Fuji 30mm T/S thoughts and comments

DMillier said:

Greg7579 said:

TimoKoo said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Diagonal shift: a combination of rise and lateral shift.

Click to expand...

Are you saying a combination of rise and panning or actually rotating the lens itself and rising at an angle. The rise portion of the Gf lens can be rotated up to 180 degrees.

Click to expand...

Alan_b did rise at an angle. Compare those shifted and non-shifted pictures – look at verticals. That's the trick why to use T/S lenses, or one of them.

Click to expand...

Rise at an angle. Now that I don't understand yet and probably won't untill I get that lens.

Click to expand...

It's not really something that needs understanding, you can just see it when you look through the viewfinder.

• Shoot unshifted and you get a rectangle cut of the centre of the optical circle
• Shoot shifted up and you get a rectangle cut out of the top of the optical circle
• Shoot shifted down and you get a rectangle cut out of the bottom of the optical circle
• Shoot shifted sideways and you a rectangle cut out of the side of the optical circle
• Shoot diagonally shifted and you get a rectangle cut from the top/bottom left or right corners of the optical circle.

If you imagine the optical circle as a circular ultra wide lens image, shifting is just moving your sensor rectangle around within this wide picture and making a crop. It's no different from cropping small bits out of an image in post. You don't scratch your head over that!

The only reason why a shift lens seems magical is because you shoot with the camera level pointing in a particular direction, then shift the rectangle around to re-frame the image you want.

Framing by keeping the camera level and shifting rather than pointing the camera in different directions comes with one particular benefit which is the key reason people buy shift lenses: you can reframe your image left/right/up/down while keeping all your vertical lines vertical.

Click to expand...

And horizontal lines too, if you want so.

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Rodenmg said:

… I saw an explanation the other day that said that if you focus at infinity and tilt downward, you can get the (flat) ground in front of the tripod to infinity all in focus. Sounds lovely and simple and the way to solve a shortage of DoF, but I bet if I try it, it won't be as obvious at all. I've never managed to find any correlation between the theory and actually using tilt. It all seems basically random effects to me!

In this instance you have to remember that when you move the plane of focus to cover the ground anything that extends to the top of the frame, like tree or mountain tops, will be out of focus. So then all you can do is stop way down to try and bring them back

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that is a problem. But I'd be happy to get a flat plane in focus front to back as that would at least suggest I'd found an entry point.

Click to expand...

I’m finding it not nearly as easy as it sounds. Believe it or not, on a complex scene, with tall objects between you and the furthest object in the frame, with an upward sloping plain of focus, I’ve seen the ground at my feet in focus, then an area of oof, followed by in focus objects higher up, then another oof area, and then the most distant object at the top of the frame in focus again.

Remember in Star Trek when 3D chess was the thing. Learning to think about that shifting plain of focus requires 3D thinking.

Click to expand...

Try playing with this: http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

I've not found a better way of demonstrating how tilt works.

Ah, Tim's demonstrator app.

Absolutely incomprehensible.

I suspect it makes perfect sense if you already understand it.

I have never tried combining diagonal images into one final image so it took a little time to get my head around it. For me 4 images are needed. 15mm LR 30 degrees CW and CCW. When those are combined the image must be rotated CCW 30 degrees to get a straight image. To get the most real estate a 2X1 format is needed but at the cost of no rise. If rise is needed or wanted then some horizontal real estate has to be eliminated. In the final analysis it is nothing I would ever use as I have other cameras that can accomplish this much better but if I only had one lens and it was T/S then this is the best solution available to get some rise combined with extended horizontal information.

I am always open to being corrected as I have never tried this before.

Victor B.

Rob de Loe said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Rodenmg said:

… I saw an explanation the other day that said that if you focus at infinity and tilt downward, you can get the (flat) ground in front of the tripod to infinity all in focus. Sounds lovely and simple and the way to solve a shortage of DoF, but I bet if I try it, it won't be as obvious at all. I've never managed to find any correlation between the theory and actually using tilt. It all seems basically random effects to me!

In this instance you have to remember that when you move the plane of focus to cover the ground anything that extends to the top of the frame, like tree or mountain tops, will be out of focus. So then all you can do is stop way down to try and bring them back

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that is a problem. But I'd be happy to get a flat plane in focus front to back as that would at least suggest I'd found an entry point.

Click to expand...

I’m finding it not nearly as easy as it sounds. Believe it or not, on a complex scene, with tall objects between you and the furthest object in the frame, with an upward sloping plain of focus, I’ve seen the ground at my feet in focus, then an area of oof, followed by in focus objects higher up, then another oof area, and then the most distant object at the top of the frame in focus again.

Remember in Star Trek when 3D chess was the thing. Learning to think about that shifting plain of focus requires 3D thinking.

Click to expand...

Try playing with this: http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

I've not found a better way of demonstrating how tilt works.

Click to expand...

Thats awesome, Rob!

vjbelle said:

I have never tried combining diagonal images into one final image so it took a little time to get my head around it. For me 4 images are needed. 15mm LR 30 degrees CW and CCW. When those are combined the image must be rotated CCW 30 degrees to get a straight image. To get the most real estate a 2X1 format is needed but at the cost of no rise. If rise is needed or wanted then some horizontal real estate has to be eliminated. In the final analysis it is nothing I would ever use as I have other cameras that can accomplish this much better but if I only had one lens and it was T/S then this is the best solution available to get some rise combined with extended horizontal information.

I am always open to being corrected as I have never tried this before.

Victor B.

Click to expand...

You have the lens, you have the camera, try it! It's so easy.

Put the camera with the T/S lens on the tripod. Level it. Rise the lens 15mm. rotate thens to the left some degrees. Take the picture.

You don't have to combine anything, it's the single shot. Try it!

DMillier said:

Ah, Tim's demonstrator app.

Absolutely incomprehensible.

I suspect it makes perfect sense if you already understand it.

Click to expand...

I think the most important thing to understand is the hinge or the hinge distance (J).

When I understood it I started to learn how to use tilt.

Rodenmg said:

TimoKoo said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Diagonal shift: a combination of rise and lateral shift.

Click to expand...

Are you saying a combination of rise and panning or actually rotating the lens itself and rising at an angle. The rise portion of the Gf lens can be rotated up to 180 degrees.

Click to expand...

Alan_b did rise at an angle. Compare those shifted and non-shifted pictures – look at verticals. That's the trick why to use T/S lenses, or one of them.

Click to expand...

Rise is pretty easy to get a hand on. But I’ve yet to experiment with rotating the lens and using rise at an angle. I’ll wait for Alan’s answer but it looks to me like vertical rise for distortion correction and a simple pan to reframe horizontally.

Click to expand...

No pan here, just diagonal shift. Note that there's no convergence in the horizontal lines.

Not that I couldn't have panned for framing, it just wasn't the goal here.

This is also a good example of being a bit too close to the building with a bit too wide of a lens. IMO the top right corner of the building is getting too much projection.

Rob de Loe said:

TimoKoo said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Diagonal shift: a combination of rise and lateral shift.

Click to expand...

Are you saying a combination of rise and panning or actually rotating the lens itself and rising at an angle. The rise portion of the Gf lens can be rotated up to 180 degrees.

Click to expand...

Alan_b did rise at an angle. Compare those shifted and non-shifted pictures – look at verticals. That's the trick why to use T/S lenses, or one of them.

Click to expand...

I don't know if this will help or hinder understanding, but there are two different ways to think about what Alan did.

1. Coming from view cameras, and using a digital view camera, I think in terms of "shift" (horizontal, left and right), "rise" (lens goes up, or back goes down) and "fall" (lens goes down, or back goes up). These are all separate movements, which means I apply them one at a time. So in Alan's example, on my setup I would first apply a shift and then a rise (or vice versa).
2. Keith Cooper argues -- and I see his point -- that the view camera language doesn't make sense for tilt-shift lenses because there's only one shift movement, but you choose the orientation with a rotation. What I call a "rise" is shifting straight up. A "shift" is shifting horizontal left or right, and what Alan did is a diagonal shift.

Click to expand...

I go back & forth between 'directional shift' and 'rise/fall/shift' depending on what camera I'm using. It all accomplishes the same thing, and usually takes longer to explain than to show or do in practice.

alan_b said:

Rodenmg said:

TimoKoo said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Diagonal shift: a combination of rise and lateral shift.

Click to expand...

Are you saying a combination of rise and panning or actually rotating the lens itself and rising at an angle. The rise portion of the Gf lens can be rotated up to 180 degrees.

Click to expand...

Alan_b did rise at an angle. Compare those shifted and non-shifted pictures – look at verticals. That's the trick why to use T/S lenses, or one of them.

Click to expand...

Rise is pretty easy to get a hand on. But I’ve yet to experiment with rotating the lens and using rise at an angle. I’ll wait for Alan’s answer but it looks to me like vertical rise for distortion correction and a simple pan to reframe horizontally.

Click to expand...

No pan here, just diagonal shift. Note that there's no convergence in the horizontal lines.

Not that I couldn't have panned for framing, it just wasn't the goal here.

This is also a good example of being a bit too close to the building with a bit too wide of a lens. IMO the top right corner of the building is getting too much projection.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Nice example.

--
... Mike, formerly known as Rod.
... https://www.flickr.com/photos/198581502@N02/

Greg7579 said:

Ken West said:

I use lens rise and diagonal shift and rotate the camera body all at the same time to square something up at times with the 30mm TS and Canon tse lenses.. Never use any tilt with a wide angle lens.

Click to expand...

I'm going to keep this quote in my notes and hope I can understand it as I start shooting with the 30 TS. I will be able to vertical shift immediately. I think I will be able to use shift to pan left and right for a 3 shot merge right away.

But I'm not sure what you mean above using lens rise, diagonal shift and rotating the camera body all at the same time... And I hope I can try some 30mm Tilt! You don't do that?

-
Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Click to expand...

I have their TSE frames for 24mm and 50mm TSE lenses.

Greg7579 said:

Rodenmg said:

TimoKoo said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Diagonal shift: a combination of rise and lateral shift.

Click to expand...

Are you saying a combination of rise and panning or actually rotating the lens itself and rising at an angle. The rise portion of the Gf lens can be rotated up to 180 degrees.

Click to expand...

Alan_b did rise at an angle. Compare those shifted and non-shifted pictures – look at verticals. That's the trick why to use T/S lenses, or one of them.

Click to expand...

Rise is pretty easy to get a hand on. But I’ve yet to experiment with rotating the lens and using rise at an angle. I’ll wait for Alan’s answer but it looks to me like vertical rise for distortion correction and a simple pan to reframe horizontally.

Click to expand...

I think he panned to the right from his original shot just in the normal way with any lens. Just some reframing before shooting a shift. But I'm saying that only because I don't understand diagonal shift.

Click to expand...

Here's what it looks like without the camera attached for clarity:


Vertical shift (front rise)


Diagonal shift (combined shift + rise)

Rodenmg said:

… I saw an explanation the other day that said that if you focus at infinity and tilt downward, you can get the (flat) ground in front of the tripod to infinity all in focus. Sounds lovely and simple and the way to solve a shortage of DoF, but I bet if I try it, it won't be as obvious at all. I've never managed to find any correlation between the theory and actually using tilt. It all seems basically random effects to me!

In this instance you have to remember that when you move the plane of focus to cover the ground anything that extends to the top of the frame, like tree or mountain tops, will be out of focus. So then all you can do is stop way down to try and bring them back

Click to expand...

Here I applied some tilt to get plane of focus from my shooting position to the trees in the back. It is hard to do. I do carry a cheat sheet on my phone.

f11, lens 90mm f2.8 TSE II



Here you can see better as I used f2.8 Plane of focus is thin but going all the way to the back.

f2.8

What you are suggesting is panning. What has been discussed is a diagonal image and the only way diagonal images can be made into a horizontal is to take 4 of them and combine.

Panning is easy but I would probably do that in portrait position. Diagonals are something I would never resort to as I have said above I have other cameras that can compound shift to achieve rise and shift at the same time.

Victor B.

Rob de Loe said:

Rodenmg said:

DMillier said:

Rodenmg said:

… I saw an explanation the other day that said that if you focus at infinity and tilt downward, you can get the (flat) ground in front of the tripod to infinity all in focus. Sounds lovely and simple and the way to solve a shortage of DoF, but I bet if I try it, it won't be as obvious at all. I've never managed to find any correlation between the theory and actually using tilt. It all seems basically random effects to me!

In this instance you have to remember that when you move the plane of focus to cover the ground anything that extends to the top of the frame, like tree or mountain tops, will be out of focus. So then all you can do is stop way down to try and bring them back

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that is a problem. But I'd be happy to get a flat plane in focus front to back as that would at least suggest I'd found an entry point.

Click to expand...

I’m finding it not nearly as easy as it sounds. Believe it or not, on a complex scene, with tall objects between you and the furthest object in the frame, with an upward sloping plain of focus, I’ve seen the ground at my feet in focus, then an area of oof, followed by in focus objects higher up, then another oof area, and then the most distant object at the top of the frame in focus again.

Remember in Star Trek when 3D chess was the thing. Learning to think about that shifting plain of focus requires 3D thinking.

Click to expand...

Try playing with this: http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/dslr-tilt-shift/

I've not found a better way of demonstrating how tilt works.

Click to expand...

I think Dave Shew shows it quite well in his article I mean the floor shot thing.

I make the floor shot a little differently. But only a little. If you want the whole floor in your picture to be in focus, do next steps:

1. Set your camera on tripod, point it to the right direction, select the right lens for the angle of field, level it (if needed, and it's needed if there is walls or other things which should be vertical).

2.Frame your picture. If the floor is important, you might want to fall the down, how much you want. You can also tilt the camera downwards, but then the vertical lines in your scene are not vertical in your picture.

3. Focus in the middle of the floor. ( not to the infinity), better if that middle point is also in the center of your picture.

4. Put the Peak on at low, if it wasn't already.

5. Tilt forward until the whole floor shows peaking. Stop tilting, forget peaking.

6. Magnify the screen. Move to the nearest part of the floor. Make it sharp using tilt, more or less tilt, untill it's sharp.

7. move to the far end of the floor. If it's not sharp, make it sharp by focusing.

8. Move back to the near area. If it is not sharp, iteration have to be done. Make it sharp by tilting. Go to far end and focus it by focusing. You'll don't need many steps.

I made a experiment, but did not post it here because it's not medium format shot. Ist's

in another thread

vjbelle said:

What you are suggesting is panning. What has been discussed is a diagonal image and the only way diagonal images can be made into a horizontal is to take 4 of them and combine.

Panning is easy but I would probably do that in portrait position. Diagonals are something I would never resort to as I have said above I have other cameras that can compound shift to achieve rise and shift at the same time.

Victor B.

Click to expand...

No, no panning, only diagonal shift. look at https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67829294

The rise is a shift to upwards and fall is the shift to downwards. The horizontal shift is not the only shift.

What the link is showing is something I wasn't doing. I was shifting up (lowering the camera) but only rotating the camera. This also is a combination of shift plus rise and has the advantage of including the center of the potential image ( assuming a left and a right ) so that they could be combined to create an image that could be cropped to enhance either width or width and some height ( 4 images ).

What was shown in the link doesn't include the center of the final image ( again assuming a left and right ) so that a level image ( no diagonal ) has to be taken to combine with the diagonals.

A diagonal with 15mm of shift/rise won't be of much use on its own. It has to be combined with something else.... right?

Victor B.

Keystoning Cops.

There was a video that was fantastic that someone posted 7 months ago where a guys took a GFX 100S and the 30 TS and did a video of the setups and showed the whole rig and how he manipulated it in various ways for sift, vertical and horizonal and also panning with shift as well as doing some tilt.

Can anyone link it? I can't find it.

Edit later.... Here it is....

NEW Fuji GF 30mm Tilt & Shift | PERFECT for Landscape & Architecture - YouTube