| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Which Canon Tilt/Shift lens is most useful?
Dan Powers, Photographer
 |
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 10:05 PM on 06.07.10 |
->> Hey guys,
I'm just curious what you think is the most useful focal length for tilt/shift lenses made by Canon. I have never used one before, but in case we ever get one at our paper it would be nice to have some feedback from those of you that already use them. Thanks...Dan. |
|
David Manning, Photographer
|
Athens | GA | | Posted: 10:53 PM on 06.07.10 |
->> A couple of friends use the 90mm for Canon. I've used the 85 for Nikon and love it, but i cant justify the price for it personally.
I found i used it mainly for portraits and the odd bizzare action photo. |
|
Dylan Lynch, Photographer, Assistant
|
Edmonton | AB | Canada | Posted: 12:18 AM on 06.08.10 |
->> That's such a ridiculously vague question it's impossible to answer.. it's like asking "Hi guys, what lens is best, k thanks."
17mm: crazy wide, good for interiors, tight spaces
24mm: great for architecture, gives a reasonable working distance, but still possible to stitch exposures to get wider if need be
45mm: good for gimmicky (IMO) portraits and general use.. popular with wedding photographers
90mm: excellent for product photography
It's the same as choosing any other lens, the fact that it's t/s shouldn't mean anything. What focal length do you use most, and what are you using it for? That's what you/we need to know to help make an informed decision. |
|
Dan Powers, Photographer
|
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 1:45 AM on 06.08.10 |
| ->> If we got one it would be a pool lens that a variety of photographers would have access to. No way to tell what they might use it for, so because we can't buy all four of them I thought I would just ask if there was one that seemed to be most useful/versatile. Maybe it was a bit vague, but I wouldn't say "ridiculously" vague. Thanks guys. |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
| | | Posted: 10:01 AM on 06.08.10 |
->> Dan,
While I'd love the 17, it is a specialty lens among specialty lenses (it also was not available when I bought my T/S). I found the 45 incompatible with how I shot.
I tested out the 24 and 90 and really loved both. Both lenses were fantastic for architecture and portraiture, they are some of the sharpest lenses Canon makes.
Ultimately, I choose the 24f3.5 T/S as I found it to be the most versatile lens in the line up. I have it, use it, love it. It does well for architecture, still live, gets ridiculously close with a 12mm extension tube for macro work (lighting then becomes a challenge), its great for portraits and I really enjoy it for my personal landscape work. |
|
Neil Turner, Photographer
|
Bournemouth | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 10:08 AM on 06.08.10 |
->> I have to agree that each lens has a very different use. I have used all four and would most like to own the 17mm because I have to shoot an increasing amount of commercial work that requires a very wide lens. If I was shooting more product stuff then I'd go for the 90mm because it is a very beautiful lens to use.
As a general lens that would get the most use I think that the 24mm has the most possibilities - it's also the latest addition to the range and has as many options as the 17mm without being a bit "mad".
Neil |
|
Dan Powers, Photographer
|
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 11:30 AM on 06.08.10 |
| ->> Thanks guys. I also had a friend recommend the 24mm version and even offered to let me try it out. I appreciate your input! Cheers...Dan. |
|
Israel Shirk, Photographer, Assistant
|
Rob Shook, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 9:07 PM on 06.08.10 |
| ->> I work at the equipment rental cage at my university. The 24 sees far more use than the 17, 45, or 90 tilt-shifts. |
|
Dan Powers, Photographer
|
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 9:30 PM on 06.08.10 |
| ->> Man Rob I wish I had your equipment rental cage when I was in school! |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 12:34 AM on 06.09.10 |
| ->> Personally I'd go with the 17, but then again that goes along with my shooting style. |
|
Mike O'Bryon, Photographer
|
Ft. Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 1:30 AM on 06.09.10 |
->> I think Paul Gero told me has had all three and he likes the 45 best
-- Mike |
|
Dan Powers, Photographer
|
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 2:03 AM on 06.09.10 |
| ->> Thanks everyone. I think I'm gonna give the 24mm a whirl first. Hello CPS! |
|
Ron Scheffler, Photographer
|
Hamilton (Toronto area) | Ontario | Canada | Posted: 5:03 AM on 06.11.10 |
->> All of the TS-E lenses also work with the Canon teleconverters, though IMO you're best to stick with just the 1.4x. Lately for my work the 17 and 45 have been most useful, but I shoot on 1.3x crop bodies instead of full frame, so the 17 is really 22mm equivalent coverage. The 17 is the only Canon super wide I've used that is sharp across most of the frame wide open (at least on a 1.3x cropper), though I haven't had a chance to try the new 14mm. The 16-35 can't compare and also has much more barrel distortion.
The two new TS-Es are phenomenal. Excellent image quality with very little chromatic aberration or distortion. The 17 with the 1.4x tc is actually better in most ways than the old 24. I did a comparison here: http://www.ronscheffler.com/blog/?page_id=309
I like the 45 and find it pretty versatile but it does suffer from significant chromatic aberrations towards the edges, especially when shifted. This is more of a problem when doing technical photography, such as architecture where you need clean details. If you're just after reverse tilts for fake miniature effects, portraits, etc. then the CA issue isn't as significant.
The 90 is all around very nice though could benefit from greater shift and tilt range like the new TS-Es... |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|