Need help buidling a system

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use a 5D and T/S lenses (when the room is large enough). What Canon offers right now is the option to work with shift lenses as wide as 24 mm (24/3.5 or, via adapter, 24 Olympus). I've reviewed both as well as a number of ultra-wide options for EOS. In fact, there are a series of articles on the site about Ultra-wides for EOS.

 

The D3 would let one work with the Schneider 28 shift which almost gets one as wide. But, of course, in some spaces there's a big difference between 24 and 28. But as soon as we see a good 20 - 24 mm shift lens for Nikon, I think the D3 will become very competitive as a camera for architecture/interiors. Absent that, it interests me that the Nikon can work, fully coupled, with lenses from Zeiss as well as those from Nikon.

 

Right now, FF Canon cameras dominate small format digital architectural photography. And, naturally, they are what I've used since the 1Ds. But the ground under us is shifting and Nikon may well be a strong player in that specialized field.

 

Many of us, I think, would love to see a first-class 20 mm shift.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[jklotz]

Thanks for adding other alternatives. Would you explain more on "proportions of the shot" and "visual reference." Is that proportions of the image itself and a reference for scale if the the building and architecture (i.e. person's height). If you have examples of good and bad that would be wonderful.

 

And then more on how this relates to the camera choice. Obviously the list goes from smaller image area to larger image area. Is that a function of capturing more detail so it's not lost or something else inherent to larger formats.

 

Thank you

 

I'll do my best. Look at a building or a room. It has porportion, a window covers x percent of the overall surface area. A chair fills x portion of a room. Tilt your camera up or down to change angles and you get perspective distortion. the verticles converge, and, for instance, the tall building you are pointing your camera up at so you can get it all in your frame, now apears to tilt inward towards the top. You correct for this by making sure your camera is level and plumb to the surface you are shooting, but then, you might be pointing half way into the ground/parking lot/floor. This is when a tilt shift lens will help you. You are now able to shift the lens up, or do a rise with a view camera, while keeping the film plane (or sensor plane) level. Now your whole room/building/whatever is now in the frame and the porportions are correct, there is no perspective distortion and your architect/designer is happy and you get paid.

 

This can also be corrected by photoshop, but the problem is you have no visual reference - as you splay the verticles, you might have to also elongate the photo to have it fill the frame the way you had intended. Now the perspective distortion my be corrected, but the building/room may be more elongated or squat than what the architect designed. How would you know? Guess you could make a print and go back and compare them, but even then, you are still guessing when you get back. Doing it in software, you also loose some micro detail due to interpolation.

 

I'll try to post some images later that might help explain it better. Hope this made sense; wish my writing skills were like Sean Reid's, but hopefully I did well enough to give you an idea.

 

James

[jklotz]

 

Many of us, I think, would love to see a first-class 20 mm shift.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Sean, if it comes out, and your web page gives it the thumbs up, I'll be one of the 1st in line to buy it!

[sean_reid]

Wouldn't that be sweet? It certainly is possible and it needn't be fast, F/3.5 would be fine.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[MJones]

I'll do my best. Look at a building or a room. It has porportion, a window covers x percent of the overall surface area. A chair fills x portion of a room. Tilt your camera up or down to change angles and you get perspective distortion. the verticles converge, and, for instance, the tall building you are pointing your camera up at so you can get it all in your frame, now apears to tilt inward towards the top. You correct for this by making sure your camera is level and plumb to the surface you are shooting, but then, you might be pointing half way into the ground/parking lot/floor. This is when a tilt shift lens will help you. You are now able to shift the lens up, or do a rise with a view camera, while keeping the film plane (or sensor plane) level. Now your whole room/building/whatever is now in the frame and the porportions are correct, there is no perspective distortion and your architect/designer is happy and you get paid.

 

This can also be corrected by photoshop, but the problem is you have no visual reference - as you splay the verticles, you might have to also elongate the photo to have it fill the frame the way you had intended. Now the perspective distortion my be corrected, but the building/room may be more elongated or squat than what the architect designed. How would you know? Guess you could make a print and go back and compare them, but even then, you are still guessing when you get back. Doing it in software, you also loose some micro detail due to interpolation.

 

I'll try to post some images later that might help explain it better. Hope this made sense; wish my writing skills were like Sean Reid's, but hopefully I did well enough to give you an idea.

 

James

 

Thank you. That makes sense. I was originally keeping the words "scale" and "proportion" in reference to just the photographic image as a thing to itself regardless of the subject matter. But it was really about the scale and proportion of the architecture, the buildings that may be more important (not that scale and proportion aren't important to the photographic image itself, they are).

 

So you're saying you have to heavily consider the effects of lens focal length, the photographer's spatial position (perspective and vantage point), film/digital format and a few other things as to how it would capture and interpret the architect's design intent, scale of the building, scale of the design of the architecture, and so forth?

 

So do you meet with the architect and go through all this to get their take.

[jklotz]

So you're saying you have to heavily consider the effects of lens focal length, the photographer's spatial position (perspective and vantage point), film/digital format and a few other things as to how it would capture and interpret the architect's design intent, scale of the building, scale of the design of the architecture, and so forth?

 

So do you meet with the architect and go through all this to get their take.

 

well, yes. I try to get as much information as possible from my clients before any job, but a perspectively correct image is expected and is rarely brought up. I always like to see a site plan or make a site visit so I know where the sun is going to be, how much lighting I'm going to need to bring, mixed lighting scenerios, props, etc. But scale and porportion are equally important for interiors. It takes a lot of practice to get good at it.

[macdaddy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So you're saying you have to heavily consider the effects of lens focal length, the photographer's spatial position (perspective and vantage point), film/digital format and a few other things as to how it would capture and interpret the architect's design intent, scale of the building, scale of the design of the architecture, and so forth?

 

Hmmm! Let me give all of you some perspective (No puns intended!) on what this project envisions: As David Plowden ( David Plowden ) has done in documenting and expounding on the disappearing American landscape, the intent of this book is a photojournalistic project to acquaint people with out-of-the-way corners and places in America that time seems to have passed by for one reason or another. It is NOT a maudlin exercise in "what used to be" but designed to show you places it would be worth your while to search out and visit for one reason, or many! As such, there will be a mixture of people, landscape/nature and architectural photos whose purpose is to show you what you're missing as you blast down the Interstate.

Think William "Least Heat" Moon's "Blue Highways" or "Lost America" or any of a dozen or more books on the famous Route 66 and add the right mixture of photography and commentary to it and you get the idea.

So while architecture IS important, getting spot-on perspective and distortion-free shots isn't 100% critical! Yes, I want as good as I can get, but I also have a strict budget, specific needs and, while the Pentax system will be more than satisfactory for people shots (Sean, the FA 77mm Limited is OUTSTANDING for that!) and some other areas, I AM finding it's 1.5 crop factor and the consistent CA I'm getting with the 12-24mm/f4 and 16-45mm/f4 zooms to be slowing me down too much.

Also, as I've said before, for personal reasons, Canon is OUT for any consideration, even as a rental! The idea of renting and using a higher-end large format system might make more sense to me at this point and I have experience using film 4X5 and MF systems, but prefer to stick with digital and ownership of the equipment. As the project is only 3 months along and will continue through through the end of 2008 before it's due to the publisher, renting might be outside the budget, not to mention difficult to get and use equipment that long.

Sean, you mentioned Schneider. I'm familiar with them on Alpa's but unaware of a Nikon mount version or adapters that will allow it. Would you be so kind as to point me to a resource for Nikon mount versions? They would be my lens of choice as they are simply incredible on an Alpa! E-mail me directly at: macmini@windstream.net, if you would.

Again, thanks to all for your contributions as they've been invaluable and have given me MUCH to think on!

Rob W

[jklotz]

Rob, I know you are opposed to Canon, but for the $7K you have to invest, you could get a 5D, 24 t/s, 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 f4 w/ is, and still have a few bucks left over for memory cards, spirit level, etc. I'd think that a majority of what you see published these days was taken with some combination thereof, and it would no doubt fit the bill for what you are looking for. The alpa is a great system, but you are looking at upwards of $10K with a few lenses, and that is before you look at a capture device (a digital back and/or film). If you are willing to wait, maybe Nikon will offer something, but it sounds like you've in the midst of it, and need it now. Just a thought.

 

The fact that you are hanging out in the Leica forum tells me you might be attrracted to a camera with a little more "personality" than a DSLR, in which case you might want to also consider getting on ebay and taking a look at a used Sinar P2, X or similar and shoot film for your interiors. Amazing what you can pick one of those up for these days. It will be a challange, as wide angle LF photography has never been easy, but the results can be quite good. I'd imagine by the time you were ready to go to press, however, you would be at or beyond your budget when you factor in film, devoloping, poloriods, etc.

 

As it stands today, your only solution, at least out of the box, that will a) fit your budget, will have you out shooting before the end of the week, c) give you the flexability you have said you need and d) allow you to get on to shooting with the least ammount of headache is tha Canon.

 

Again, for the investment you are looking at making, I'd highly recomend you spend a few hundred bucks renting the various systems you are considering for a day. That will tell you more than a month of reading about it on the internet.

 

James

[macdaddy]

James:

I see you're "just down the road" from me in Atlanta! I've contacted a high-end dealer there (Preferred Photography Resources) who sells and rents every sort of dream system your wallet can stand to take a hit on and will be meeting with one of their consultants this weekend to actually sample systems in their studios and in downtown Atlanta. That should give me a pretty good idea what will/won't work for me for the book!

They've indicated that they'll work with me to see if they can put together a system inside my meager grant budget!

Rob

[jklotz]

James:

I see you're "just down the road" from me in Atlanta! Rob

 

PPR, huh? Steve Hendrick over there is a good guy. Watch your wallet though, they sell some of everything....

 

I'll shoot you an email in case you need anything while in town.

 

James

[macdaddy]

PPR, huh? Steve Hendrick over there is a good guy. Watch your wallet though, they sell some of everything....

 

I'll shoot you an email in case you need anything while in town.

 

James

Yeah, my Dearly Beloved, aka "The Keeper of the Cash", has informed me of the mortal danger I'll be in from HER when I go down there Friday! 8o) Thanks for the kind response. We should hook up soon and just talk things photographic!

For those interested, here is a link to T.O.P. and an article about my inspirations for this project:

The Online Photographer: Vanishing Point by David Plowden

 

For fans of QUALITY B&W photography, refined over a 50-year plus career, you can do worse than study the photography of David Plowden!

Rob W