D800 with 24mm PC-E

[tashley]

Hi John,

I think that as a vast generalisation, lenses are better re-designed for digital, though a lot of older, film-designed lenses work well and create great results, whether technically or creatively.

However... here's a good example: the last-generation Leica 35 Lux was designed for film. It had a focus shift which people almost never noticed on film but which in the end made it not ideal for digital, so Leica made another version.

One of the reasons might have been that digital sensors in effect either have more resolution (I don't want to start scanner wars here, like I say these are generalisations) or are more often used to make large prints at least.

Another reason that was widely given at the time was that film has more 'depth' to the emulsion and so the shifts in focus got sort of sucked in to the depth and were less noticeable.

in Medium Format land, Rodenstock and Schneider have made new, digital targeted lenses for technical camera use too. Sensor wells and micro lenses, especially when offset towards the extremes of the frame, induce chromatic aberrations, vignetting and colour shifts which need different lens designs on order to be minimised.

When I had a P45+, Luminous Landscape ran various opinion pieces as to whether it was roughly equivalent to 4x5 film. Many people, including me (and I have shot a reasonable amount of 4x5) thought it was, though again this depends on the scanning process involved in order to make the comparison. The D800 sensor is within spitting distance of the P45+. Which means that lenses that might originally have been designed for a 35mm film camera are now being asked to handle a 'film' that has the resolution of a sheet many times the size. So it's no wonder that many film lenses are not optimal for the job in purely technical terms, even if they can still be wonderful 'look' lenses.

But I think the point I am trying to make is that the different formats are collapsing together at the moment and that means someone should make the right glass, at almost any price, because I know loads of people who would pay for it - including me!

I have the two film systems mentioned already with several lenses each. Used them for years. Those lenses cost no where near what you say you are willing to pay now so you can use digital 35mm. Am I to assume from this that the current glass and design offered for 35 digital is inferior enough that it would require paying several grand to match what I had use for years with film? Something is not making sense here. Granted I do not have your experience in the MFD department but I have had years in the MF and LF film. Maybe some light can be shed on this topic for me to come to some understanding.

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[tashley]

Hi Elliot,

Yup, the 28 does have a parabolic field of focus (or at least mine does!) but it is predictable, consistent, and tends to give you 'bonus' areas that are in focus, rather than punish you with areas that should be in focus and are instead OOF. Also, the bonus areas is where you might want it on aside lens: in the centre.

As to whether my sensor isn't either flat, or mounted in the correct plane, I get the same results on both D800 and E and only on those two lenses. I do have other lenses with problems (my 24-120 has a smeary RHS) but there's no pattern that indicates the sensor, and I do also have lenses that are utterly perfect like my 70-200VRII, adapted Leica R 50 Cron and Nikkor 85mm F1.8G...

Here is an image, which I hope answers lots of questions on this thread. It was taken last week in Helsinki. Focus was on the middle of the triangular bit above the columns.

http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/img/s2/v51/p185135344.jpg

The focus in that image does look very strange. It ruins what would have been an interesting photo.

I wonder how it would have turned out if you had focused on the bus?

I think you remarked previously on these forums that your new 28/1.8G has a similarly parabolic field of focus. This is probably a ridiculous suggestion, but is it possible that the sensor in your D800 is not entirely flat?

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[GMack]

Something doesn't look right in this shot. Almost like the lens is not resting in its default home position where it clicks in on both is shift and tilt movements and everything is perpendicular to the sensor.

Tilt is very temperamental and I need to carry a chart with me to refer to as well to keep from going too far in the tilt end. In general, any applied tilt of more than one degree in a landscape (or more than 5-6 feet away) is going to be bad. Blow it by 1/2 degree and the entire shot is bad. Mine was fixed by Nikon for a sticking movement in the tilt end and some washers were added internally according to the repair invoice. Default detents seems better too since they fixed it. Too bad it doesn't have a finer gearing in the tilt for narrower operation below say two degrees.

I do know my 24mm PC-E is sharper around the edges than the center compared to my 14-24mm f/2.8 which is the complete opposite (i.e. sharp center, softer edges). I'd expect that behavior of sharper edges in any PC-E since the shift must cover a wider area than a generic lens too.

Too bad DxO Optics Pro 7 doesn't address some of the issues encountered like vignetting in the shift available in these lenses and supply corrective modules for them. They seem to avoid the PC-E tilt-shifts at all costs.

Mack

 

[tashley]

Hi Mack,

That shot was with 10 rise but no tilt, it was 100% definitely clicked in and tightened at zero, though whether that is reliable I couldnt say! However, it's just in that 1/9th portion of the frame that the defocus occurs...

Something doesn't look right in this shot. Almost like the lens is not resting in its default home position where it clicks in on both is shift and tilt movements and everything is perpendicular to the sensor.

Tilt is very temperamental and I need to carry a chart with me to refer to as well to keep from going too far in the tilt end. In general, any applied tilt of more than one degree in a landscape (or more than 5-6 feet away) is going to be bad. Blow it by 1/2 degree and the entire shot is bad. Mine was fixed by Nikon for a sticking movement in the tilt end and some washers were added internally according to the repair invoice. Default detents seems better too since they fixed it. Too bad it doesn't have a finer gearing in the tilt for narrower operation below say two degrees.

I do know my 24mm PC-E is sharper around the edges than the center compared to my 14-24mm f/2.8 which is the complete opposite (i.e. sharp center, softer edges). I'd expect that behavior of sharper edges in any PC-E since the shift must cover a wider area than a generic lens too.

Too bad DxO Optics Pro 7 doesn't address some of the issues encountered like vignetting in the shift available in these lenses and supply corrective modules for them. They seem to avoid the PC-E tilt-shifts at all costs.

Mack

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[Nick Wong]

Hi Tashley,

Thanks for bring up the issue. I've the same combo but I don't use my 24PCE much enough.

Your picture does show the problem. I think I need to do a similar testing and see how mine performs.

Also, I have a different thought. Do you think it's possible that the blur area is not from focus curvature? May be it's from some oil, dust, fog, fungus, moisture, or even finger print from the back and/or front glass element? I know that you are an experienced photographer. You should already checked your gear already. I mentioned it just in case.

Or maybe the oil (or whatever) is not on the lens, it's on the D800's sensor?

BTW, I feel bad that such a nice picture got ruined.

I'll post here if I found anything.

--
Nick Wong

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
http://photos.nickwong.net

 

[russbarnes]

No way would I give up the 24mm PC-E... it worked well on the D700 but I think it's dynamite on the D800. Tilt/Shift is not all about buildings...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/russellbarnes/7557613726/

 

[DvD5]

No way would I give up the 24mm PC-E... it worked well on the D700 but I think it's dynamite on the D800. Tilt/Shift is not all about buildings...

Russ--I take it that you are not experiencing the kind of problem I showed above with a parabolic field of focus. Correct? If that is the case, perhaps I may be able to convince Nikon that mine is defective.

Thanks,

Don

 

[tashley]

Thank you Nick - and I do wish that fungus or finger grease were to blame but the lens is quite new and I haven't yet fumbled for a lens cap that isn't on and greased the lens yet; but it is only a matter of time!

Hi Tashley,

Thanks for bring up the issue. I've the same combo but I don't use my 24PCE much enough.

Your picture does show the problem. I think I need to do a similar testing and see how mine performs.

Also, I have a different thought. Do you think it's possible that the blur area is not from focus curvature? May be it's from some oil, dust, fog, fungus, moisture, or even finger print from the back and/or front glass element? I know that you are an experienced photographer. You should already checked your gear already. I mentioned it just in case.

Or maybe the oil (or whatever) is not on the lens, it's on the D800's sensor?

BTW, I feel bad that such a nice picture got ruined.

I'll post here if I found anything.

--
Nick Wong

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
http://photos.nickwong.net

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[Robin Casady]

Robin Casady wrote:

Interesting write-up. It and some other reviews have soured my interest in this lens.

Which other reviews?

The lensrentals.com comments on lenses for the D800 is one source that comes to mind.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/03/d800-lens-selection

This review was seeing soft corners on a D3.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1176

I may have seen other reviews that I don't recall specifically, but I've read a lot of comments about this lens on this forum and the Nikon SLR Lens Talk Forum. Like the f/1.4 vs. f/1.8 prime lenses, this one seems to have advocates and detractors.

Hopefully the D800/E launch is spurring a new generation of PC-E lens designs from Nikon. I'm very hesitant to purchase the Nikon 24mm PC-E now. This is one area where Nikon really does need to catch-up to Canon.

We can hope.
--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html

 

[russbarnes]

Well I don't believe so. The image in the link is I uncropped and I don't see too many issues there...

No way would I give up the 24mm PC-E... it worked well on the D700 but I think it's dynamite on the D800. Tilt/Shift is not all about buildings...

Russ--I take it that you are not experiencing the kind of problem I showed above with a parabolic field of focus. Correct? If that is the case, perhaps I may be able to convince Nikon that mine is defective.

Thanks,

Don

 

[tashley]

Russ, that is a great shot. May I ask what t/s settings you used? The reason I ask is that I also have quite a few shots from this lens that 'work' and I am trying to categorise in my own mind which combinations of movements and apertures give it problems. It is the unpredictability of it that's dangerous IMHO.

No way would I give up the 24mm PC-E... it worked well on the D700 but I think it's dynamite on the D800. Tilt/Shift is not all about buildings...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/russellbarnes/7557613726/

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[russbarnes]

Of course it's very difficult to tell later, as you know. There's no focus point information or anything in EXIF on how many degrees of Tilt I used and I don't keep notes of each shot. I took about 80 at this location yesterday. What I can tell you is that I actually rarely use Live View, I rarely use the extremes of Tilt or Shift, and in this case I would have used no more than three degrees of Tilt for a straight landscape shot. When I want a dramatic effect I drop out the aperture to wide open and shoot with around five degrees of Tilt. I've shot with the lens for more than two years so it's kind of second nature to me now, I don't think too much about what I'm doing because Ive done all of the 'discovery' with the lens so long ago.

The lens itself has never been altered in configuration or serviced and has served me very well indeed. I have bought and sold a lot of glass over the last few years and my copy of the 24 PC-e is certainly a keeper, at least until Nikon ever replace it

Russ, that is a great shot. May I ask what t/s settings you used? The reason I ask is that I also have quite a few shots from this lens that 'work' and I am trying to categorise in my own mind which combinations of movements and apertures give it problems. It is the unpredictability of it that's dangerous IMHO.

No way would I give up the 24mm PC-E... it worked well on the D700 but I think it's dynamite on the D800. Tilt/Shift is not all about buildings...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/russellbarnes/7557613726/

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[tashley]

Thanks Russ. You are one lucky (and talented) dude!

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[HyperCypher]

super work on your site Tim

just a comment on affordability - for someone such as myself even the 24 PCe would be a very significant layout just to get into the T/S game - rather distressing to see it may be a compromised lens - or - I should lower my expectations just a bit; the advantages of having any such lens trumps its minor focus field anomalies ?

your comments?

I also thought in particular it might make more sense for a fellow like me to pick up a 5D2 and the Canon 17mm which looks to be superior - that lens is enough to make me wonder about jumping brands

I do a small amount of property shooting. Currently "getting by" with a D700 and 14-24 (mostly) and lots of use of the transform functions in CS5

 

[John M Roberts]

I have bought and sold a lot of glass over the last few years and my copy of the 24 PC-e is certainly a keeper, at least until Nikon ever replace it

I enjoyed seeing both yours and Tim's work. Russ, since you use your PC's in similar setting as I would, have you found the axis limitation to be a hindrance to you? Have there been times you wanted to switch it. I believe you mentioned you have not had it altered. I was wishing Nikon would update that, even had considered Canon as an addition for this but would so much want to keep it simple with one brand. I'm used to the LF movements but have never used the PC, T/S lenses.

Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[tashley]

It's a really tough call. I think that it is the best there currently is for Nikon in this focal length, and that with really careful use, plenty of experience and, most importantly for critical work, in the field monitoring of results to ensure you get the shot, it can be useful. I'm certainly not selling mine. It's just not as good as I'd hoped or as good as I suspect could be done. I haven't used the Canon version but people say they're notably better, so if a 5dII offers enough resolution and DR and good enough noise performance for you, that might be a better option for now...

super work on your site Tim

just a comment on affordability - for someone such as myself even the 24 PCe would be a very significant layout just to get into the T/S game - rather distressing to see it may be a compromised lens - or - I should lower my expectations just a bit; the advantages of having any such lens trumps its minor focus field anomalies ?

your comments?

I also thought in particular it might make more sense for a fellow like me to pick up a 5D2 and the Canon 17mm which looks to be superior - that lens is enough to make me wonder about jumping brands

I do a small amount of property shooting. Currently "getting by" with a D700 and 14-24 (mostly) and lots of use of the transform functions in CS5

--
Gallery: http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/

 

[Robin Casady]

I enjoyed seeing both yours and Tim's work. Russ, since you use your PC's in similar setting as I would, have you found the axis limitation to be a hindrance to you? Have there been times you wanted to switch it. I believe you mentioned you have not had it altered. I was wishing Nikon would update that, even had considered Canon as an addition for this but would so much want to keep it simple with one brand. I'm used to the LF movements but have never used the PC, T/S lenses.

I had my 85mm PC (previous generation to the 85mm PC-E) modified by Nikon so the tilt and shift were in the same axis. This is most useful when shooting up at a building. The tilt allows you to keep the face of the building in focus while shift corrects the perspective distortion.

One instance I can think of where Nikon's default orientation is useful is when using shift for stitching images together while looking down on a field such as in Russ' shot. You would tilt the lens down, while shifting side-to-side for three images. It is best to move the camera side-to-side the same amount as the lens, but in the opposite direction—keeping the lens in the same location, but having the camera move left to right.

The other would be where you are shooting a building or a line of trees that are at an angle to you while you are also looking up at them. Say you are shooting the front of a building. You are close to one end of the building and looking up at it.

With a view camera you would use tilt and swing + shift and rise. You don't have those options with the PC-E so you have to choose your poison. The perspective distortion of looking up is probably more of a problem than looking along the building into the distance. So, you want to shift up. The focus plane probably needs to swing because the building is wider than it is high. So, you swing and rise. Sounds like a dance from the 1940's.

Whichever way you have it set it will be wrong for some situations.
--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html

 

[John M Roberts]

I had my 85mm PC (previous generation to the 85mm PC-E) modified by Nikon so the tilt and shift were in the same axis. This is most useful when shooting up at a building. The tilt allows you to keep the face of the building in focus while shift corrects the perspective distortion.

I'm confused why the tilt if you have leveled your camera, not up or down, straight ahead then the building should be on that same plane of focus as the sensor? You just need the rise unless you slightly tilt your camera upward, then I could see the need for some lens tilt.

One instance I can think of where Nikon's default orientation is useful is when using shift for stitching images together while looking down on a field such as in Russ' shot.

Good point, that would be useful. I just noted some notes from another thread I believe you were in as well with several links of great information.

Whichever way you have it set it will be wrong for some situations.

Unfortunately that would be the case which is why I wish they would update. I have been spoiled by the free movement of my Horseman 69 and Weisner 57. Now I want all that in 35DSLR.

Thanks for the tips Robin.

 

[Robin Casady]

I had my 85mm PC (previous generation to the 85mm PC-E) modified by Nikon so the tilt and shift were in the same axis. This is most useful when shooting up at a building. The tilt allows you to keep the face of the building in focus while shift corrects the perspective distortion.

I'm confused why the tilt if you have leveled your camera, not up or down, straight ahead then the building should be on that same plane of focus as the sensor? You just need the rise unless you slightly tilt your camera upward, then I could see the need for some lens tilt.

If you are shooting up at a building, your camera is not level front to back.

One instance I can think of where Nikon's default orientation is useful is when using shift for stitching images together while looking down on a field such as in Russ' shot.

Good point, that would be useful. I just noted some notes from another thread I believe you were in as well with several links of great information.

Whichever way you have it set it will be wrong for some situations.

Unfortunately that would be the case which is why I wish they would update. I have been spoiled by the free movement of my Horseman 69 and Weisner 57. Now I want all that in 35DSLR.

There are adaptors for putting DSLRs on 4x5 view camera, but you are limited to fairly long lenses.
--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html

 

[MSchu]

Don: Did yoever get the 24PC on the 800E issue resolved? I have a fries in Germany who tried 3 PC Nikors (24mm) and all had this issue.