Tilt/Shift for medium format

[marameo]

I'm not considering getting into LF at the moment. Yet, I'm interested in tilt/shift capabilities for medium format. I own a RZ67 camera and would like to get a 180mm f/4.5 Short Barrel Lens with a tilt/shift adapter.

At first glimpse the difference between tilt/shift for LF and MF is that the latter doesn't seem to have rear tilt. To my knowledge real tilt has the disadvantage of likely changing the perpective, though.

I'd like to know how you would use front tilt as far as shallow depth of field works for portraits. Should I tilt up (backwards) or down (forward)? Can I stop down the lens to its sweet spot and still get a creamy out of focus effect?

My portrait style would range from close up to waist level.

Thanks

 

[Dwig]

It's all a matter of how you want to shift the plane of focus. If a portrait is posed and framed similar to your avatar then tilt is not likely what you want. You would usually want to use swing (tilt=horizontal axis, swing=vertical axis) to shift the plane of focus so that the nose/lips/stash, subject's right eye and possibly ear are close to the plane of best focus. You could then chose an aperture that will yield the DOF you want, though being careful not to completely loose the left eye in the blur.

 

[Larry H-L]

The main disadvantage of using rear movements is causing distortion. One end of the image is either closer to, or further away from the subject. Using rear movements does not change your perspective as the lens is in the same position.

The main disadvantage of using front movements is exceeding the size of the image circle. Using front movements also does change your point of view or perspective.

Most medium format cameras do not have rear movements. You could simulate a rear movement by tilting the entire camera and then repositioning the lens back to "level."

With portraiture, you should be fine using front movements. Either tilting up or down would work, the difference would be in the rendering of the background or foreground area, you will just have to decide what looks best. Swinging the front from side to side could also create some interesting looks.

Yes, you can stop down the lens somewhat and still see the effects of the tilts or swings. "Shifting" the lens will not cause any change in depth of field.

 

[Santtu Määttänen]

One option (which might be even cheaper then short-barreled lens / bellows combo) would be to find a peco junior with 6x9 roll back. Those can be had for quite cheap and it would give full movements. I actually have considered it quite a bit lately due to the fact that my 18x24cm camera is bit large to carry around 😱 But haven't took the plunge yet, too many cameras already and I just bought one today as well.. must stop looking sites that sell stuff..

 

[marameo]

The main disadvantage of using rear movements is causing distortion. One end of the image is either closer to, or further away from the subject. Using rear movements does not change your perspective as the lens is in the same position.

Since I never operated a tilt camera I can't tell the difference between the two.

The main disadvantage of using front movements is exceeding the size of the image circle. Using front movements also does change your point of view or perspective.

So when I tilt forward I must rise shift to reframe?

Most medium format cameras do not have rear movements. You could simulate a rear movement by tilting the entire camera and then repositioning the lens back to "level."

If I position the lens to "level" (parallel to the subject) and tilt the back of the camera backwards will that not change the depth but only the distortion?

Thanks

 

[Larry H-L]

Distortion relates to the shape of the subject / object, take a round plate as an example, rear movements could cause the plate to appear oblong.

Perspective in this case refers to "where you are seeing from" and how things in view line up with each other. If you move the lens with a front movement, you are seeing from a different position.

Tilt, then rise or fall? Might be required, depends on the image circle, most likely not a problem with a tight portrait.

Tilting the camera backwards will cause some distortion but it might not be an issue for you.

Remember that front and rear movements are opposite, a front foward tilt equals a rear back tilt.

I would first try a tilt, with the top of the lens tilted back toward the camera, and with the camera being kept level.

Have fun, experiment.

 

[Larry H-L]

Here is one with the lens tilted up, top back toward the camera.

http://www.hamel-lambert.com/people/content/people-40_large.html

 

[john_s]

One option (tilt only) is the Rolleiflex SL66. Although the lens standard tilts, the effect optically is that it's rear tilt, otherwise the coverage of the standard lenses would be exceeded. I've used mine for near/far landscape and the amount of adjustment is sufficient. I haven't tried it for differential focus in portraiture but I did see an example on the web somewhere which was good.

In other ways the SL66 is a lovely camera.

 

[x-ray]

One option (tilt only) is the Rolleiflex SL66. Although the lens standard tilts, the effect optically is that it's rear tilt, otherwise the coverage of the standard lenses would be exceeded. I've used mine for near/far landscape and the amount of adjustment is sufficient. I haven't tried it for differential focus in portraiture but I did see an example on the web somewhere which was good.

In other ways the SL66 is a lovely camera.

I second the Rollei SL66. I used them in studio and on location for many years and the tilt feature works very well.

Doesn't the big Fuji GX 6x8 studio camera have some movements? Seems like a friend of mine that used them said they do but not sure.

 

[MCTuomey]

I second the Rollei SL66. I used them in studio and on location for many years and the tilt feature works very well.

Doesn't the big Fuji GX 6x8 studio camera have some movements? Seems like a friend of mine that used them said they do but not sure.

The GX680 was offered with and without movements, actually. Those with movements featured front rise/fall, swing, and tilt.

 

[marameo]

One option (tilt only) is the Rolleiflex SL66. Although the lens standard tilts, the effect optically is that it's rear tilt, otherwise the coverage of the standard lenses would be exceeded.

Do you think the same applies for medium format in general?

The mamiya should look like this: http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00L/00LvSQ-37536884.jpg

 

[aizan]

check out the horseman vh and 6x9 linhof technika and technikardan.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Go to http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/camera movements.html and scroll about half way down to see how rear camera movements distort shape.

Cheers,

R.

 

[EdSawyer]

I have the full Tilt Shift setup for the RZ67 I might consider parting with: 180 and 75 SB lenses, the SB spacer, tilt-shift adapter, and the ground-glass back. All as-new, most with original boxes, etc. Feel free to pm or email. It's nice gear I just don't use it much and when I need tilt I reach for the 4x5.