Align tilt and shift in parallel?

[Peter Mendelson]

I have the 90mm TS-E and plan to use it a lot more with my 5D this summer for shifted-stitched landscapes. If I want to get close and far objects in focus, I can tilt a little bit and then shift left and right to get three shots that I can stitch together.

My question is: why would someone want to adjust their shift and tilt mechanisms so that they operate in parallel? I know people do it, but I am not sure why and whether it could be of any use in landscape photography.

Thanks,

Peter

[Stan Jirman]

I did it to my 24TSE. In landscape photography, at least the way I do it :) it's much more common to be shifting up (to get trees into the picture) or down (to get more of a foreground) rather than sideways (usually only used for panoramas, and I use different methods than shifing for that). So having both planes in parallel is useful.

[Diane Fields]

I have the 90mm TS-E and plan to use it a lot more with my 5D this summer for shifted-stitched landscapes. If I want to get close and far objects in focus, I can tilt a little bit and then shift left and right to get three shots that I can stitch together.

My question is: why would someone want to adjust their shift and tilt mechanisms so that they operate in parallel? I know people do it, but I am not sure why and whether it could be of any use in landscape photography.

Thanks,

Peter
I'm a complete novice at tilt/shift (having just returned my 2 week rental of the 24 TSE). I'm not sure it would be helpful with most landscapes--but remember seeing one example on another forum where the photographer wanted to bring the horizon up in the photo--but also wanted to tilt for maximum DOF---it was a beach scene taken at almost ground level, rocks in fore and mid and hills and hills, etc. in background with some sea. He said that he had changed the tilt/shift to be in parallel for that shot.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=16981755
Another might be (off the top of my head) with tallish trees in fore--so that the tilt might allow you to get them in correct perspective but you could also tilt for near focus with your focus set at infinity for mountains in rear. Not having been able to do this with a rental--it was just something that I realized might be helpful.

There was a discussion about this on another forum--with some preferring to leave theirs perpendicular and some changing to parallel--and some doing it 'in the field' so to speak.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=17016633 (same thread I think)

[Alain Briot]

My question is: why would someone want to adjust their shift and tilt mechanisms so that they operate in parallel? I know people do it, but I am not sure why and whether it could be of any use in landscape photography.
Peter

Essentially when you want to get get near and far in focus while keeping vertical lines straight. I use this setup each time I photograph Totem Pole from the Sand Dunes area in Mt Valley for example. Also with forest scenes, Anasazi Ruins, and any situation where vertical lines have to be straight.

[Jack_Flesher]

I initially did it on my 24 and after a few months ended up converting all three TSE's to co-axial orientation. I have an article outlining how to do it here -- note the revision comment if you have a newer TSE lens: http://www.getdpi.com/tse_swap.html

[Alain Briot]

http://www.beautiful-landscape.com/OPP/Ruin.jpg

Here is an example of shift and tilt used at the same time to bring the foreground/background in focus and to keep the vertical lines straight. The photograph was created with a Canon 1DsMk2 and Canon 24TS during my San Juan River Running Workshop last month.

[Diane Fields]

http://www.beautiful-landscape.com/OPP/Ruin.jpg

Here is an example of shift and tilt used at the same time to bring the foreground/background in focus and to keep the vertical lines straight. The photograph was created with a Canon 1DsMk2 and Canon 24TS during my San Juan River Running Workshop last month.

Alain, since you are using the 24TSE (and, in fact, I have one of your pages bookmarked of the first shoot you did with your 24 TSE), I wonder if you are using any focusing aids--such as a viewfinder screen and/or the Canon Anglefinder C?

[Stan Jirman]

While I am not Alain, since I use the 24TSE as well I'll mention that I don't use any focusing aids. I have a different focusing screen which I bought for this purpose but I use it only when I know I'll be shooting at night, as otherwise I find it distracting. I have an angle finder but use it almost exclusively for macro work (mushrooms).

[Alain Briot]

I use the EC1E (not sure if that's the right number) Canon screen which has grid lines, essentially for composition. I also use the angle viewfinder when I am shooting up to avoid getting on my knees. In my opinion you don't need any of these to use the 24TS per se. I have an article on Luminous landscape in which I compare 4x5 to the 1DsMk2 that details my setup. Check it out.

[Stan Jirman]

The one with the lines is the Ec-D, the same that I use too. I also have a (3rd party) variety of this grid screen with a split focusing prism for MF which I was referring to earlier.

[Sid Jervis]

I initially did it on my 24 and after a few months ended up converting all three TSE's to co-axial orientation. I have an article outlining how to do it here -- note the revision comment if you have a newer TSE lens: http://www.getdpi.com/tse_swap.html

Jack,
I have a question about the comment on your site about newer versions of the Canon TSE lenses appearing to have slightly longer ribbon harnesses.
Have you any information as to when Canon made this change?

Thanks

[Jack_Flesher]

Have you any information as to when Canon made this change?


Hi Sid:

I wish I did know. All I can tell you is my gear bag was stolen 1-1/2 years ago and I replaced all of my TS-E's then. All of those newer lenses had a longer harness and I was able to orient them so the adjustment knobs are next to each other with room to spare.

The bottom line is that it will be obvious if you shouldn't go clockwise with a given lens as the harness will be strained around the internal optical barrel.

Hope this helps,

[Sean DeMerchant]

I did it to my 24TSE. In landscape photography, at least the way I do it :) it's much more common to be shifting up (to get trees into the picture) or down (to get more of a foreground) rather than sideways (usually only used for panoramas, and I use different methods than shifing for that). So having both planes in parallel is useful.

How much shift do these lenses yield? I always assumed the real value of the shift in landscape work was to get your "optical axis" to appear to be beyond the edge of a cliff or in the middle of some rapids in a river without doing something insanely dangerous. But this may partly be a issue of what I like to shoot.

thanks,

Sean

[Stan Jirman]

I don't know how to describe the amount, so I went digging and found two images that were shot with the camera completely level, one up and one down. I didn't bother too much with a nice raw conversion since it's more about the shifting than content :) Hope it helps.

http://fm.jirman.com/24TSE/up.jpg
http://fm.jirman.com/24TSE/down.jpg

[Sean DeMerchant]

I don't know how to describe the amount, so I went digging and found two images that were shot with the camera completely level, one up and one down. I didn't bother too much with a nice raw conversion since it's more about the shifting than content :) Hope it helps.

[pic]

[pic]



Thanks Stan. Would you have a non-shifted version of the two shots for comparison? By themselves the shots do not yield context.

thanks,

Sean

[Stan Jirman]

Well actually I hope they do: my statement that the camera was level means that the horizon would be in the middle. By that you can see how much off-center the images are.
No, I don't have an unshifted version.

[Jack_Flesher]

FWIW, I think Stan's images above are good examples to show the value of having tilt and shift co-axially oriented. Imagine adding forward tilt to either of those rise/fall images to expand the PoF from foreground to horizon. However, if he did so, note that the top of the tree in the first image would go oof pretty fast.

[Stan Jirman]

The first image was definitely not tilted. I believe the 2nd one was - I can't remember 100% anymore, but I am almost certain it was.

[David Bostock]

How much shift do these lenses yield? I always assumed the real value of the shift in landscape work was to get your "optical axis" to appear to be beyond the edge of a cliff or in the middle of some rapids in a river without doing something insanely dangerous. But this may partly be a issue of what I like to shoot.

thanks,

Sean

Sean, all three Tilt/Shift lenses provide 11mm of shift in either direction, and 8 degrees of tilt. For what it's worth, I have all three set to shift and tilt in the same direction. I've rarely been in a situation where I wished they were set back to factory spec...by the way, I followed the following article from Digital Outback to change the orientation: http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_42/essay.html

Also, for an interesting, short tutorial on tilt/shift see this: http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/tech/room/f_ts-e.html

Finally, the Canon Museum is wonderful for getting all sorts of information on their lenses:http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/index.html

Cheers,

[Sean DeMerchant]

Well actually I hope they do: my statement that the camera was level means that the horizon would be in the middle. By that you can see how much off-center the images are.
No, I don't have an unshifted version.

Thanks, this elaboration yields enough info to see how much shift you got. :o)

[Sean DeMerchant]

Thanks David. :o) I am in general comfortable with what they do, but do not know how much they do if that makes sense. I will have to rent one some time and take it out into the woods.

enjoy,

Sean

[Diane Fields]

Thanks David. :o) I am in general comfortable with what they do, but do not know how much they do if that makes sense. I will have to rent one some time and take it out into the woods.

enjoy,

Sean

Sean, I wasn't able to determine where you live (US or other, but think US) from your profile and site, but..... if you want to rent in the US, rentglass.com is very reasonable compared to other choices--$35+ per week for a 2 week rental. I found renting a 24 TSE was the best course for determining if a tilt/shift would be beneficial for me--and also allow me to get a grip on using it as opposed to just 'theory'.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I don't know how to describe the amount, so I went digging and found two images that were shot with the camera completely level, one up and one down.


Do you have a special method to reduce light fall-off / vignetting as that can be worse, depending on how tilt is done in relation to shift, than shift alone.

Bart

[Stan Jirman]

I actually don't care all that much about vignetting etc., so no, I don't have any special method; I just print it the way it is. If it bothers me too much I just don't shift as much :)

[Diane Fields]

I initially did it on my 24 and after a few months ended up converting all three TSE's to co-axial orientation. I have an article outlining how to do it here -- note the revision comment if you have a newer TSE lens: http://www.getdpi.com/tse_swap.html

I'm planning to convert my 45 TSE to co-axial orientation following Jack Flesher's article. However, there is a fairly long thread on Fred Miranda's forum where one poster stated that he stripped 3 of the 4 brass screws and had to have his father/denist drill them out. He's since replaced those screws with ones that are not brass. I asked whether he used the Micro-tools Phillipshead screwdriver and he said he did--and that if I could find a flathead #00 instead of a pointed head that might be better. Its made me a bit cautious about ordering the kit (the one I think Jack's referring to https://www.micro-tools.com/store/item_detail.aspx?ItemCode=26991 ) and doing my own reorienting. I had hoped to be comfortable enough with it to be able to change it back if I chose--but now I'm a bit nervous about even attempting it the first time.

I know I've seen posts here and on other forums where the posters have changed theirs themselves--guess I'm just looking for some confirmation from others that it may be an exception for this poster to have had problems. I truly don't want to 'screw up' this lens and lose its use for a period of time this season.

Diane

[Ray West]

Diane,

If you don't need to do it, save your nerves until you have the time to consider your options.

I have not read the fm thread, but is seems the poster was a bit 'ham fisted'. There are a number of similar looking cross-point style screw heads, but they need a matching screwdriver, that exactly fits. If the screwdriver slips out of the slot, and if its a hardened steel blade (which it will be), and in particular an unplated brass screw, then you will damage the screw slot. You need to select the exact screwdriver, and 'know' the amount of downward pressure to exert when rotating the driver.

Without knowing the materials involved, brass screws can corrode. this weakens the screw, and at the same time jams it in the thread. If you are not experianced in taking things apart, then a useful lens may not be the wisest choice for a first try. Practice a bit more on unimportant items with similar sized screws, pick the brains of a local clock maker (do they exist any more??) would be my suggestion.

Best wishes,

Ray

PS I've now read what Jack said - seems he was warning of the screw slot/slip too

[Alain Briot]

The best is to buy a jeweler screwdriver kit that contains something like 5 or 10 different size screwdrivers. Those are relatively unexpensive, and worth the expense given that you are working on a 1k lens. Then just select the size that fits the screw, push down hard, and turn. I sometimes use a small pair of pliers to turn the screwdriver while I push down. The first "crack" of the screw is the hardest to get and the time when you run the highest risk of having the screwdriver slip and damage the screw. After that its ok.