24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS for $1,299

Pre-order new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens

Bower 35mm f/1.4 price dropped to $379

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 4 end

Archive 2012 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Fred Miranda
Online
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #1 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Mike K wrote:
Here is a lens collar made specifically for the 24 and 17 TSE lens mounts. It looks pretty slick and still allows tilt. However mounted vertically as shown, it only allows horizontal shifts. To do vertical shifts one has to rotate the tripod standoff to horizontal.

http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

If there is any concern about parallax, I counter shift the body to keep the lens immobile.
Mike K

This looks like a better solution. Thanks for posting it.

It's about $680 though.

Did you get one Mike?

Feb 04, 2012 at 12:02 AM

jwin
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #2 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Mike K wrote:
Here is a lens collar made specifically for the 24 and 17 TSE lens mounts. It looks pretty slick and still allows tilt. However mounted vertically as shown, it only allows horizontal shifts. To do vertical shifts one has to rotate the tripod standoff to horizontal.

http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

If there is any concern about parallax, I counter shift the body to keep the lens immobile.
Mike K

Have you used this device Mike? I'll be very appreciative to hear some user hands-on perspective on this.

Feb 04, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #3 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

I haven't used my 24/3.5 II much which is a shame as it's superb. I think I need to go FF now.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Feb 04, 2012 at 12:59 AM

coranda
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #4 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

anandnvi wrote:
17TS-E with a 1.4x TC for when you need to go less wide.

Can you do that? I thought the TCs only fit lenses that are 135mm or longer.

Feb 04, 2012 at 03:17 AM

Mike K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #5 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

jwin wrote:
Mike K wrote:
Here is a lens collar made specifically for the 24 and 17 TSE lens mounts. It looks pretty slick and still allows tilt. However mounted vertically as shown, it only allows horizontal shifts. To do vertical shifts one has to rotate the tripod standoff to horizontal.

http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

If there is any concern about parallax, I counter shift the body to keep the lens immobile.
Mike K

Have you used this device Mike? I'll be very appreciative to hear some user hands-on perspective on this.

No, I have not tried it, its rather pricey. But we did write to Stefan Steib and asked about it. Its not obvious looking at the pictures, but the lens collar holds the Canon TSE lens on the flat areas just in front of the shift mechanism. Thus one is still free to rotate the camera body just behind the shift and rotate the tilt (and tilt) just in front of the shift. However the shift itself can only be horizontal if the if the collar stem is vertical. The lens shift direction cannot rotate relative to the lens collar stem. If you want to shift vertically (ie perspective distortion), you need to mount the lens collar stem horizontally, which will be rather unstable atop the tripod. I was not thrilled by this feature.

Hartblei's own TS lens, 4/40 IF/TS uses Zeiss MF glass in a version of their super rotator T/S housing. Note that it comes with a lens collar, and the collar is attached in front of both the Tilt and Shift mechanism which are near the camera body.
http://www.hartblei.de/en/sr40if.htm

I wrote a lens review of a much less expensive version of the Hartblei super rotator TS lens 6 years ago. I cannot search through the FM archives, so here is the DPR version. See part 1 and 2 on the Super Rotator T/S construction, other wise skip this old lens review, the performance parts are no longer relevant to today's lenses.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=17612257
Mike K

Feb 04, 2012 at 03:40 AM

fredv
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #6 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Thanks for all the info, a very informative read
I have always liked the distortion wide angle lens produce.... BUT
this looks like fun

Thanks Again

Feb 04, 2012 at 05:19 AM

Klaus Priebe
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #7 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Pixel Perfect wrote:
24 any day. When fully shifted on FF the 24 can give you a pano with effective horizontal fov of a 14.8mm lens, more than wide enough IMO. The 24 can also easily use filters unlike the 17. I think a 24 TS-E paired with a 17-40L is a nice combo.

Not true. I use Singh Ray nd grads on my 17 tse all the time. You just need to make an adapter for the filter holder for the lens.

Feb 04, 2012 at 03:04 PM

campyone
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #8 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Mike K wrote:
Here is a lens collar made specifically for the 24 and 17 TSE lens mounts. It looks pretty slick and still allows tilt. However mounted vertically as shown, it only allows horizontal shifts. To do vertical shifts one has to rotate the tripod standoff to horizontal.

http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

If there is any concern about parallax, I counter shift the body to keep the lens immobile.
Mike K

From the standpoint only of parallax, is there any reason to use this device rather than counter-shifting the body as you mention (which is what I do also)?

Feb 04, 2012 at 05:27 PM

Mike K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #9 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

campyone wrote:
From the standpoint only of parallax, is there any reason to use this device rather than counter-shifting the body as you mention (which is what I do also)?

With a lens mounted standoff you are quite certain the lens is not moving between pano shift shots and that you are just moving the sensor (camera). With the counter shift method both the camera and lens move in opposite directions. It really helps to have a RRS lever clamp for this as the camera L plate can be loosened, easily moved using the index marks, and quickly retightened. So there is the advantage of precision, speed and convenience with the lens collar (standoff), but functionally they should be pretty close.

Feb 04, 2012 at 06:46 PM

campyone
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #10 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Mike K wrote:
campyone wrote:
From the standpoint only of parallax, is there any reason to use this device rather than counter-shifting the body as you mention (which is what I do also)?

With a lens mounted standoff you are quite certain the lens is not moving between pano shift shots and that you are just moving the sensor (camera). With the counter shift method both the camera and lens move in opposite directions. It really helps to have a RRS lever clamp for this as the camera L plate can be loosened, easily moved using the index marks, and quickly retightened. So there is the advantage of precision, speed and convenience with the lens collar (standoff), but functionally they should be pretty close.

Thanks, I can see where that would be an advantage.

I have the RRS head with a lever clamp but the index marks are obscured by the L bracket on my 1Ds MkIII. I put three pencil marks on the clamp, 11mms apart, and use them as a guide when counter-shifting, which seems to work pretty well. Considering the cost of the Hartblei collar I'll have to stick with the pencil marks and RRS head.

Feb 04, 2012 at 07:28 PM

mark1958
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #11 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

I had both and found that I did not use the 17mm TSE too often for landscapes. I sold it and recently purchased as zeiss 18mm and 21mm. THe zeiss 18mm is much better than i had expected based on what I had read. THe 24mm TSE II is a killer as pointed out. I do agree the 17mm TSE is also quite good as an ultra wide but the zeiss 18mm is just so much smaller and easier to pack in the bag

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:05 PM

Peter Figen
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #12 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Rather than pencil marks, I cut two small triangles of white tape and put them on in a way that lets me line up the center mark on the camera plate with the edges of the tape. In a phone conversation with RRS, I asked them if it would be possible to them to change their design and scribe appropriate marks in the anodization process, but that was asking too much apparently.

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:05 PM

Mike K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #13 · 24TS-E or 17TS-E for landscapes?

Peter Figen wrote:
Rather than pencil marks, I cut two small triangles of white tape and put them on in a way that lets me line up the center mark on the camera plate with the edges of the tape. In a phone conversation with RRS, I asked them if it would be possible to them to change their design and scribe appropriate marks in the anodization process, but that was asking too much apparently.

No, it is not too much to ask for. It certainly is worthwhile asking for such features.
My first RRS L plate was for a 1DmkII, and it had no index marks what so ever. I asked them where they should be. I had to scribe in index marks with a file so I knew where to place the camera in the clamp.

I also complained that the MPR CL II nodal rail should have an index mark on its rear end so that one could center the camera with the index mark on the L plate for rotational panos. Again I had to scribe in a mark with a file.

Now all newer RRS L plates and nodal rails come with index marks. In addition, recent Kirk L plates and rails also have index mark; this has been a more recent improvement to their product line.
It is worthwhile to ask for what you want, you may eventually get it.
Mike K

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:36 PM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end