Titlt/shift focussing methods

[Garry Edwards]

I'm certain it can, I just can't visualise the way to set the camera up to do so.

I suspect you need to treat the body as the rear part of the LF camera and tilt the base towards the object you want to emphasise and then use the lens to correct the view.

Well, I suppose it depends on what you want to do - but generally my approach would be to keep the camera square to the subject (or as square as the limited shift capability of the lens allows), have the camera above the subject and then use the shift to lower the lens.
At this point you hopefully have no image distortion and the shift will show the top of the subject.
Then, use the shift to alter the plane of sharp focus.

Tilt shift lenses are a very poor relation to the real thing.

True, but they're all we have available for digicams.

 

[troutfisher]

First congrats on buying a fabulous lens, they are not easy to use but the results are stunning

Have a read here http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/tilt_and_shift_ts-e.html.

The trick with tilt is to try to envisage the wedge shaped plane of focus, once you get your head round that it becomes fairly straightforward.
You need a good tripod, live view to make life easier and most of all patience.
BTW the sweet spot on mine is about f7-8.
Best of lick with it

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Well, I suppose it depends on what you want to do - but generally my approach would be to keep the camera square to the subject (or as square as the limited shift capability of the lens allows), have the camera above the subject and then use the shift to lower the lens.
At this point you hopefully have no image distortion and the shift will show the top of the subject.
Then, use the shift to alter the plane of sharp focus.

True, but they're all we have available for digicams.

Not quite.... you can buy LF digital backs, with a mortgage.

 

[steveo_mcg]

Well, I suppose it depends on what you want to do - but generally my approach would be to keep the camera square to the subject (or as square as the limited shift capability of the lens allows), have the camera above the subject and then use the shift to lower the lens.
At this point you hopefully have no image distortion and the shift will show the top of the subject.
Then, use the shift to alter the plane of sharp focus.

True, but they're all we have available for digicams.

The op was trying to manipulate the scene to make a foreground object larger relative to the background. I know how I'd do it by tilting the rear standard but I don't know how you'd achieve that effect with a fixed body camera.

 

[jerry12953]

The op was trying to manipulate the scene to make a foreground object larger relative to the background. I know how I'd do it by tilting the rear standard but I don't know how you'd achieve that effect with a fixed body camera.

That's right. I suspect there may be limitations using a DSLR but I'll have to go out in the field and a good try.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

That's right. I suspect there may be limitations using a DSLR but I'll have to go out in the field and a good try.

To make a foreground object bigger compared to the background you need to move your viewpoint closer, a shift lens will be no help..
simply move closer till it looks as you want it and choose a focal length that gets every thing in.
changing the plane of focus might help in focus terms but equally it might not, as some parts will become less in focus.

 

[steveo_mcg]

That's right. I suspect there may be limitations using a DSLR but I'll have to go out in the field and a good try.

Ahahah, I knew I read something for you somewhere.

https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2013/03/the-art-of-looming/

 

[jerry12953]

Ahahah, I knew I read something for you somewhere.

https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2013/03/the-art-of-looming/

Actually Steve, I found that myself earlier on. I was a bit disappointed when I read in one of the comments at the bottom of the article - "It doesn't work [with a DSLR and TS lens]"

However the poster goes on to say - " However I hope that all is not lost. I think that a tilt/shift DSLR lens is never going to be able to reproduce the distinctive effect that a view camera can get but, using shift (drop front) to enable you to get a viewpoint that doesn’t flatten the foreground too much, and then using tilt to give front to back sharpness is still going to be a useful technique."

You'll even find a comment from me lower down........

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

A tilt shift lens is useful and extends a cameras ability. Especially if you can get your head round what it is actually doing.
first you need to separate the optics from the mechanics of a lens camera system.

1) a camera lens always produces a circular image that is parallel to the plane of the lens.
2) it does this how ever it is oriented.
3) the image is projected backward with the subjects represented by sharpness at proportional distances to their distances in front of the lens.
4) by orienting the back relative to the lens, at different angles, you can pick up different planes of focus through out the image.
5) you can only orientate and pick up one plane of focus at a time.

A monorail camera has these same limitations. But it has an almost unlimited scope to capture the image anywhere within the image circle and at any orientation and plane of focus.

Tilt shift lens has the same ability to slide the captured image around the image circle and to change the plane of focus. But in a far more limited way, and with very little of the flexability.

But a tilt shift lens increases the scope of a Dslr for architectural and product photography in a fairly dramatic way.

 

[Alastair]

A dedicated T/S lens may not be what you're looking for to achieve what you want with a DSLR. There are a number of monorail style adaptations to mount medium format lenses with a DSLR with a range of movement options,e.g.

http://www.pbase.com/pganzel/mamiya_rb67_lenses_on_a_dslr​

And I've seen a variant of this with a DSLR on the back.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/epatsellis/2959291499/​

 

[steveo_mcg]

Actually Steve, I found that myself earlier on. I was a bit disappointed when I read in one of the comments at the bottom of the article - "It doesn't work [with a DSLR and TS lens]"

However the poster goes on to say - " However I hope that all is not lost. I think that a tilt/shift DSLR lens is never going to be able to reproduce the distinctive effect that a view camera can get but, using shift (drop front) to enable you to get a viewpoint that doesn’t flatten the foreground too much, and then using tilt to give front to back sharpness is still going to be a useful technique."

You'll even find a comment from me lower down........

I've not read that in a while but doesn't the author demonstrate how to do with a fixed body?

 

[jerry12953]

I've not read that in a while but doesn't the author demonstrate how to do with a fixed body?

Not really. He demonstrates using a 5x4 (I think) and then shows a photograph of the looming effect but it appears to have been taken with a 5x4.. He then says this -

So with your DSLR tilt shift lens all you need to put on a reasonable amount of drop front and then compose your picture and apply the right amount of tilt for near far focus. Or you could work out your tilt first and then use drop front. Either way it's the combination of the two movements that simulate looming.

The quotes in post 48 (above) follow in the Comments.

But there is more useful stuff in InLandscape.

I'm just going to have to try it out for myself........ sometime soon.........

 

[Canon Bob]

Some values to get you going, Jeremy. The values specify the amount of tilt required to get the maximum front to back focus in the scene. The height is the height above the part of the foreground subject that will dominate (it's not simply the height above ground level). Bear in mind that the DoF can be "considered" to be symetrical so don't waste half of it by having it below ground or outside of the frame)

Height of lens.....Amount of tilt
above subject.....required
mm's...................degrees
1300............1
900..............1.5
690..............2
550..............2.5
460..............3
390..............3.5
345..............4
275..............5
230..............6
197..............7
172..............8

Bob

 

[jerry12953]

Bob,

Thanks for that. Is it something you've calculated yourself or is it available elsewhere?

Still trying to get my head around tilt...........

 

[Canon Bob]

I've got 3 pukka t-s lenses (and a further 9 focal lengths that I can use via a t-s adapter with medium format lenses) so I made an Excel sheet that calculates for all 12 focal lengths.

The values are rounded up somewhat but they're as close as you need to worry about given the accurracy of measurements in the field.

Bob

 

[HoppyUK]

I've only skimmed the thread, but as I think has been alluded to already, there's no difference in theory between a T&S lens on a DSLR and a large format monorail with movements on both front and rear standards. With a DSLR obviously the sensor is fixed, so you just have to tilt the whole camera and make corresponding adjustments with the lens. Same difference.

I've never tried 'looming' but I don't see why you shouldn't at least have a go with a DSLR. The likely problem will be the very limited movements you can achieve compared to large format and I'd guess that might be a show stopper, but worth a try to see what you can get.

My recent experience with T&S on a DSLR is limited to a week with a Canon 24mm MkII from our StewartR at LFH. I was using it almost exclusively for the panormas technique (for which it was fabulous) so didn't get much time to explore Scheimpflug, other than to say that I am familiar with that technique on large format where it is easy - but useless on a DSLR. The problem is you don't know where the lens plane is (though you could work it out) and even with that knowledge, the movements needed with a wide-angle on a DSLR are so tiny you simply cannot eye-ball it large format stylee with anything like the necessary standard of accuracy.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Going by some posts of Facebook, it seems that people are now fitting DSLR bodies to LF cameras - mainly it seems the Sinar P2, which makes sense as it's a brilliant camera. This then provides full movements on both the front and rear standard, with the digicam becoming the rear standard of course.
It's theoretically do-able using LF lenses (which of course have the advantage of a massive image circle) but MF lenses are preferred because of their much better resolution. The camera does of course need to be fitted with bag bellows, because of the much shortner than normal focal lengths involved.

Not something that I know anything about myself, but interesting.

 

[HoppyUK]

Going by some posts of Facebook, it seems that people are now fitting DSLR bodies to LF cameras - mainly it seems the Sinar P2, which makes sense as it's a brilliant camera. This then provides full movements on both the front and rear standard, with the digicam becoming the rear standard of course.
It's theoretically do-able using LF lenses (which of course have the advantage of a massive image circle) but MF lenses are preferred because of their much better resolution. The camera does of course need to be fitted with bag bellows, because of the much shortner than normal focal lengths involved.

Not something that I know anything about myself, but interesting.

That would be interesting to try, if only as an experiment, but there are fundamental problems that make large format-type camera movements difficult/limited with much smaller formats, ie a DSLR.

Large format lenses have much longer focal lengths, ie a standard lens on 5x4in format is 150mm, 10x8in is 300mm. The characteristics here are shallow depth of field, but deep depth of focus - just the opposite of the short focal lengths of a DSLR with relatively deep depth of field, but very shallow depth of focus. Depth of focus is the zone of sharpness either side of the sensor plane and with a DSLR it is measured in mms, or even small fractions of a mm at low f/numbers. Leica once told me of a mysterious sharpness problem they had with a 50mm f/1 Noctilux and it turned out it was caused by the film not being perfectly flat if it had got a slight bend in it after sitting in the jaws of the cassette overnight.

Dept of focus works differently to depth of field. Basic summary:
Deep depth of field = shorter focal length, greater distance, higher f/number
Deep depth of focus = longer focal length, closer distance, higher f/number

The way this pans out in practise, is that large formats inherently have shallow depth of field and need camera movements to increase it, but fortunately the natural balance between depth of field and depth of focus is such that they allow quite big movements before they run out of depth of focus. With a DSLR, depth of field is naturally much greater, and that's just as well because movements are relatively much more limited before you hit the depth of focus barrier. Scheimpflug is a handy technique that basically works out the optimum relationship between depth of field and depth of focus, for maximum depth of field. But as I mentioned above, while it's easy to apply with large formats, I found it unhelpful with a wide-angle lens on a DSLR.

 

[Garry Edwards]

That would be interesting to try, if only as an experiment, but there are fundamental problems that make large format-type camera movements difficult/limited with much smaller formats, ie a DSLR.

Large format lenses have much longer focal lengths, ie a standard lens on 5x4in format is 150mm, 10x8in is 300mm. The characteristics here are shallow depth of field, but deep depth of focus - just the opposite of the short focal lengths of a DSLR with relatively deep depth of field, but very shallow depth of focus. Depth of focus is the zone of sharpness either side of the sensor plane and with a DSLR it is measured in mms, or even small fractions of a mm at low f/numbers. Leica once told me of a mysterious sharpness problem they had with a 50mm f/1 Noctilux and it turned out it was caused by the film not being perfectly flat if it had got a slight bend in it after sitting in the jaws of the cassette overnight.

Dept of focus works differently to depth of field. Basic summary:
Deep depth of field = shorter focal length, greater distance, higher f/number
Deep depth of focus = longer focal length, closer distance, higher f/number

The way this pans out in practise, is that large formats inherently have shallow depth of field and need camera movements to increase it, but fortunately the natural balance between depth of field and depth of focus is such that they allow quite big movements before they run out of depth of focus. With a DSLR, depth of field is naturally much greater, and that's just as well because movements are relatively much more limited before you hit the depth of focus barrier. Scheimpflug is a handy technique that basically works out the optimum relationship between depth of field and depth of focus, for maximum depth of field. But as I mentioned above, while it's easy to apply with large formats, I found it unhelpful with a wide-angle lens on a DSLR.

Very true, but from what I can glean from these FB posts people are using MF cameras with wide angle (for LF) lenses, say the Super Angulon 90mm) which for a MF sensor is pretty much a standard lens, and of course they are used with a bag bellows, to allow the movements to take place.

My guess is that people are going for this kind of setup as a replacement for the old Horseman full-frame digital monorail camera that was around until the manufacturers decided to stop supporting it, or maybe some of them will be doing it as a project, who knows.

I have to say though that it would be a fantastic bit of kit for my product photography, because although I took your advice and bought a tilt shift lens and it's very useful, I do miss having an adjustable rear standard

 

[HoppyUK]

Very true, but from what I can glean from these FB posts people are using MF cameras with wide angle (for LF) lenses, say the Super Angulon 90mm) which for a MF sensor is pretty much a standard lens, and of course they are used with a bag bellows, to allow the movements to take place.

My guess is that people are going for this kind of setup as a replacement for the old Horseman full-frame digital monorail camera that was around until the manufacturers decided to stop supporting it, or maybe some of them will be doing it as a project, who knows.

I have to say though that it would be a fantastic bit of kit for my product photography, because although I took your advice and bought a tilt shift lens and it's very useful, I do miss having an adjustable rear standard

Just thinking out loud here, but I'd guess that one of the unique advantages of a monorail is the ability to swivel both the front/lens and rear standards along the optical axis and middle of the sensor, to make optimum use of the image circle. Relatively speaking, the movements available with a T&S lens on a DSLR are very limited, in addition to the optical restrictions.

 

[jerry12953]

Several interesting posts here since i last looked, so thanks.

I have at long last been out in the field - well the beach - with my TS lens. Not any old beach as you can see........

It does appear that looming is very limited with this set up. I also had some problems with front>back focus - either the front or back is out-of focus - although it's obviously much less problematical in the background. I set f16 and guessed where focus should be. I can see that if set up correctly the lens is bitingly sharp.

I also notice that Lightroom does not have a profile for this lens. Is this because of its movements? In other words, because LR couldn't know what angles of tilt/shift were set ?

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/first-time-out-with-tilt-shift-lens.631664/

 

[HoppyUK]

Several interesting posts here since i last looked, so thanks.

I have at long last been out in the field - well the beach - with my TS lens. Not any old beach as you can see........

It does appear that looming is very limited with this set up. I also had some problems with front>back focus - either the front or back is out-of focus - although it's obviously much less problematical in the background. I set f16 and guessed where focus should be. I can see that if set up correctly the lens is bitingly sharp.

I also notice that Lightroom does not have a profile for this lens. Is this because of its movements? In other words, because LR couldn't know what angles of tilt/shift were set ?

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/first-time-out-with-tilt-shift-lens.631664/

There's no LR profile as corrections can't be made without knowing what tilt/shift has been set, as you say. So for distortion and vignetting you have to do that manually (use radial filter for vignetting as it won't be symmetrical with lens movements applied). CA correction still works though, as it's not lens specific and LR just looks for red/green fringes.

Fortunately, the 24mm T&S Mk2 has almost zero distortion and minimal vignetting anyway, not much CA either