I'm done - I have all the lenses I need

[mackguyver]

Yes, with my camera - I posted a few of the photos in the Anything shot with a 1dx thread. Probably not the smartest thing to do, but I still have all of my appendages...and gator tail is interesting to eat...

Sagittarian - both of my focus rings feel about the same or at least I've haven't noticed any significant difference when using them side-by-side. Tilt does affect verticals, but you can compensate for it by tweaking your ballhead a hair. I'm sure a geared head would be nice and someday I might get one. I'm no expert by any means, but I don't think the collars are needed unless your work has to be absolutely perfect, as in 98% is not acceptable. I think PBD has some opinions on this given his previous posts.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If your camera has a built in level (I use a pair of 5DIII's) and you are using a tripod. Which you should be with a TS-e lens...the more stable the better, ideally without a centre column and the best quality ball head you can afford. I use a Gitzo GT3541LS with spikes and a Markins M80 head. On your camera, call up the built in level and correct the left and right pitch using the tripod. Once level, then correct the pitch using your tripod (forwards / backwards tilt) using the same level, it's the bit in the middle which goes up or down. Once corrected, then apply the lens shift function to bring the object into the frame...once placed in the frame the lens shift has corrected your perspective and no further adjustment (apart from fine focussing) is required. This is the correct (and upto now) undocumented method for correcting verticles with a TS-e lens. It's a no brainer with this technique and works every time and stops under or over correction of the shift function.

I would avoid hotshoe spirit bubbles....there'a massive degree of manufacturing error in the plastic bases. I have three than they all vary wildly. The in build camera level seems really accurate, as was the one on my iphone 4s....but my new iphone 5s is permanently off by quite a few degrees.

 

[mackguyver]

If your camera has a built in level (I use a pair of 5DIII's) and you are using a tripod. Which you should be with a TS-e lens...the more stable the better, ideally without a centre column and the best quality ball head you can afford. I use a Gitzo GT3541LS with spikes and a Markins M80 head. On your camera, call up the built in level and correct the left and right pitch using the tripod. Once level, then correct the pitch using your tripod (forwards / backwards tilt) using the same level, it's the bit in the middle which goes up or down. Once corrected, then apply the lens shift function to bring the object into the frame...once placed in the frame the lens shift has corrected your perspective and no further adjustment (apart from fine focussing) is required. This is the correct (and upto now) undocumented method for correcting verticles with a TS-e lens. It's a no brainer with this technique and works every time and stops under or over correction of the shift function.

I would avoid hotshoe spirit bubbles....there'a massive degree of manufacturing error in the plastic bases. I have three than they all vary wildly. The in build camera level seems really accurate, as was the one on my iphone 4s....but my new iphone 5s is permanently off by quite a few degrees.

GMC, thanks for the additional detail - I know you've been at this for a while. I've tried the tripod method, but seem to get more reliable results by using the camera's built-in level. I get the camera perfectly level on all axes and then I pitch the lens up one (in-camera-level) line and fine tune from there as needed. It's essentially the same as the leg idea, but allows me to be sure that the leg adjustment doesn't throw off another axis, especially if I'm not on level ground. I like that it's repeatable for a sequence of photos and the first line below/above level (depending on how you see it) seems to be just right for most work. It's no good with a lightweight tripod/head, but works well with good support gear.

The hotshoe levels are atrociously off, mine all have Sharpie marks to show where true level is, but thankfully both of my primary camera have the levels built in now, so I can throw them away! I can't speak for iPhones...but my Google Nexus 5 is incredibly accurate according to an app I just downloaded. Hadn't though of using my phone...

Also, I had to do some art reproduction over the weekend that was a pain to light because of where it was mounted, and there was no way to get the tripod where I needed it. The TS-E 24 II + 1.4x III saved the day by allowing me to shift the painting into view!

 

[sagittariansrock]

If your camera has a built in level (I use a pair of 5DIII's) and you are using a tripod. Which you should be with a TS-e lens...the more stable the better, ideally without a centre column and the best quality ball head you can afford. I use a Gitzo GT3541LS with spikes and a Markins M80 head. On your camera, call up the built in level and correct the left and right pitch using the tripod. Once level, then correct the pitch using your tripod (forwards / backwards tilt) using the same level, it's the bit in the middle which goes up or down. Once corrected, then apply the lens shift function to bring the object into the frame...once placed in the frame the lens shift has corrected your perspective and no further adjustment (apart from fine focussing) is required. This is the correct (and upto now) undocumented method for correcting verticles with a TS-e lens. It's a no brainer with this technique and works every time and stops under or over correction of the shift function.

I would avoid hotshoe spirit bubbles....there'a massive degree of manufacturing error in the plastic bases. I have three than they all vary wildly. The in build camera level seems really accurate, as was the one on my iphone 4s....but my new iphone 5s is permanently off by quite a few degrees.

Thanks for the advice. As I understand slight under correction of shift will be preferable.
According to Merklinger, the problem with verticals is associated with tilt. He says that when you change the tilt to change plane of focus, you will see the verticals have changed. So a bit of back and forth is needed, unlike in view cameras.
Clearly not a big problem if PBD with so many years of professional experience says so.
I am aching to try out my toys but first bad weather and now bad health is holding me back. Soon, though...
Thanks all for the helpful advice. I usually follow protocols to the T before being completely familiar with something (from my days at the Molecular Biology bench)

 

[privatebydesign]

Thanks for the advice. As I understand slight under correction of shift will be preferable.
According to Merklinger, the problem with verticals is associated with tilt. He says that when you change the tilt to change plane of focus, you will see the verticals have changed. So a bit of back and forth is needed, unlike in view cameras.
Clearly not a big problem if PBD with so many years of professional experience says so.
I am aching to try out my toys but first bad weather and now bad health is holding me back. Soon, though...
Thanks all for the helpful advice. I usually follow protocols to the T before being completely familiar with something (from my days at the Molecular Biology bench)

The tilt plane changing the verticals is a "feature" of retrofocus tilt lens designs, on view cameras none of the lenses are retrofocus, unfortunately with the 42mm registration distance for the EF lenses the 17, 24 and the 45 all suffer from this effect, the 17 quite severely.

When I got mine I did some tests that showed almost all the forward tilt is actually used up by the necessity to use reverse tilt, or rear tilt, to re straighten verticals. Having said that, in the field I have rarely (never so far) been forward tilting to the max whilst needing totally oof rendered verticals parallel, though this is one situation where the 135 format T/S lenses cannot compete with technical cameras.

So I dug up the tests I did. It is important to understand what is going on here so forgive me if I don't explain it well.

Image 1: I set the camera up with a level to be perpendicular to the ground and parallel to the posts, through the viewfinder everything was straight and level. I then applied full forward tilt of 8º on the lens only and did nothing else, that is the first image, as you can see the posts lean in a lot at the bottom, this is the "characteristic" of retrofocus tilt lenses, and it kind of sucks.

Image 2: I then looked through the viewfinder and tilted the whole camera back until I had the posts parallel again and took image two.

Image 3: I then took a picture of the camera illustrating how far back you have to tilt to get the posts parallel again.

Now this looks pretty dramatic, but as I pointed out, in actual shooting situations the need for extreme tilt and close quarters parallel lines is not something I have encountered, though it does limit tilt use for interiors if you are using very short J distances. However for normal 40"-48" height interior shots it is no issue as the tilt required by a 17mm lens at that distance is >1º if you are even using tilt.

Hope this helps.

 

[mackguyver]

privatebydesign, thanks for sharing more great information and the shot of the camera with tilt corrected is quite interesting to see. I've shot nearly all of my interiors with a Tokina 11-16 or 16-35 II, so it's going to take some time to get used to the TS-E 17mm. I haven't had any interior work come up in a while, but might play around at my house, but I'm loving the lens for landscapes. Nice pool, btw.

 

[privatebydesign]

So I was reading Harry Merklinger's article and found tilt affecting vertical lines in my case too. Apparently the overpriced tripod mount solves that. I want to see if I can find a DIY way around it.

No the overpriced tripod mount doesn't solve that, it just moves it. It moves it from a front tilt with rear tilt correction, to a rear tilt with front tilt correction. All the mount does is enable easier parallax free stitching, though I have yet to take an image where PS hasn't sorted all that out for me anyway. Image impacting parallax is difficult to induce in stitched 17mm images, though if you try really hard you can do it.

I can't advise staying away from the idea of the lens mount enough even those who advocate for it strongly don't end up using it.

One thing I can highly recommend for the 17 TS-E though is the Fottodiox Wonderpana filter system, it is the only filter system I have seen that allows 100% shift, not only that but it allows 100% shift and some tilt, or max tilt and a little shift, far and away the best filter solution on the market.

 

[privatebydesign]

privatebydesign, thanks for sharing more great information and the shot of the camera with tilt corrected is quite interesting to see. I've shot nearly all of my interiors with a Tokina 11-16 or 16-35 II, so it's going to take some time to get used to the TS-E 17mm. I haven't had any interior work come up in a while, but might play around at my house, but I'm loving the lens for landscapes. Nice pool, btw.

Hey you are welcome, at heart I am all about spreading good information. As for the pool, you know where it is and you are welcome any day you are over heated.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Thanks for the information, PBD.
I was able to go out after a bout of rain followed by bout of fever. Wasn't able to do much other than take my first shifted image of a high-rise. Nothing special... at all. But I am taking baby steps.
Hand held, 1/25s, 1/100, no tilt.

Wonder if it needed less stretching...

 

[privatebydesign]

sagittariansrock, nice building, the sort of thing the 17 was made for.

One thing I do with big shifts is resize on the shifted axis but not on the other axis, many might say it is sacrilege and you lose IQ, but the truth is the building gets compressed in the shifted axis, I normally resample 10% - 25% or so more to give the building back its height and haven't had any real issue with IQ.

Here is another test I did with mine when I got it, the first shot is full shift and as shot, the second has been resampled on the shifted axis only, in this case an extreme 30%, that is what it took to get the building back to the actual proportions of the real life structure. But I was very close and used max shift, normally not so much resampling is needed and you need to strike a better balance between IQ and actual proportions.

 

[sagittariansrock]

sagittariansrock, nice building, the sort of thing the 17 was made for.

One thing I do with big shifts is resize on the shifted axis but not on the other axis, many might say it is sacrilege and you lose IQ, but the truth is the building gets compressed in the shifted axis, I normally resample 10% - 25% or so more to give the building back its height and haven't had any real issue with IQ.

Here is another test I did with mine when I got it, the first shot is full shift and as shot, the second has been resampled on the shifted axis only, in this case an extreme 30%, that is what it took to get the building back to the actual proportions of the real life structure. But I was very close and used max shift, normally not so much resampling is needed and you need to strike a better balance between IQ and actual proportions.

Thanks, there are some interesting buildings in the Texas Medical Center.
I see what you are saying- the building gets squished in the shifted axis. How would you stretch it in LR?

One more question to whoever has switched the small shift knob for the bigger one (yes, Canon delivered the spare!)- how does one go about getting a driver for that odd little screw-head? I was lucky to stop before I used my Philips-head and stripped it!

 

[privatebydesign]

McMaster Carr has good ones for very reasonable money.

http://www.mcmaster.com/#jis-%28japanese-industrial-standard%29-screwdrivers/=s9rn76

 

[sagittariansrock]

McMaster Carr has good ones for very reasonable money.

http://www.mcmaster.com/#jis-%28japanese-industrial-standard%29-screwdrivers/=s9rn76

Japanese industrial standard, eh? Cool, thanks so much for the info. I've done a lot of business with McMaster-Carr. Very nice people to work with.

 

[privatebydesign]

"How would you stretch it in LR?"

You would have to use the Export dialog box, the bit about Image Size, you can change to resample, you can then set it to reimport the new file.

 

[sagittariansrock]

"How would you stretch it in LR?"

You would have to use the Export dialog box, the bit about Image Size, you can change to resample, you can then set it to reimport the new file.

Erm... I was exporting something to FredMiranda for uploading at 640p-longest dimension. As a result, I have lost the default

 

[mackguyver]

As my work has evolved - primarily due to the limitations I have with pain - so has my gear. Events and hiking are no longer possible, so I've sold off my 24 f/1.4 II and 50 f/1.2. I also sold off my 16-35 f/4 IS, which I may regret, but I don't think I need it with the 11-24 and 24-70, plus the excellent EF-M 11-22 IS. My current gear is now:

11-24 f/4
24-70 f/2.8 II
70-200 f/2.8 IS II
TS-E 17 f/4
TS-E 24 f/3.5 II
85 f/1.2 II
180 f/3.5 macro
300 f/2.8 IS II
1.4x III and 2x III extenders
EF-M 11-22 IS, 18-55 IS, 22

I'd like a 600 f/4...but I think it would cost me twice as much in jewelry and other "make-up gifts" for the wife

 

[JoeKerslake]

This thread is brilliant! I had a similar conversation with my girlfriend after I bought the 70-200mm 2.8 II, she asked "how many more do you need". I genuinely couldn't bring myself to answer so I stared blankly at her. I think she got the message.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

Thanks, or maybe no thanks to a canonpricewatch.com alert I set up, I just snagged a refurbished TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II at 20% off.

With that, I'm done. Really. I have all the lenses I'll ever need to own. I can rent longer super teles, other TS-Es, etc. for jobs or projects.

It's taken me a long time to figure out what I need, but I have and I'm so happy to have completed it

My lenses and uses are as follows:

24 1.4L II - I love 24mm, it's my favorite and most used FL, period. The f/1.4 rocks for events and landscapes, and it's nice & small.

TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II - I have more and more architectural work coming my way and TS-Es just can't be beat. I don't like in a big city or shoot interiors much, so 24mm is ideal, plus I can use polarizers and ND filters with ease. I borrowed one from CPS and loved it, but didn't have much time to perfect it. I was very sad to return it once I realized how amazing tilt-shift movements can be.

85 1.2L II - the 50 1.2 and 135 2 are great, but I found the 85 to be more versatile for all types of portraits, and I think it's THE people lens.

180 3.5L Macro - I prefer the longer working distance, included tripod ring, and compression over the 100L. Plus it has the very best color of any Canon lens, IMHO.

300 2.8L IS II - I went for this over the bigger lenses as it's far more versatile (300, 420, and 600) and truly hand-holdable. No gimbal needed, just more patience and skill requireed to get closer to wildlife. I'll rent the 600 or 800 as needed.

Extenders 1.4x III & 2x III - both work awesome with the 180 3.5L Macro, 300 2.8L IS II and 70-200 2.8L IS II

16-35 2.8L II - I don't love this lens as much, but it is very versatile for architecture, landscape, and events

24-70 2.8L II - Perfect do it all zoom #1

70-200 2.8L IS II - Perfect do it all zoom #2

I'm sure I sound a bit nuts , but I'd like to thank that I have all I need to own. Has anyone else "completed" their lens kit?

congratulations man.
im only 3 away, 17mm TSE f4, 85mm 1.2, 24mm 1.4, 400mm 5.6 IS will wait on that one.

the 400mm 2.8 IS II i can rent.

 

[IgotGASbadDude]

Let's see. Other than my "dream" lens I'm done buying lenses:

Sigma Art 24 1.4
Sigma Art 50 1.4
40mm pancake
70-200 2.8L (would consider selling this if I had the $ for the II version)
400 5.6L
2X extender

Can't think of anything else I need. If I had 11K I'd sell the 400 5.6 and get my dream lens:
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens

 

[agierke]

i dont think i will ever be done. aside from a few more 35mm dslr lenses i would like to acquire, i have a strong interest in reviving antiquated formats including polaroids of all formats, 8x10 film, and non silver processes. and then there's the studio gear...still lots to acquire there as well.

all of photography for the past 150 years is highly intriguing to me. in the past couple months i have tested van dyke brown printing from 4x5 negs, am trying to put together an 8x10 package to run 8x10 polaroids off an 8x10 polaroid printer i picked up, refurbished an kodak 1a folding camera and modified it to take 120 roll film panoramas, and completed my polaroid 180 kit. lol...i just cant get enough of this stuff.

now im looking at Petzvel Brass lenses on ebay and wondering what kind of portraits i could take with those.....

it never ends!