Keith, this brings me back to why I became a photographer. The discovery and the creative side of making photos. I so appreciate every episode you share. Thank you so much Charlie
Could you request a video to explain size sensors, medium and large etc 4:33:2 format, 35 mm medium formats. Implications of buying cameras for; and lenses. I am totally confused by it all. I hope your viewers would have the same problems- I hope?
I could try but my inclination is to avoid small sensors, so no APS-C and no M43 and no phones. The difficulty is that I've used 35mm full frame since 2003 and would only move larger ;-) It means my use of cameras is not relevant to many. That said' I'll look at it!
I noticed that these lenses tilt and shift on a radial angle vs a linear one (like a bellows camera with left right or up & down). I assume there are tradeoffs to this? Do the tradeoffs or benefits differ if were dealing with macro vs regular points of focus?
Accurate orientation of the tilt axis is easier with the lens able to rotate. Tilt at an arbitrary angle/direction is more difficult if you have to break it into two individual components [v tilt + h tilt] This makes any focusing which just alters the tilt amount rather than direction a more fiddly procedure. Of course a lot depends where you're coming from in terms of experience. I prefer the T/S lens approach of tilt as a single vector [direction + amount] rather than the product of two orthogonal vectors. I can work out the direction of the single vector first and then use a simple iterative approach to find its magnitude [amount of tilt] Does that answer what you were referring to?
@@KeithCooper yes, thank you. Thanks for sharing the proper terminology, as that will give me a better starting point for researching this. I assumed it was either a cost-saving measure for the manufacturer or one which simplifies usage. However, i also assumed that there was a resolution benefit by keeping the tilt and shift mechanism on-axis. Have a good weekend!
There are lots of mechanical and optical design constraints at work here too. With T/S lenses for example, you are not tilting about the nodal point of the lens in most instances. This means that some shift may be required to compensate for the offset element of the lens movement. Look too at the varying design for lenses used in view cameras, where you typically have the option of far more tilt than possible with T/S lenses. Loss of resolution is associated with lens tilt by any amount
Keith, this brings me back to why I became a photographer. The discovery and the creative side of making photos. I so appreciate every episode you share. Thank you so much Charlie
Thanks - this lens is just that.
Not one for those who pore over MTF charts and worry about diffraction...
Beautifully explained thank you so much
Glad it was helpful!
Terrific video. Really helped me visualize how tilt works, even better than your video with the toy cars.
Thanks - I try and find different ways that might work in explaining it.
very good explanation, and good to see on the screen as well.
Thanks - tilt is definitely more difficult to show in video without the wide aperture
The new office looks very nice. ;)
Thanks, but I suspect it's not going to be available very often for me to use. That and printers will not be allowed in there ;-)
Really interesting Keith - many thanks.
Thanks!
Good video Keith
Thanks!
Could you request a video to explain size sensors, medium and large etc 4:3 3:2 format, 35 mm medium formats.
Implications of buying cameras for; and lenses.
I am totally confused by it all.
I hope your viewers would have the same problems- I hope?
I could try but my inclination is to avoid small sensors, so no APS-C and no M43 and no phones. The difficulty is that I've used 35mm full frame since 2003 and would only move larger ;-)
It means my use of cameras is not relevant to many.
That said' I'll look at it!
Thanks so much
I noticed that these lenses tilt and shift on a radial angle vs a linear one (like a bellows camera with left right or up & down). I assume there are tradeoffs to this? Do the tradeoffs or benefits differ if were dealing with macro vs regular points of focus?
Accurate orientation of the tilt axis is easier with the lens able to rotate.
Tilt at an arbitrary angle/direction is more difficult if you have to break it into two individual components [v tilt + h tilt] This makes any focusing which just alters the tilt amount rather than direction a more fiddly procedure.
Of course a lot depends where you're coming from in terms of experience.
I prefer the T/S lens approach of tilt as a single vector [direction + amount] rather than the product of two orthogonal vectors. I can work out the direction of the single vector first and then use a simple iterative approach to find its magnitude [amount of tilt]
Does that answer what you were referring to?
@@KeithCooper yes, thank you. Thanks for sharing the proper terminology, as that will give me a better starting point for researching this. I assumed it was either a cost-saving measure for the manufacturer or one which simplifies usage. However, i also assumed that there was a resolution benefit by keeping the tilt and shift mechanism on-axis. Have a good weekend!
There are lots of mechanical and optical design constraints at work here too.
With T/S lenses for example, you are not tilting about the nodal point of the lens in most instances. This means that some shift may be required to compensate for the offset element of the lens movement.
Look too at the varying design for lenses used in view cameras, where you typically have the option of far more tilt than possible with T/S lenses.
Loss of resolution is associated with lens tilt by any amount
The video with toy cars is easier!
Oh yes, that one works really well, but I also wanted to show a use for this particular lens I'm testing ;-)