First off, I am getting more keepers with this lens using AF than I did with my 24TSE. This is mostly because I am hard pressed to manual focus accurately. The lens is sharp and has great micro contrast.
I also like the ability to compose with zoom rather than my feet. I often find only one place to stand because of roads, trees cliffs etc. But the zoom allows me flexibility.
But I am getting home with lots of leaning trees. And yes I use a level in the left right axis. In this example I had to point the lens up to avoid too much brushy foreground. This causes the trees to lean as you see I the original. This is not lens distortion, it is simply perspective error which could have been solved by completely leveling the camera.
I always leveled the 24TSE and used shift to compose in such situation. But then I was stuck with manual focus and 24mm.
I corrected it as shown in the second version, but now I lose a lot of image. I am interested in solutions.
Here is my temporary solution which is to shoot with a level camera and then shoot wide enough to crop later.
I use the lens correction under filters. I also tried transform and got similar results. So far as I can tell, any method will require a crop including my solution.
Hi, remember that the TSE gives you the ability to compose the image precisely in camera (by shifting) without the need to crop. When you loose that capability then generally you need a much wider lens and then crop the scene (or transform / lens correction in PS). You loose quite a bit of resolution in the process depending on how much cropping or lens correction you need.
That is why the 24mm TSE feels wider than its focal length suggests. It allows you, as an example, to include much more sky in a scene, while keeping it level, than a normal 24mm would.
I have the 17TSE and a 1.4 x which gives me 24. But also remember the 24TSE is never more than 24 (without an extender) and sometimes you need 28 or 31 or even 70.
It so happens that I shot from the same place here at 70mm. I probably would not have mounted a different lens had I been using the 24TSE.
When Canon releases its new T/S L zoom at Photokina next year, we will raise a glass to King Canon. Until then, our trees will lean and post-processing will droop.
Ben,
The new TS-E II lenses really excel in the distortion department. So, if for example, you have your camera carefully leveled at 24mm, images from the new 24-70 II zoom will have noticeably more barrel distortion. Actually around 3x more distortion! When shooting landscape, this is something to consider.
Regarding your comment: "I also like the ability to compose with zoom rather than my feet...":
Zooming your 24-70 II only changes the field of view whereas moving with your feet affects perspective only. You can't substitute one with the other.
ben egbert wrote:
I have the 17TSE and a 1.4 x which gives me 24. But also remember the 24TSE is never more than 24 (without an extender) and sometimes you need 28 or 31 or even 70.
It so happens that I shot from the same place here at 70mm. I probably would not have mounted a different lens had I been using the 24TSE.
Mounting another lens and shooting may be well worth it after you figure out how much computer time you have to spend correcting the 24-70 images to your liking.
Or again, just shoot a horizontal pano. Or flip your camera into vertical and shoot a pano at 35mm or something so you don't have as much distortion to deal with in the first place... Stitch panos are QED for subjects such as this one (light is not moving fast, still subject, etc.).
I know it negates the "ease" and use of a $2250 zoom, though.
Mike Tuomey wrote:
When Canon releases its new T/S L zoom at Photokina next year, we will raise a glass to King Canon. Until then, our trees will lean and post-processing will droop.
Mental note: don't sell the TSEs any time soon.
Part of why I posted this. The 24-70 mk2 is reaching into the prime territory for sharpness, but does have this problem.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Ben,
The new TS-E II lenses really excel in the distortion department. So, if for example, you have your camera carefully leveled at 24mm, images from the new 24-70 II zoom will have noticeably more barrel distortion. Actually around 3x more distortion! When shooting landscape, this is something to consider.
Regarding your comment: "I also like the ability to compose with zoom rather than my feet...":
Zooming your 24-70 II only changes the field of view whereas moving with your feet affects perspective only. You can't substitute one with the other.
Best,
Fred
How well I know. I tried my 24TSE out on my 50D to see how it worked with live view focus. If my 1DS-mk3 had that feature I might not have sold it. But I ended up with a lot of OOF images when I relied on 1DS-mk3 live view on a a 24TSE. Same for 17TSE.
But I was not using my 24TSE much anyway, most TSE shots called for the 17 which I will keep. I am going to learn how to compose with the zoom. I expect Canon to release lens correction for inclusion in Photoshop soon.
The distortion in this shot was just perspective distortion. The lens distortion is not troubling me when the lens is leveled.
mco_970 wrote:
Mounting another lens and shooting may be well worth it after you figure out how much computer time you have to spend correcting the 24-70 images to your liking.
Or again, just shoot a horizontal pano. Or flip your camera into vertical and shoot a pano at 35mm or something so you don't have as much distortion to deal with in the first place... Stitch panos are QED for subjects such as this one (light is not moving fast, still subject, etc.).
I know it negates the "ease" and use of a $2250 zoom, though.
Before I got the 24-70 I had no usable landscape zoom below my 70-200. That means I had to rely on a 35 and 50
to fill the gaps. Thats a lot of range.
I find 14 and 17 and 24 not such big leaps, but the gaps in the 24-70 range were tough to fill with the primes I have.
I also find that once I am below 24mm I often have too much foreground or sky and need a pano crop anyway. Many of my prints end up being 16x9 aspect.
This is an interesting discussion for a wanna be landscaper, thank you. Would love to learn more about being able to adjust the perspective.
For me, the cure would be to not shoot trees, .
Nice shot, thanks for the education.
I also like the ability to compose with zoom rather than my feet. I often find only one place to stand because of roads, trees cliffs etc. But the zoom allows me flexibility.
Sometimes there are limited choices of where to put the camera. But, camera to subject distance is a big factor in creating your image. Most people don't know what I'm talking about, but it's very true.
But I am getting home with lots of leaning trees.
You should leave them in the forest!
And yes I use a level in the left right axis. In this example I had to point the lens up to avoid too much brushy foreground. This causes the trees to lean as you see I the original. This is not lens distortion, it is simply perspective error which could have been solved by completely leveling the camera.
You mean horizontal, correct? Tilting the camera up causes 'convergence', the bane of architectural and landscapers alike. Like Fred said, many wide angle lenses simply add distortion. Learn to deal with it. You're on the right track to use the tools in your image editor to straighten things out. You will lose a bit of the L&R edges. Compensate for that when you make the image.
I always leveled the 24TSE and used shift to compose in such situation. But then I was stuck with manual focus and 24mm.
There's nothing stuck about MF or a given FL. Learning to manual focus would be a very good benefit in your image-making.
I use the lens correction under filters. I also tried transform and got similar results. So far as I can tell, any method will require a crop including my solution.
Cropping is your most powerful compositional tool! Embrace it. Learn to use it properly. Those that only compose in camera are relegating themselves to remain beginners forever.
At age 72, and after 30 years of practice, my eyes are never going to learn to manual focus, especially at wa where details are small. Near stuff is not so bad, but anything past 100 feet or so gets pretty difficult.
I take a lot of compositional heat as a result of leveling my camera and getting centered horizons. I have been working on this. Which often means pointing up or down, even with a TSE on occasion.
So I am asking a question and hoping for some good suggestions. Cropping which is my own solution is a good one. But for this example, it means shooting a bit wider. In this case that would mean mounting my 17 the next wider lens in my bag. But then I could have corrected with shift.
The image is not a keeper anyway, just an example. The trees were too empty to make a good image here.
Telling me to learn to manual focus is not very helpful. I get home with a lot that are close and once in a while some that are perfect. The perfect ones make me trash the not so perfect ones.
Its a process of shooting with Af confirm, on something at hyperfocal, then again at infinity then doing a couple at live view and then selecting the best when I get home.
The 24-70 using AF at hyperfocal seems to nail it. I usually do a couple versions at different depths, but there is no way (for me) to see if any are sharp until I view at 100% on a 26 inch monitor.
nice tip, I will give it a try, it appeared to me that there was too much stuff in the white regions. I especially wanted that lower right side aspen which was going to get cut in the crop. The left side I was not worried about.
Mike Tuomey wrote:
I was kidding, Ben, sorry. Good thread for those of us who like zooms for flexibility but struggle with the perspective problems that go with them,
No problem. I loved my primes, but even the non TSE primes have this issue.But it was pretty rare on my 35 and 50. I think this is mostly a WA issue.
Ben, I feel your pain…..the old eyes (legs, back, and many other body parts for that matter) aren’t what the use to be. What I wouldn’t give to have one of today’s cameras with me on my travels and experiences from the past.
I don’t think there is a solution to your problem until “they” come up with an in camera tilt shift sensor. The sensor moves instead of the lens and automatically corrects for perspective distortion. Of course that camera will also have a dynamic range equal to or beyond the human eye and a built in variable ND filter that balances the light for us.
The appreciation of great photography comes from the knowledge of how difficult it is to get the “perfect” shot. Some of the old timers and “real photographers” think we are nothing but machine operators now, with our auto everything cameras and computer manipulation of the images.
One thing that helps me is the ED-G focus screen with grid lines. The lines help visualize the perspective distortion of a hand held shot.
Thanks Chief. I am never sure on the eye thing. My optometrist says I have better than 20/20 for the first foot or so. I often wonder if my real problem is when I am pixel peeping at 100%, that I see differences that others don't see or care about. But also my eyes are sort of like a slow lens, I don't capture as much light. In the end, I have no idea what anyone elses sees. Maybe I am just too picky? But the eye doctor flips those variations at me and I usually can't pick the best unless they are several lens flips apart. This is what I see when focusing, not enough change on the view screen when moving the focus ring. Then I get home and find I have focused past infinity and nothing is sharp, thats my biggest issue.
Back to the zoom thing. I am not unhappy with this lens. I love it in fact. I shot this test image more as an example shot. I know what I need to do in the field but this seems to be a good topic.
I think some people just let the trees lean and think nothing of it. Like soft edges/corners and vignetting and CA.
Interested to see what the answers are. 
.