Jump to content

Options for Shift lenses on the M-240 -Merged


MarkP

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The first two are from Bodie,Calif., the " best preserved ghost town in the West". It's not too far North of Mono Lake, about 10 miles East of Highway 395. Fascinating location, very few tourists, and absolutely no commercial development of any kind whatsoever. Very easy to spend an entire day there and not even notice you'd been there from sunrise to dark.

 

The white church is in Bodega Bay, off Coast Highway 1, North of San Francisco and is the little church in the movie "The Birds" - one of Ansel Adams's most famous shots is of that church, taken from roughly the same spot.

 

PS: very embarrassing to find myself singing the praises of the Canon 24mm T/S lens, not having thought through its lack of aperture adjustability if mounted on a Leica M.

Link to post
Share on other sites

John, thanks for the location information, in particular the Church, interesting history. I use the Canon 24,45 and 90mm T/S lenses and wish there would be some way to use them on the M. Unfortunately the M has no electrical connections in the mount and no way of signalling the shutter release.

 

For the M I have the Leica 28mm Super Angulon, Olympus 24mm and 35mm shifts. The Olympus 24mm does however suffer from rather severe red fringing in high contrast areas.

 

Bob.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 questions

 

- looking at the Nikon PC-Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 and the Leica 28 S-A there seem to be quite a lot of overlap - and these are very competitively priced these days 2nd hand (interesting that it's still available new!). Does anyone have experience of this?

 

- In the digital age - is there a real benefit in a PC lens, or would we be better off using a good quality wide angle lens and making the corrections in software?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris,

 

With 24MP, that is a lot of pixel headroom to use free transform in PS. I am going to start with W/A, mainly using the Zeiss 25 Biogon, which is beautifully rectilinear for architecture shots. This is always a good start to doing transform. I have found if you have to correct first with a lens profile, then transform never seems to work quite as well. If I find my images lacking, only then will I go down the Arsat MC-TS 35mm route in M42 mount, as I already have an M42 to M adapter.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 questions

 

- looking at the Nikon PC-Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 and the Leica 28 S-A there seem to be quite a lot of overlap - and these are very competitively priced these days 2nd hand (interesting that it's still available new!). Does anyone have experience of this?

 

- In the digital age - is there a real benefit in a PC lens, or would we be better off using a good quality wide angle lens and making the corrections in software?

 

Regarding your 1st question: I tried the PC 28 Nikkor on the M9, and was disappointed with the results. With the 28 Super Angulon that's not the case.

 

Re your 2nd question: it all depends from the quantity. If only a few pictures have to be corrected, the PP approach is of course OK. But that won't work if you must deliver more than a few photos.

 

Besides, there is a not so subtle benefit in the geometry of the final image when working with a shifting lens in comparison with the corrected image via software: there is no alteration of the building's thickness.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Besides, there is a not so subtle benefit in the geometry of the final image when working with a shifting lens in comparison with the corrected image via software: there is no alteration of the building's thickness.

It is a photoshop basic to correct that as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a photoshop basic to correct that as well.

 

of course, that's right, I don't say it because we can take it for granted ;) : a lot can be altered with greater or lesser work in PP.

The benefit from using a shift lens, for me, is that the Leica format proportion (2:3) is automatically preserved.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding your 1st question: I tried the PC 28 Nikkor on the M9, and was disappointed with the results. With the 28 Super Angulon that's not the case.

 

Manolo - many thanks for the comment (and others). I've worked with Lightroom to correct converging verticals and have been pleased with the results (based on Zeiss 18mm lens as the starting point) - though I'm still intrigued by the idea of working with a PC lens on the M9.

Again a question - Manolo - can you comment on the nature of your disappointment? It's possible to find the Nikon 28PC for under €350 - while the 28 SA is going to cost at least €1200 to €1400 . Was it that disappointing? :)

Edited by chris_tribble
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that some are satisfied with the results of post-processing perspective correction (including with my 2.8/25 ZM Biogon, Wilson). For minor corrections LR is OK,and I think PS is better, but for more significant corrections especially for convergent/divergent verticals I've never thought that the results looked 'realistic'. Hence my interest in a PC lens (correction, Manolo's PC 28-R).

 

Is this just me or do others feel similarly?

Edited by MarkP
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Manolo - many thanks for the comment (and others). I've worked with Lightroom to correct converging verticals and have been pleased with the results (based on Zeiss 18mm lens as the starting point) - though I'm still intrigued by the idea of working with a PC lens on the M9.

Again a question - Manolo - can you comment on the nature of your disappointment? It's possible to find the Nikon 28PC for under €350 - while the 28 SA is going to cost at least €1200 to €1400 . Was it that disappointing? :)

 

Thank you, Chris, for your kind words!

My dissatisfaction had to do with a not-so-good detail level on the corners, even stopping down, of course. That could be because of the particular lens I was testing. In any case, when I bought the 28 R Super-Angulon, the one travelling to where Mark lives (did it arrive, Mark? :) ), the price difference here in Spain was not that steep: the Nikkor was around 1000€, and the S-Ang was 1200€. The mechanics of the S-Ang is IMHO nicer, and the results are fine.

But if you find one for under 350€, I would try it, of course!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that some are satisfied with the results of post-processing perspective correction (including with my 2.8/25 ZM Biogon, Wilson). For minor corrections LR is OK,and I think PS is better, but for more significant corrections especially for convergent/divergent verticals I've never thought that the results looked 'realistic'. Hence my interest in a PC lens (correction, Manolo's PC 28-R).

 

Is this just me or do others feel similarly?

 

Mark,

 

I agreed that correction in PS is not as good in a perfect world but IMHO, unless you are using a proper view camera of at least 5" x 4", with rise/fall/side to side and tilt, small format tilt shift lenses are not a whole lot better than PS. I just don't feel you can judge the correction properly in the viewfinder or on the LCD. Now if you were using the camera tethered to a laptop, which I have not tried, I suspect that may be a different matter altogether.

 

I have a small Exacta-Wirgin 6 cm x 9.5 cm view camera, with up/down and side to side shift, which has a removable roll film back (you can't buy the slides for the dark slide back any more). My results from this, have not been great as the ground glass screen is just too small to get the perspective adjustment totally accurate, even if you spend ages twiddling. As long as you have lots of pixels and with the M-240, we will have, I think PP will, on average, produce equally good results to optical correction.

 

I am not fixed in this view and if I don't get the results I am looking for using PS, then I too may get a TS lens.

 

Wilson

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a 35/2.8 Nikkor PC and agree that it's hard to line things up perfectly in the viewfinder (haven't yet really tried it with live view on the D700). But I'm not too proud to use a little digital PP for final adjustment. Overall this feels more satisfactory than using a plain 21 or 24mm lens with heavy digital adjustment and concomitant loss of pixels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I am correct that the multifunction hand grip allows tethering (am I?) If you can tether to an iPad or similar, that would be fantastic for adjustment of a TS lens. Capture One has an app for their Phase One cameras and backs, to tether to an iPad.

 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to David Farkas - YES (http://www.reddotforum.com/content.php/278-Photokina-2012-Day-1-The-Leica-M) - he says:

For tethering, the M will work with Leica Image Shuttle software and directly into Lightroom. Pretty sweet. I can see that Leica has plans for a wider adoption base than for previous M cameras. Oh, and a very cool trick of the Multifunction Handgrip is that it has a built-in GPS in the handle that automatically embeds GPS information into the file metadata. Awesome for travel and landscape photography as well as photojournalism. There's also a copyright entry menu to embed this data. Even better for PJs.
:)
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting thread but I can't help wonder whether those who are serious about architectural photography (or any other photography for which tilt/shift lenses are of benefit) shouldn't be looking at other systems. The M 240 is unproven at this moment in time and there is no reason to believe that its 24MP CMOS chip holds any advantage over, say, the 36MP chip of the Nikon 800E. £5100 buys a lot of DSLR nowadays and is in reach of used Hasselblad and other MF systems. Using SLR tilt/shift lenses on an M negates the small size of the M body and the user will not be using the defining characteristic of the M system – namely, it's optical viewfinder. Rather than mess around with adapters, etc. it would better IMO to just use a camera better suited (from the outset) to the task in hand – especially at this "35mm" generalist level of photography. If you are very serious about architectural photography (on the level of that which gets commissioned for magazines like Domus) you'd be better off looking at a higher level of system altogether and/or spending your money on lighting equipment.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian - I fully take your point - I suppose I'm seduced by the possibility of what might be possible :) - especially when I'm travelling. It's a bit the same story with long lenses. In anticipation of the M-240 I've just got an FD mount 300 f.4 L series Canon lens + Leica R 80-200. I already have the latest Canon USM 70-200 IS lens + Canon USM L series 300 f2.8 + the 5D2, and for a forthcoming trip to India (documentary photography) I'm going to have to take both a DSLR and the 70-200 + a 2 body Leica kit. For this trip, given the choice, I'd so much prefer to be able to take the lighter, smaller Leica 80-200 and my normal range of lenses - and for concert work I'll still use the Canon for the foreseeable future.

 

The same applies to the idea of a PC lens... when on the road I often find myself working in domestic spaces, or wanting to capture architecture. At the moment, I use the Zeiss 18 and then throw away a lot of data in post-process... I'm kind of tempted to be able to use a PC lens with the Leica M-240 to do the same job, better. OK - an assistant and a proper view camera would be wonderful - but I'm not going to have that luxury - hence the desire to see what one body with new technologies built in can do for me :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...