually attract more people. You invest in these lenses when you work with a tripod, which means you have time to compose ,focus and shift carefully. Lousy focus by wire is the last thing you need on these lenses.

When I started working as an assistant my boss was using a Horseman LX-C 4x5 view camera with integrated computer that was giving you the required DOF based on the lens you were using; though it didn't seem a bad idea at the time, he ended never using it, since it was in fact just a gimmick. None of the major view camera manufacturer of the era ever copied the idea since it was just plain useless. I still work sometimes with a 4x5 and it's not a feature I miss.

I rented a couple of TS-E lenses last year and had a lot of fun and took some photos I like. But I concluded that I wouldn’t use one enough to justify buying one. Or maybe more accurately, I didn’t really want one enough to part with the money. I may change my mind some time and buy the 24mm, knowing going in that it is not that rational a thing to do. I have enough money lying around to support a couple impulse purchases from what I haven’t spent on travel, etc., over the last 14 months. So that’s not the issue.

So I have a hard time seeing any broad appeal for spending $3,000+ for similar lenses by folk who haven’t used one just because they could also be used for casual snapshots.

 

[stevelee]

A tilt-shift lens with a focal length of 14mm and auto focus? Dayum!

I did such a poor job adjusting to the 17mm lens during my rental period that I am not tempted by the idea of a 14mm one. I did get some nice outdoor shots, including panoramas. But I did not manage anything decent indoors, not even interesting for their wackiness. I realize that it is a bread-and-butter lens for a fair number of real estate photographers and the like, and if I did that work, I’d learn to use it when needed.

 

[Antono Refa]

While this will be a great lens regardless, I'm very interested to seeing if there is a method of accepting filters (drop in or other-wise). The use of ND filters and CPL filters is almost a necessity for certain kinds of photography, and helpful in many others.

AFAIK, the TS-E 17mm requires a 150mm square filter. I would be surprised if a 14mm tilt-shift could do with smaller front filters. IIRC, the TS-E lenses have plenty of space next to the mount for drop in filters, so I hope for a drop in filter.

 

[Antono Refa]

I did such a poor job adjusting to the 17mm lens during my rental period that I am not tempted by the idea of a 14mm one. I did get some nice outdoor shots, including panoramas. But I did not manage anything decent indoors, not even interesting for their wackiness. I realize that it is a bread-and-butter lens for a fair number of real estate photographers and the like, and if I did that work, I’d learn to use it when needed.

It would be an impressive technological fit, if nothing else. After Canon released the TS-E 17mm, it took Nikon about five(?) years to release the PC-E 19mm.

 

[Tamerlane]

I am with you here, I am afraid the trend is into going über-everything. All lenses must be 1.2, or full of features most people don't need. But as the market is shrinking, I guess manufacturers need to sell innovation at any cost. Though I am sure it's a good lens, the 100mm macro R seems a bit over-engineered too; while 1.4:1 macro is not a bad idea, the SA control (a copy of what Nikon made in 1990 with the 100mm and 135mm f2 Defocus Image Control), is IMO a gimmicky feature that leads to over complicated and expensive lenses).

About the fact that it could attract new user, I don't agree, TS-E lenses are expensive specialized lenses, and most people don't even know how to use them. I don't thing adding AF and selling them for 4000$ will actually attract more people. You invest in these lenses when you work with a tripod, which means you have time to compose ,focus and shift carefully. Lousy focus by wire is the last thing you need on these lenses.

When I started working as an assistant my boss was using a Horseman LX-C 4x5 view camera with integrated computer that was giving you the required DOF based on the lens you were using; though it didn't seem a bad idea at the time, he ended never using it, since it was in fact just a gimmick. None of the major view camera manufacturer of the era ever copied the idea since it was just plain useless. I still work sometimes with a 4x5 and it's not a feature I miss.

"You invest in these lenses when you work with a tripod,"
My 17mm TSE + EOS 5DSR have been fine handheld outdoors, and even down to 1/25 indoors - few private spaces, like churches or government buildings, let you set up a tripod without going through cumbersome permission applications. I've lost some shots because the infinity setting of the 17mm is not at the end of the dial and gets knocked out of place easily, so autofocus might overcome this (a focus lock would have been even better).

 

[RoyE]

One of the features I really like about the EF to R adapter is the behind the lens polarizer. This makes the 17mm much easier to deal with. I'm wondering if the new 14 and 24 t/s lenses would have that capability