Patent: New Tilt-Shift Lens Designs & More Information

[Canon Rumors Guy]

The 45mm and 90mm tilt-shift lens have yet to be replaced years after the TS-E 17mm f/4L & TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II were released. A lot of people, myself included figured we’d be seeing new 45mm and 90mm tilt-shift lenses relatively soon, that obviously hasn’t been the case.</p>
<p>We now see (thanks dilbert) that Canon continues to work on a long tilt-shift lens, and a new patent for multiple optical formulas has appeared.</p>
<ul>
<li>TS-E 90mm f/2.8</li>
<li>TS-E 125mm f/4</li>
<li>TS-E 130mm f/4</li>
</ul>
<p>You can few the patent <a href="https://www4.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/cgi-bin/tran_web_cgi_ejje?u=http://www4.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/eng/translation/20170524205651800262998965870184174F4E926F16BCD9091F994191500242AC">here</a>.</p>
<p>While we haven’t heard anything directly about a new tilt-shift lens, there has been some talk about a <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/new-information-about-a-new-canon-135mm-lens/">new kind of 135mm lens</a>, which is not a replacement for the EF 135mm f/2L. There has been an optical formula patent for a <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-135-f2l-wapodization-filters/">135mm APO</a> and now a 130mm tilt-shift.</p>
<p>We do know something along these lines is coming later in 2017, and we hope to confirm it some time soon.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[midluk]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

 

[ecqns]

I'm my dreams I'd like to see a 40mm TS-E and something wider than the 17mm - a 12mm TS-E?
I have the 11-24 just to use it at the 11mm setting, but I always want to shift/rotate it.

Currently playing around with using the 17mm and 24mm TS-Es with both the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.
Quality is ok but not great obviously - a new ~40mm TS-E or so would be great.

 

[midluk]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

Good point. I was also recalling earlier discussions of a rumored 'special' 200mm f/4 Macro that some were suggesting would be a TS lens. A short tele macro is reasonable. The issue isn't that a longer TS tele macro can't be made, but rather that tilt won't really be effective.

 

[Chaitanya]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

Good point. I was also recalling earlier discussions of a rumored 'special' 200mm f/4 Macro that some were suggesting would be a TS lens. A short tele macro is reasonable. The issue isn't that a longer TS tele macro can't be made, but rather that tilt won't really be effective.

Schneider has 90mm macro and hartblei makes 120mm macro which are tilt-shift lenses for Canon ef mounts. 180/200mm macro tilt-shift macro lenses would be a strict no go as they would be ridiculously large and turn already a niche lens into super niche product which wouldn't sell more than a handful in a year. I would much rather like see a 180/200mm macro lenses that shot more than 1x mag ratio.

 

[FramerMCB]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

What if you paired an extension tube or 3 with one of the TSE lenses? Has anyone here tried that? I don't have any TSE lenses or I would try it.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

What if you paired an extension tube or 3 with one of the TSE lenses? Has anyone here tried that? I don't have any TSE lenses or I would try it.

SLR's really aren't designed for tilt lenses, if you look at the range of tilt you get with an slr format tilt lens (around 6-10 degrees) compared to a field cameras movements ( 20-45 degrees) you begin to understand the comparative limitations of them. The mirror box is a long tube and it doesn't take much tilt for that tube to start casting a shadow on the sensor, an extension tube would make that even worse so isn't a very practical idea.

The main 'issue' I'd foresee for a tilt macro lens is the very limited tilt effect you could get at close distances with the range of tilt an slr tilt lens can achieve. You are going to want very short 'J" distances and that is only possible with large amounts of tilt.

 

[RGF]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Nikon has the PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 85mm 1:2.8 D and PC-E Micro-NIKKOR 45 mm 1:2,8 D E, both with 1:2 macro. Not 1:1 but still better than what Canon has. I have not found any numbers for the maximum tilt of the plane of focus at MFD, though.

I guess greater possible tilt for macro is one of the best reasons for a shorter flange distance in a mirrorless camera.

What if you paired an extension tube or 3 with one of the TSE lenses? Has anyone here tried that? I don't have any TSE lenses or I would try it.

I have used the 90 TS-E w/ 1.4 for close up work. Not 1:1 but I think I was able to get 1:2 or so

 

[LDS]

I'm hoping for a TS-E macro.

I'm not sure we'll see one, or if we do, how useful it will be. If we do see one, I'd expect it to be a relatively short focal length. More tilt is generally required with closer subjects and more tilt is generally required with longer focal lengths, which has some obvious implications for using tilt with a macro telephoto lens. Somehow I doubt Canon will solve this with a view camera back, which may be the only way to achieve the required degree of tilt.

Novoflex has a T/S bellows for the EF mount, and a specific 90mm lens. Anybody ever used anything like this?

 

[symmar22]

What if you paired an extension tube or 3 with one of the TSE lenses? Has anyone here tried that? I don't have any TSE lenses or I would try it.

Extension tubes work perfectly TS-E lenses, as do the 1.4x and 2x converters. The 90mm TS-E can almost be considered as a macro lens when paired with the 12 and/or 25 tubes, though I don't think it is optimized for close-up focusing like a true macro lens. However, despite it's aging optical formula, it holds up very well compared to more modern lenses. I own both the 90TS-E and 100 Macro L and almost always end up using the TS-E for its possibilities, even though the image is a little bit less crisp than the 100.

Very often convenience overtakes absolute sharpness, I was already using these setups with my old Nikon film cameras (180mm F2.8 ED with 52mm tube or 1.4x TC with the 105 Micro) , and got excellent results in closeup photography. Another solution at the time was to use the rare PB-4 Nikon macro bellows, that has tilt movements.

Nowadays in my work I use the 24 TS-E with 1.4x III converter on a regular basis, to get a 34mm equivalent, and get decent results, though not optimal. My personal wish is that Canon is finally updating both 45mm and 90mm, the 90mm being less urgent thanks to it's stellar optical formula. Ideally, a 40mm f2.8 TS-E with the new separate movements and the optical quality of a modern lens would be my dream.

 

[Ladislav]

I would be very interested in TS-E lens with focal range somewhere between 40 and 55 and overall build and optical quality of 24 TS-E L II.

 

[davidcl0nel]

SLR's really aren't designed for tilt lenses, if you look at the range of tilt you get with an slr format tilt lens (around 6-10 degrees) compared to a field cameras movements ( 20-45 degrees) you begin to understand the comparative limitations of them. The mirror box is a long tube and it doesn't take much tilt for that tube to start casting a shadow on the sensor, an extension tube would make that even worse so isn't a very practical idea.

I don't know the other TS-Es, but on my 17 I can get with full Tilt (yes it are only some degree) anyway the effect to set the focus plane to 90°. So I have a small stripe from the front of the camera to the horizon sharp and left/right offfocus and with the focus ring I can move the stripe from left to right in the picture. If I rotate, I can get it in other desired directions.... What more should I want?
I use Tilt not very often, shift is what I want...

Maybe you need much more tilt-angle on this 90mm TS-E, I don't know...
A internal 1.4 Konverter (as in the 200-400) on the 17mm would be very nice... so I don't have to remount the lens.... but after that they are nearly perfect now...




The total shift effect / shift panorama of the 17mm is about 11mm - on the first pictures the 11-24 it seems to be very similar to the TS-E (front element) - I never have compared it next to each other for details...
But how enormous the front element should be, to get even more than this 11mm circle as a 12mm shift lense... Should that be a 25cm bulb or what?

 

[privatebydesign]

SLR's really aren't designed for tilt lenses, if you look at the range of tilt you get with an slr format tilt lens (around 6-10 degrees) compared to a field cameras movements ( 20-45 degrees) you begin to understand the comparative limitations of them. The mirror box is a long tube and it doesn't take much tilt for that tube to start casting a shadow on the sensor, an extension tube would make that even worse so isn't a very practical idea.

I don't know the other TS-Es, but on my 17 I can get with full Tilt (yes it are only some degree) anyway the effect to set the focus plane to 90°. So I have a small stripe from the front of the camera to the horizon sharp and left/right offfocus and with the focus ring I can move the stripe from left to right in the picture. If I rotate, I can get it in other desired directions.... What more should I want?
I use Tilt not very often, shift is what I want...

Maybe you need much more tilt-angle on this 90mm TS-E, I don't know...
A internal 1.4 Konverter (as in the 200-400) on the 17mm would be very nice... so I don't have to remount the lens.... but after that they are nearly perfect now...




The total shift effect / shift panorama of the 17mm is about 11mm - on the first pictures the 11-24 it seems to be very similar to the TS-E (front element) - I never have compared it next to each other for details...
But how enormous the front element should be, to get even more than this 11mm circle as a 12mm shift lense... Should that be a 25cm bulb or what?

8 degrees of tilt with a 17mm lens requires 42 degrees of tilt to get the same effect with a 90mm.

You can get the plane of focus at 90 degrees to the sensor, but that isn't the point, the point is how close to the bottom of the sensor can you get that 90 degree plane, there is a major difference between the two . 8 degrees of tilt with a 17mm lens gets the plane of focus around 8" below the sensor, you can't get it any closer, longer focal lengths get worse.

The 11-24 is much bigger than the TS-E17.

 

[neuroanatomist]

on the first pictures the 11-24 it seems to be very similar to the TS-E (front element) - I never have compared it next to each other for details...

I have both. The 11-24 is much bigger and heavier (and it's particularly front-heavy) compared to the TS-E 17.

 

[ecqns]

shouldn't this thread go in the Lens rumors section?

 

[rrcphoto]

on the first pictures the 11-24 it seems to be very similar to the TS-E (front element) - I never have compared it next to each other for details...

I have both. The 11-24 is much bigger and heavier (and it's particularly front-heavy) compared to the TS-E 17.

the two lenses that smacked down the theory that canon can't do UWA's