New Canon Tilt-Shift lenses in the wild [CR2]

[Del Paso]

Why such "niche" products?
Just because, for many of us, these are no niche products, but lenses we often use. And they sell well. So, the "niche" must be quite large...
In my case, the 24 TSE was my very first Canon lens, and the reason why I didn't buy the Nikon D 850, the TSEs being (according to several reviews) better than the Nikkor equivalents.
Canon have lenses no competitor can offer, it's part of their success.

 

[Del Paso]

I do wonder if Canon will be able to make the tilt/shift mechanism motorized as well. It may be even more useful than AF.

Do you mean automated setting of the right tilt or shift value?

 

[Del Paso]

Agreed, I can certainly live without AF in a TS lens.


Depends on what/where you shoot. For exterior architecture in the US, I typically use the TS-E 24L II. But in Europe, there are many lovely buildings with very little space around them where I'd like wider than my TS-E 17L and I end up using the 11-24/4L without the benefit of shift.

I'd be tempted by a 14m TS lens for RF mount, but I'd also keep the TS-E 17 (and 24).

The 14 TS is indeed extremely tempting, also for lanscapes (forests, canyons etc...).

 

[entoman]

Would be interesting to find out if 14mm requires special filter mount or they manage to keep standard screw in filter thread on front.

Fitting a front-mounted filter on a lens with a massively wide angle of view doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Unless you are extremely lucky, that ultra-wide angle of view will include the sun, or some other flare-inducing light source, and even the best filters will be prone to flare under such circumstances. IMO, drop-in filters are a better option, although they bring their own issues such as the risk of dust and moisture getting into the lens.

 

[entoman]

Do you mean automated setting of the right tilt or shift value?

With all the advances in AI tech, before long the camera will be able to detect how much tilt and shift to apply, and drive the appropriate settings into position. 2030, here we come!

 

[Mark M]

I look forward to this as well:

Photography with Tilt and Shift Lenses

Tilt and shift lenses offer tremendous creative possibilities for users of digital SLR and mirrorless cameras. This practical book explains the techniques that will help you take better photos - photos that don't distort or lose focus. Assessing the benefits and pitfalls of a range of lenses...

www.crowood.com

The most experience I have with tilt-shift lenses is on my home theater Epson projector (!) ... Keith's book will be a good place to start.

Keith's book is fabulous.

 

[Hector1970]

I'm very curious on the 14mm TSE. It would be useful for skyscrapers with a high MP camera.
The cost will be incredible. I don't see the particular advantage of having autofocus in a Tilt-Shift.
I think manually focusing it kind of comes along with a tilt shift lens and the careful preparation of taking an image.
I have the 24 TS-E and 50mm TS-E I don't think I'll ever be replacing them with RF lens.
I have Keiths book too. It's a great introduction to TS-E lens.
I'd have to say Tilt-shift lens are a great photography teacher. They really make you precise and careful about the image you take.

 

[Del Paso]

With all the advances in AI tech, before long the camera will be able to detect how much tilt and shift to apply, and drive the appropriate settings into position. 2030, here we come!

No way! AI will never know how much shift (a bit of converging often looks better) or tilt we want to apply. But it could certainly guarantee absolutely parallel building lines, or maximum tilt sharpness.
Trouble is, I just do no want AI to take MY pictures! (I'd rather turn back to my Kodak Brownie)

 

[Del Paso]

I'm very curious on the 14mm TSE. It would be useful for skyscrapers with a high MP camera.
The cost will be incredible. I don't see the particular advantage of having autofocus in a Tilt-Shift.
I think manually focusing it kind of comes along with a tilt shift lens and the careful preparation of taking an image.
I have the 24 TS-E and 50mm TS-E I don't think I'll ever be replacing them with RF lens.
I have Keiths book too. It's a great introduction to TS-E lens.
I'd have to say Tilt-shift lens are a great photography teacher. They really make you precise and careful about the image you take.

Same here, neither I see an advantage having AF in a TS lens, unless used for "normal" photography.
And yes, the price will be like the lens, stellar...so I'll certainly, like you, keep mine. I too have Keith's excellent TS book.

 

[entoman]

Same here, neither I see an advantage having AF in a TS lens, unless used for "normal" photography.
And yes, the price will be like the lens, stellar...so I'll certainly, like you, keep mine. I too have Keith's excellent TS book.

I thought the same way originally, but I'm starting to change my mind for 2 reasons:

a) you get 2 lenses in one, i.e. a "normal" walkabout AF 24mm for the occasions when I need to work fast, AND a T/S for the occasions when I want to "correct" perspective etc and prefer to take more time.

b) being a bit dozy, and being so used to having AF in all my other lenses, I find that I sometimes forget to focus when using my T/S-E... depth of field is so deep with wide/ultra-wides that things can look sharp and focused through the EVF, even when they're not. I find focus peaking to be pretty useless for landscapes, and the magnifier not much better, so AF might be useful.

 

[entoman]

No way! AI will never know how much shift (a bit of converging often looks better) or tilt we want to apply. But it could certainly guarantee absolutely parallel building lines, or maximum tilt sharpness.
Trouble is, I just do no want AI to take MY pictures! (I'd rather turn back to my Kodak Brownie)

I agree that a bit of convergence looks more natural, as it's the way we see thing with our own eyes. I often shoot from low down to deliberately exaggerate natural perspective.

Commercial photographers might (?) feel differently though, as automated "AI-shift" would greatly speed up photography of buildings and interiors, leaving the photographer to concentrate on composition, while leaving the convergence "correction" to the camera.

 

[neuroanatomist]

a) you get 2 lenses in one, i.e. a "normal" walkabout AF 24mm for the occasions when I need to work fast

Work fast…with a slow lens. Oki dokie.

 

[scyrene]

As the end of the article says, there would indeed be a market for an MP-R macro lens I'm very curious which direction Canon will take that. Something as straight-forward as built-in lights like the EF-M28mm would already be a huge quality of life improvement.

Rounded aperture blades, and more of them would be an easy way to improve the MP-E's successor!

 

[entoman]

Work fast…with a slow lens. Oki dokie.

Ah, but if it's got AF and you're not using the tilt/shift facilities, it'd be fast to use. I think that's the idea Canon have with this lens, to make it a dual purpose lens. It's primarily a tilt-shift lens that will spend most of its life on a tripod, but it can also double up as a normal lens for hand-held scenery and travel shots (assuming it's not massively heavy and bulky). Either way, I think AF will prove valuable. I'd love to have the 14mm version (I've got the 24mm T/S-E already).

 

[David - Sydney]

Fitting a front-mounted filter on a lens with a massively wide angle of view doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Unless you are extremely lucky, that ultra-wide angle of view will include the sun, or some other flare-inducing light source, and even the best filters will be prone to flare under such circumstances. IMO, drop-in filters are a better option, although they bring their own issues such as the risk of dust and moisture getting into the lens.

Depends on what you are shooting.
For waterfalls, there is no flare to speak of but lots of reflections due to water on rocks which means using CPL. No blue sky issues from CPL though. ND filters are also needed to smooth the water.
One benefit of front filters is the ability to wipe down spray from waterfalls but the sheer cost/size etc is onerous.
I currently use my EF16-35mm/4 and ND/grad ND/CPL but sometimes that isn't wide enough so upgrading to the RF14-35mm with its 77mm filters would be an option.
Tall waterfalls (eg Iceland) really lean back in perspective so a TS-E would help there. Using my drone gives a better perspective... although being allowed to fly in national parks is problematic.

A TS-R 14mm would be fun to play with but perhaps I will wait for a second hand TS-E17mm and adapt it with drop-in CPL/ND filters.
Lots of options

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Autofocus is a thing I don\'t need

Apparently, you also don't need to escape single quotes.

 

[scottburgess]

Unlike the authors, I'm not completely confident in an MP-E macro replacement for the R series. This was always an amateur-market targeted lens. The old MP-E can still work with the R system using an adapter, which is fine for some folks. The EF lens is easily surpassed by several third party solutions as well as microscope objectives--the former lower cost and sometimes also better, the latter yielding highest image quality at 2.5X and 5X. These market changes may have eroded potential sales.

However, there is enough Canon ownership to possibly justify improving upon the lens and releasing the improved design. Releasing one with a compatible Canon stage capable of reliable .5 micrometer linear motion might help. But otherwise I'm not sure where the value-added comes from, as I'm not convinced improvements in image quality are alone sufficient to justify an R-series replacement. The convenience of the mount is something, but this isn't going to be an autofocus lens.

With respect to the TS-E lineup, I hope the lenses have barrel-based shoes for tripod attachment. While the ROGETI products are pretty good, an integrated foot is easier to use and the lens in this case should be attached to the tripod. I welcome the autofocus for improving pace of work in the field--anyone finding it less valuable can certainly turn the switch to 'off,' so I think it adds substantial value to the lens (especially since aging eyes become less able to discern sharpness in the field).

What surprises me sometimes is how Canon often skips opportunities to add simple value to their products or sell secondary products. Tripod feet for the TS-E lenses, Arca-Swiss style feet for large L-lenses, and no camo paint on wildlife lenses are possible examples of opportunities missed. A 1.4X 100mm macro represents an opportunity taken, as do DS elements. Canon has recently added more features to one-up their competition on several products and leverage their market position, but there still seems to be plenty of low-hanging fruit.

 

[roby17269]

Would love these new TS lenses... as long as they do not delay the 35mm L

As per AF, for me it's a nice to have but not a deal breaker. I find that I naturally tend to use my TS (24 II and 17) slowly and the R5's MF aids work wonderfully with them.
If they will have AF I will welcome it, since I also often use my TS with no tilt and no shift, but maybe the AF will only work properly with the lens untilted and unshifted? Like metering with the TS lenses and EF bodies.

I like the idea of the 14mm - I would probably be more interested in that one than the 24... ok ok who am I kidding? I want both

 

[Deleted member 380853]

DOA: These RF TSE will be \'almost\' entirely useless without a high Mp body and even then, will still have an inferior image result when compared to an EF TSE on the Fuji 100s 102Mp body.

Additionally, the EF TSE 17 and be used on RF bodies with a CPL or VND BEHIND the lens.

 

[neuroanatomist]

DOA: These RF TSE will be \'almost\' entirely useless without a high Mp body and even then, will still have an inferior image result when compared to an EF TSE on the Fuji 100s 102Mp body.

LOL - almost entirely useless?!? If you find that to be true, most likely the problem is behind the viewfinder not in front of it. My TS-E lenses are quite useful with 18-24 MP sensors behind them.

As for use on a Fuji MF camera, while the TS-E image circle is sufficiently large without movements applied, it is no bigger than it has to be to support full lens movement with a FF sensor.



Personally, I tend to use a fair amount of shift, it is necessary to correct keystoning of tall buildings. In that scenario, I would not consider strong mechanical vignetting with a shifted sensor too large for the image circle as providing superior image quality – quite the opposite.

Additionally, the EF TSE 17 and be used on RF bodies with a CPL or VND BEHIND the lens.

At least your post had one correct statement. Well done.

I do have the 145mm front filter setup for mine, the drop in adapter is far more convenient. That’s even more true for the 186mm filter setup I’d need for my EF 11-24/4L.