This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 201324mm TS-E POV Question
p.1 #124mm TS-E POV Question
I'm quite interested in city-scape and architectural photography here in Chicago. My question: what is the equivalent POV when fully shifted in both directions in portrait and landscape orientation?
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:20 PM
p.1 #224mm TS-E POV Question
It seems a bit wider than 16mm to me, but I could be mistaken.
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:24 PM
p.1 #424mm TS-E POV Question
Right, but when you stitch an image that was fully shifted left, center, and right - what is the equivalent focal length?
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:29 PM
p.1 #524mm TS-E POV Question
With the 24mm TS-E, the shift range is from -12mm to 12mm.
If we take 3 frames (-12mm, 0, 12mm) and combine into a single image, we will have:
1) Equivalent FL = 18mm (Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally)
2) Equivalent FL = 14.5mm (Camera orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally)
PS: for number 2), the image will have panorama aspect ratio and we actually only need 2 frames (-12mm and 12mm)
If we take 3 frames (-12mm, 0, 12mm) and combine into a single image, we will have:
1) Equivalent FL = 18mm (Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally)
2) Equivalent FL = 14.5mm (Camera orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally)
PS: for number 2), the image will have panorama aspect ratio and we actually only need 2 frames (-12mm and 12mm)
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:33 PM
p.1 #624mm TS-E POV Question
Fred Miranda wrote:
With the 24mm PC-E, the maximum shift is -11.5mm and 11.5mm.
If we take 3 frames and combine into one, we will have:
1) Effective Focal Length = 18mm -- Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally
2) Effective Focal Length = 14.5mm -- Canon orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally
PS: for number 2), the image will have panorama aspect ratio and we actually only need 2 frames (all the way to the right and all the way to the left)
Thanks, Fred! And, what is the effective focal length on the 17mm?
With the 24mm PC-E, the maximum shift is -11.5mm and 11.5mm.
If we take 3 frames and combine into one, we will have:
1) Effective Focal Length = 18mm -- Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally
2) Effective Focal Length = 14.5mm -- Canon orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally
PS: for number 2), the image will have panorama aspect ratio and we actually only need 2 frames (all the way to the right and all the way to the left)
Thanks, Fred! And, what is the effective focal length on the 17mm?
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:35 PM
p.1 #724mm TS-E POV Question
On the Canon 17 TS-E, we would have:
1) Equivalent FL = 13mm (Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally)
2) Equivalent FL = 10mm (Camera orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally)
UPDATE: The above numbers are incorrect. See the calculation and correct numbers here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1186421/1#13193755
1) Equivalent FL = 13mm (Camera orientation: portrait, lens shifted horizontally)
2) Equivalent FL = 10mm (Camera orientation: landscape: lens shifted horizontally)
UPDATE: The above numbers are incorrect. See the calculation and correct numbers here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1186421/1#13193755
Jan 30, 2013 at 09:36 PM
p.1 #924mm TS-E POV Question
Fred gave us the answer while I was writing this:
I was wondering the same thing a few months ago and couldn’t find the answer; so I tested my 24mm TS-E II shifted 12mm both directions against my 14mm II. They looked very close to the same.
I also tested this result against my 17mm TS-E shifted both directions; as you would guess the 17mm was wider. I’ve seen where others are saying the shifted 17mm is a 10mm equivalent; I don’t know how they got that number.
If the weather stays nice this week I’ll try to find an interesting subject and shoot it with all three and post the results for a comparison.
Fred, how do you calculate the mm equivalent? Did you use the percentage of pixel width increase and apply that percentage to the mm focal length?
Thanks,
Bruce
I was wondering the same thing a few months ago and couldn’t find the answer; so I tested my 24mm TS-E II shifted 12mm both directions against my 14mm II. They looked very close to the same.
I also tested this result against my 17mm TS-E shifted both directions; as you would guess the 17mm was wider. I’ve seen where others are saying the shifted 17mm is a 10mm equivalent; I don’t know how they got that number.
If the weather stays nice this week I’ll try to find an interesting subject and shoot it with all three and post the results for a comparison.
Fred, how do you calculate the mm equivalent? Did you use the percentage of pixel width increase and apply that percentage to the mm focal length?
Thanks,
Bruce
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:33 PM
p.1 #1024mm TS-E POV Question
Do you find the 17mm substantially wider when fully shifted?
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:35 PM
p.1 #1124mm TS-E POV Question
Chiefdog72 wrote:
Fred gave us the answer while I was writing this:
I was wondering the same thing a few months ago and couldn’t find the answer; so I tested my 24mm TS-E II shifted 12mm both directions against my 14mm II. They looked very close to the same.
I also tested this result against my 17mm TS-E shifted both directions; as you would guess the 17mm was wider. I’ve seen where others are saying the shifted 17mm is a 10mm equivalent; I don’t know how they got that number.
If the weather stays nice this week I’ll try to find an interesting subject and...Show more →
Bruce,
The final numbers depend on the camera orientation. If you shift the 17 TS-E horizontally while your camera is in portrait orientation, you will get about 13mm (12.8mm precisely) focal length when combining the 3 frames (-12, 0, 12) into one image. However, if you have your camera in landscape orientation and shift the lens horizontally for a panorama, the effective focal length will be indeed 10.2mm.
Here is an example:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1089677
Best,
Fred
Fred gave us the answer while I was writing this:
I was wondering the same thing a few months ago and couldn’t find the answer; so I tested my 24mm TS-E II shifted 12mm both directions against my 14mm II. They looked very close to the same.
I also tested this result against my 17mm TS-E shifted both directions; as you would guess the 17mm was wider. I’ve seen where others are saying the shifted 17mm is a 10mm equivalent; I don’t know how they got that number.
If the weather stays nice this week I’ll try to find an interesting subject and...Show more →
Bruce,
The final numbers depend on the camera orientation. If you shift the 17 TS-E horizontally while your camera is in portrait orientation, you will get about 13mm (12.8mm precisely) focal length when combining the 3 frames (-12, 0, 12) into one image. However, if you have your camera in landscape orientation and shift the lens horizontally for a panorama, the effective focal length will be indeed 10.2mm.
Here is an example:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1089677
Best,
Fred
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:45 PM
p.1 #1224mm TS-E POV Question
At the bottom of this page there is a calculator for ts lenses for equivalent FOV
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:53 PM
p.1 #1324mm TS-E POV Question
Chiefdog72 wrote:
Fred, how do you calculate the mm equivalent? Did you use the percentage of pixel width increase and apply that percentage to the mm focal length?
Thanks,
Bruce
I'll jump in. Shifting 12 mm left and right (with horizontal FF camera) you create the equivalent of a sensor 60 mm wide. A 24 mm lens on 60 mm width is proportional to 14.4 mm FL on 36 mm width, etc.
Fred, how do you calculate the mm equivalent? Did you use the percentage of pixel width increase and apply that percentage to the mm focal length?
Thanks,
Bruce
I'll jump in. Shifting 12 mm left and right (with horizontal FF camera) you create the equivalent of a sensor 60 mm wide. A 24 mm lens on 60 mm width is proportional to 14.4 mm FL on 36 mm width, etc.
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:57 PM
p.1 #1424mm TS-E POV Question
NCAndy wrote:
At the bottom of this page there is a calculator for ts lenses for equivalent FOV
That's handy.
At the bottom of this page there is a calculator for ts lenses for equivalent FOV
That's handy.
Jan 30, 2013 at 11:00 PM
p.1 #1524mm TS-E POV Question
Fred, I remember that shot from when you posted it……..What a beautiful shot. It’s one of the most stunning shots of Racetrack that I’ve seen. Using both the shift for the pan and tilt for focus is much more difficult than I thought it would be.
Thanks Photon for the answer and NCAndy for the link…….that answers my question on how to calculate the mm equivalent.
Bruce
Thanks Photon for the answer and NCAndy for the link…….that answers my question on how to calculate the mm equivalent.
Bruce
Jan 30, 2013 at 11:07 PM
p.1 #1624mm TS-E POV Question
Eskimochaos, to answer your question: Do you find the 17mm substantially wider when fully shifted?
The 17mm shifted is an equivalent of 10.2mm for a horizontal angle of view of 120.9 degrees. Translated into a real world example; if you were 20 feet from the subject you are photographing you would be able to get 70.59 horizontal feet of the subject into the frame. That is very wide.
The 24mm shifted is a 14.4mm equivalent for a horizontal angle of view 102.7 degrees. In our example from above you would get 50 horizontal feet of the subject into the frame.
Does that answer your question?
Bruce
The 17mm shifted is an equivalent of 10.2mm for a horizontal angle of view of 120.9 degrees. Translated into a real world example; if you were 20 feet from the subject you are photographing you would be able to get 70.59 horizontal feet of the subject into the frame. That is very wide.
The 24mm shifted is a 14.4mm equivalent for a horizontal angle of view 102.7 degrees. In our example from above you would get 50 horizontal feet of the subject into the frame.
Does that answer your question?
Bruce
Jan 30, 2013 at 11:44 PM
p.1 #1724mm TS-E POV Question
Yes, thanks a lot Bruce. I really can't decide between the two - I'm leaning towards the 24 simply due to the fact that it takes filters - WITHOUT modifying anything.
Jan 31, 2013 at 10:41 AM
p.1 #1824mm TS-E POV Question
I went for the 24 first. I'm glad I did, having a blast with it (had it 7-8months now).
Love doing shift stitches with it especially in portrait /14mm mode.
I have a 17-40 for really wide shots that require a single exposure.
I think I'll end up with the 17 at some point.
Love doing shift stitches with it especially in portrait /14mm mode.
I have a 17-40 for really wide shots that require a single exposure.
I think I'll end up with the 17 at some point.
Jan 31, 2013 at 01:44 PM
p.1 #1924mm TS-E POV Question
What is cool about the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II is that you basically have access to 14mm, 18mm, 24mm and ~35mm on full frame with one high quality lens.
a) 14mm (2.4:1 panoramic aspect ratio)
Position the camera in portrait orientation with shift left/right which yields a horizontal image (2 frames needed: -12,12)
b) 18mm (Roughly a 4:3 aspect ratio)
Position the camera in landscape orientation with shift left/right which yields a horizontal image (3 frames needed: -12,0,12)
c) 24mm (3:2 aspect ratio)
d) 35mm (3:2 aspect ratio) using the 1.4x extender
NOTE that on a) and b), another benefit is increasing your file size and therefore resolution in the final image. In the case of b), file size is doubled. It's like shooting with a Canon 6D 40MP camera.
Fred
a) 14mm (2.4:1 panoramic aspect ratio)
Position the camera in portrait orientation with shift left/right which yields a horizontal image (2 frames needed: -12,12)
b) 18mm (Roughly a 4:3 aspect ratio)
Position the camera in landscape orientation with shift left/right which yields a horizontal image (3 frames needed: -12,0,12)
c) 24mm (3:2 aspect ratio)
d) 35mm (3:2 aspect ratio) using the 1.4x extender
NOTE that on a) and b), another benefit is increasing your file size and therefore resolution in the final image. In the case of b), file size is doubled. It's like shooting with a Canon 6D 40MP camera.
Fred
Jan 31, 2013 at 02:05 PM
p.1 #2024mm TS-E POV Question
Here is a post I done elsewhere when I got the 24tsemkII, on a 5d2. Shows examples of the fov for each mode, sorry about the boring shots...
"One aspect I'm interested in with the tiltshit is the ability to create stitched shots by just shifting the lens.
A tilt shift lens provides a much bigger image circle than a normal lens and shift moves the lens across that image circle, due to low distortion and no real camera movements (though more on that later) the stitching can be quite easy.
The downside is that you are moving towards the edge of the lens. This means lower IQ at the borders, vignetting and its more susceptible to show any filters used.
This morning I decided to have a play see what you can achieve. This is a standard unshifted frame (well 3, hdr'd in photomatix) at 24mm. Image size is about 5600x3700.
Shifting that setup to the maximum left and right (this is in reality 9 shots bracketed from -12mm,0mm,+12mm and -2,0,+2), this image is 9400x3700. Equivalent to about 14mm wide but tons more resolution, downside is the inability to shoot it in one frame so moving subjects are mostly out. Because I didnt shift the camera as well I have parallax issues with some stuff near to the camera on the right, technically I think I need to shift the camera in the opposite direction to the lens shift (keeping the lens in effectively the same place for each frame)
This shot is the camera in portrait orientation shifted horizontally. size is 7500x5700. Better edge definition than the landscape shift above
This is portrait mode shifted in vertical plane , 3700x9200.
Overall impressed with the ability to turn a 24mm lens into something much wider, I could easily shift like the last one above and also rotate to create a much wider panoramic with some huge dimensions. I'll certainly have to learn the right trick of shifting the camera at the same time to avoid parallax issues. The low distortion makes stitching with 24mm OK, I still think normally your better off with a longer focal length (50mm on FF seems ideal)."
"One aspect I'm interested in with the tiltshit is the ability to create stitched shots by just shifting the lens.
A tilt shift lens provides a much bigger image circle than a normal lens and shift moves the lens across that image circle, due to low distortion and no real camera movements (though more on that later) the stitching can be quite easy.
The downside is that you are moving towards the edge of the lens. This means lower IQ at the borders, vignetting and its more susceptible to show any filters used.
This morning I decided to have a play see what you can achieve. This is a standard unshifted frame (well 3, hdr'd in photomatix) at 24mm. Image size is about 5600x3700.
Shifting that setup to the maximum left and right (this is in reality 9 shots bracketed from -12mm,0mm,+12mm and -2,0,+2), this image is 9400x3700. Equivalent to about 14mm wide but tons more resolution, downside is the inability to shoot it in one frame so moving subjects are mostly out. Because I didnt shift the camera as well I have parallax issues with some stuff near to the camera on the right, technically I think I need to shift the camera in the opposite direction to the lens shift (keeping the lens in effectively the same place for each frame)
This shot is the camera in portrait orientation shifted horizontally. size is 7500x5700. Better edge definition than the landscape shift above
This is portrait mode shifted in vertical plane , 3700x9200.
Overall impressed with the ability to turn a 24mm lens into something much wider, I could easily shift like the last one above and also rotate to create a much wider panoramic with some huge dimensions. I'll certainly have to learn the right trick of shifting the camera at the same time to avoid parallax issues. The low distortion makes stitching with 24mm OK, I still think normally your better off with a longer focal length (50mm on FF seems ideal)."
Jan 31, 2013 at 02:21 PM