pgalimba
Newbie
I'm sorry for my bad english.
I prefer architectural photo and i ask if someone know objective tilt and shift for micro 4/3.
I prefer architectural photo and i ask if someone know objective tilt and shift for micro 4/3.
hans voralberg
Veteran
You can use the Canon FD 35/2.8 TS on m4/3
samoksner
Who stole my light?
Anything should work since the flange or mount to sensor distance is so short on micro 4/3. With an adapter, you should be able to use Canon FD, Olympus, Pentax, Nikon...
Hans' suggestion for the Canon FD 35mm is a good one, probably not too expensive since it's a dead system, I can recommend the Olympus 28mm myself, but i have not tried it on micro 4/3. Make sure you take into account the crop factor, a 35mm lens becomes quite long...
Hans' suggestion for the Canon FD 35mm is a good one, probably not too expensive since it's a dead system, I can recommend the Olympus 28mm myself, but i have not tried it on micro 4/3. Make sure you take into account the crop factor, a 35mm lens becomes quite long...
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
I would guess that any TS lens from any manufacturer would work with the right adapter. I think the bigger problem would be finding a TS lens that is wide enough to compensate for the crop factor of the 4/3 format. If I have it right a 35mm TS lens for 35mm format would become a 70mm TS lens on 4/3 format cameras. That may not be very useful for architectural shots but do for product shots.
Bob
Bob
pgalimba
Newbie
the is the crop but a lens for wide format (like 6X6)?
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Somebody will correct me if I am wrong, but by going to an even larger film format size lens the situation gets even worse with the 4/3 crop factor.
Bob
hans voralberg
Veteran
I think so, since the larger image circle would decrease the effect of TS?
laptoprob
back to basics
Why not in postprocessing? PS works great!
Dwig
Well-known
yes, you're correct. Using a "wide" T/S lens made for 35mm would be bad enough. Using one for 6x6 would be even worse. The widest T/S lenses for 35mm work out to normal or slightly long lenses on 4/3.
There are two other big issues:
1. The m4/3 mount is rather narrow. Shifting a lens off center may result is some vignetting caused by the small mount opening and the even smaller opening in the adapter.
2. Shifting lenses off center on digital is a bad thing. Digital sensors abhor light striking at an angle to their surface. In most cases the image quality loss from digitally manipulating an image to straighten verticals is less than that produced by a significantly shifted lens, especially when the shifted lens was not designed from the ground up as a T/S lens for digital. Given that many wide angle M lenses work poorly on m4/3 bodies while 50mm and longer lenses almost uniformly work perfectly well, its safe to assume that shifting lenses on m4/3 will be problematic.
Its probably best to frame loosely with a slightly wider than necessary lens and do most of the correct in post processing.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Yea, I guess doing corrections in PP is the way to go and I do it regularly. I can't remember the last time I used my shift lens.
Bob
Bob
Audii-Dudii
Established
This is precisely the reason why I finally stumped for an Oly 7-14 zoom, as IMO, this approach outperforms all of the alternatives. (That said, I do have plans to attach my GF1 / E-P1 bodies to my Toyo 23G view camera so that I can capture several images of a scene by shifting the body left and right, then up and down, and then flat-stitch them all together in PS. I've yet to see how well this works in practice, though...)
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I would love to see some image samples of this.
Tom Diaz
Well-known
Yes, I strongly agree. I used to use an Olympus Zuiko 35mm shift lens (which was excellent), and like other lenses, you could use it on a micro-4/3 camera with an adapter.
However, once I started doing digital printing and using Photoshop, I never used a shift lens again. You can easily straighten perspective lines with Photoshop. If perspective control is what you want, I suggest saving the money for the shift lens (which could be a lot). If you don't already ahve Photoshop you could buy it with the money!
Tom
mrisney
Well-known
I have the Canon FD TS 35mm 2.8, this was done with the G1, I have since gotten the GH1, here is a video of it
http://www.vimeo.com/7122353
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Excellent, I really appreciate it. Those look great.
Dwig
Well-known
I have the Canon FD TS 35mm 2.8, this was done with the G1, I have since gotten the GH1, here is a video of it
http://www.vimeo.com/7122353
Tilting for DOF control is one thing. It can't really be duplicated in PP.
For architectural work, as mentioned by the OP, its shift that is the primary useful function. Shift can be replicated well in PP, particularly if you help things along by loose framing with a wider lens so the final transformed image can be cropped to create a rectangular image.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I actually got my hands on the Canon FD 35/2.8 TS lens this week, and I must say it's quite a pleasure to use. Tilting works great, but I suspect I will mostly be using the shift function on film, where the wider angle will be more useful. Here are a few examples. (BTW, I'm using the Rainbow Imaging adapter from eBay and it's very sturdy with no wobble.)
wjlapier
Well-known
The Canon 35 t/s lens is very nice. Sharp and very well made. Long ago I had one in Nikon mount but eventually sold it when I sold my film cameras. Now I have the D700 and I am considering it again. Might have to send it to SKGrimes for conversion.
I'd like to see the tilt in the opposite direction on a mFT body ( greater DOF ) if anyone has some photos. Just curious how and if it would work.
Bill
I'd like to see the tilt in the opposite direction on a mFT body ( greater DOF ) if anyone has some photos. Just curious how and if it would work.
Bill
