p.1 #1 · Are tilt-shift lenses really obsolete? Pentax 645 33–55mm as a full-frame tilt-shift zoom
I’ve just finished a fairly extensive test of an unusual combination: the SMC Pentax-FA 645 33–55mm F4.5 AL medium-format zoom used on a full-frame Sony (suitable also for Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm and Leica) via the Fotodiox TLT ROKR tilt-shift adapter.
The combination effectively creates a 33–55mm full-frame tilt-shift zoom, with a very large image circle, substantial shift capability and the ability to rotate the movement through different orientations. I’ve tested it for optical performance, perspective control, stitched panoramas exceeding 190MP, tilt applications and a range of practical uses well beyond conventional architectural photography.
But the broader reason I thought this might be interesting here is the recurring argument that perspective-control lenses have effectively become obsolete in the digital era.
The usual proposition is straightforward: shoot with a sufficiently wide conventional lens, leave some room around the subject, then crop and correct the geometry in post.
I strongly disagree — and the more I use shift lenses, the less convincing I find that argument.
Does digital perspective correction really replace what a shift lens does, or does it only reproduce one particular application of lens movement? And by treating shift primarily as a tool for correcting converging verticals, are we overlooking much of what these lenses can actually contribute to composition?
That became one of the underlying themes of the video, alongside the review of the Pentax/Fotodiox combination itself.
p.1 #2 · Are tilt-shift lenses really obsolete? Pentax 645 33–55mm as a full-frame tilt-shift zoom
If you use a modern GFX camera, photograph in portrait orientation, and crop the top part of the frame horizontally, you still get a 57 MP image with about 10 mm of rise. Shift lenses are unnecessary in all but the most extreme cases.
