TS-E on the cheap? For architectural photography

AmateurArchitectural wrote:

I shoot architecture, largely exteriors, for work but not for income. Mostly photos I only use at PowerPoint resolutions and for book/article illustrations. Really large prints are an occasional treat.

I really want to move to a TS-E, firstly because I much prefer to compose and problem-solve in-camera rather than in PS, and secondly because I loved my old Nikon shift and want to play with tilt too.

My question is, is it too bad a waste of a beautiful lens (17mm TS-E) to put it on a 7-year-old EOS400D?

- Will I be able to focus through the 400D’s little view-finder?

- Is the image quality in camera too low to be worth it?

My alternative is to shell out another £1000+ to get the 6D and the 24mm TS-E instead (17mm on FF the angles are too un-natural-looking for my kind of architecture), and consign my EFS to spare.

Any advice welcome!

(If you want to see the sort of thing I shoot, there's some here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/barnabas_calder/)

To me a good lens is good lens, no such thing "a waste" on any camera, the unique T/S capabilities can be fully utilized for your type of work regardless what kind of camera body is mounted on, of course 6D is easier than the 400D due to all the newer technologies, but it's definitely not a "waste" on 400D, I have used my TSEs both film, old 20D and all the newer bodies like 5D2, 1DS3, all worked great.

Focusing the TSE with VF is not as difficult as you may think, I mainly use MF Zeiss and TSE primes and while it's "harder" to do that with VF than the LV LCD, but it's definitely doable if you take your time and practice more, you are not shooting fast moving objects with such combo, so don't be turned off by VF MF, you will love those TSE, once you tried, it's hard to go back to any other Canon WA lenses.

Mike K wrote:

My question is, is it too bad a waste of a beautiful lens (17mm TS-E) to put it on a 7-year-old EOS400D?

- Will I be able to focus through the 400D’s little view-finder?

- Is the image quality in camera too low to be worth it?

I own both the 17 TSE and 24 TSE II and use them quite a lot Vs other lenses.

I shot for several years using a older version of the TSE24 on a Canon 1DII. Despite the large viewfinder, I found it very difficult getting optimum tilt and shift adjustments using the viewfinder only. Tilt in particular was difficult, whereas sometime shift (perspective adjustments) could be done in the viewfinder by paying attention to larger items like trees, building columns, etc. With the Live View you can zoom into 5X or 10X, and with a higher resolution LCD , greatly facilitates Tilt and Shift lens movement adjustments.

So my advice for T/S use is get a camera with a good Live View implementation and a good LCD. The 400D has a 2.5" LCD with only 230,000 dots, a very first generation Live View that simply doesn't have the resolution to do critical lens movements.

No, it does not have live view. At all. The 450D was the 1st of the series with live view.

All of the current Canon dSLRs Including Rebels) have a 3" LCD (Some swivel and are touch sensitive) with about 1.1m dot resolution. Big difference.

Mike K

Thank you all very much for the answers so far - really helpful. Live View, especially for tilt, seems to be the critical issue.

If I'm stopping down to f11 most of the time and often at 10-20m from the critical focus subject will I be able to wing it without Live View, or will I find myself endlessly frustrated by slight missed focus?

If it comes to it, I'd probably rather spend more and enjoy using the kit than save and get driven mad by it!

I also have a fondness for over-polarised blue skies which makes me favour the 24mm for filters, at which point I'd need a FF body to be wide enough for architecture. (Sounds as if I'm trying to talk myself out of saving the money...).

AmateurArchitectural wrote:

I shoot architecture, largely exteriors, for work but not for income. Mostly photos I only use at PowerPoint resolutions and for book/article illustrations. Really large prints are an occasional treat.

That is your current situation. Your photography might grow, so try to take that into account if that is not very unlikely.

I really want to move to a TS-E, firstly because I much prefer to compose and problem-solve in-camera rather than in PS, and secondly because I loved my old Nikon shift and want to play with tilt too.

My question is, is it too bad a waste of a beautiful lens (17mm TS-E) to put it on a 7-year-old EOS400D?

It does not go to waste, but maybe shine on a body with fewer restrictions.

- Will I be able to focus through the 400D’s little view-finder?

That is the biggest problem. For smaller apertures and small sized images, slightly off focussing will not matter too much, though.

- Is the image quality in camera too low to be worth it?

I guess you must mean image quality out of camera? At low ISO settings the 400D is fine. Just a tad less vibrant than other Canon models. Whether the 10mp is enough is for you to decide (it seems it is).

The main downsides of the 400D are the smallish LCD, no LiveView, in combination with the small XXXD viewfinder.

My alternative is to shell out another £1000+ to get the 6D and the 24mm TS-E instead (17mm on FF the angles are too un-natural-looking for my kind of architecture), and consign my EFS to spare.

You can consider a 400D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you low quality higher ISO, usability problems with tilt judgement. No live view to aid you either.

You can consider a 650D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you much better higher ISO possibilities, a great high res. LCD which swivels (and offere live view) and has a nifty touch interface that you can use or leave, and will give you much better judgement of focus and tilt.

You can consider a 6D with 24mp TS-E II. Will give you a better than the 400D LCD, with live view. Will offer a bigger and brighter view finder, which helps a bit judging focus and tilt too.

You can consider a 6D with Samyang 24mm tilt shift. You get a tad lower quality optics than the Canon powerhouse, less build quality for a lower (more affordable) price.

You can consider a 6D with the old 24mm TS-E, 2nd hand.

Any advice welcome!

(If you want to see the sort of thing I shoot, there's some here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/barnabas_calder/)

You can consider a 400D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you low quality higher ISO, usability problems with tilt judgement. No live view to aid you either.

You can consider a 650D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you much better higher ISO possibilities, a great high res. LCD which swivels (and offere live view) and has a nifty touch interface that you can use or leave, and will give you much better judgement of focus and tilt.

You can consider a 6D with 24mp TS-E II. Will give you a better than the 400D LCD, with live view. Will offer a bigger and brighter view finder, which helps a bit judging focus and tilt too.

You can consider a 6D with Samyang 24mm tilt shift. You get a tad lower quality optics than the Canon powerhouse, less build quality for a lower (more affordable) price.

You can consider a 6D with the old 24mm TS-E, 2nd hand.

This is a fantastically knowledgeable, helpful and clear answer - thank you so much. I hadn't thought of a cheapo new crop body as a clever way to keep costs down but get Live View! Along with Mike CH's observation about the limitations of polarisers at wide angles this is sounding like a great option:

EOS650D+TS-E17mm:

- decent resolution

- good quality Live View for focusing, especially with tilt

- excellent IQ (including avoiding the less good edges of TS-E)

- I don't lose my EF-S standard zoom

From the reviews of the EOS650D it sounds as if I might even be able to get the occasional shot at a quality and resolution needed for a smallish poster-sized print, if I get my technique bang-on.

Any down-sides I'm failing to spot?

Thank you!

AmateurArchitectural wrote:

You can consider a 400D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you low quality higher ISO, usability problems with tilt judgement. No live view to aid you either.

You can consider a 650D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you much better higher ISO possibilities, a great high res. LCD which swivels (and offere live view) and has a nifty touch interface that you can use or leave, and will give you much better judgement of focus and tilt.

You can consider a 6D with 24mp TS-E II. Will give you a better than the 400D LCD, with live view. Will offer a bigger and brighter view finder, which helps a bit judging focus and tilt too.

You can consider a 6D with Samyang 24mm tilt shift. You get a tad lower quality optics than the Canon powerhouse, less build quality for a lower (more affordable) price.

You can consider a 6D with the old 24mm TS-E, 2nd hand.

This is a fantastically knowledgeable, helpful and clear answer - thank you so much. I hadn't thought of a cheapo new crop body as a clever way to keep costs down but get Live View! Along with Mike CH's observation about the limitations of polarisers at wide angles this is sounding like a great option:

EOS650D+TS-E17mm:

- decent resolution

- good quality Live View for focusing, especially with tilt

- excellent IQ (including avoiding the less good edges of TS-E)

- I don't lose my EF-S standard zoom

From the reviews of the EOS650D it sounds as if I might even be able to get the occasional shot at a quality and resolution needed for a smallish poster-sized print, if I get my technique bang-on.

Or bigger poster print... The bigger you print, the bigger the viewing distance will be. Print resolution kinda scales with viewing distance.

Also, if you go for a 17mm f4 TS-E, and you go FF in future, you can add a 1.4x TC (not totally sure about Canon, but Kenko for sure) I believe, and get a 1.4 x 17 = 23.8mm TS-E. This way you get two focal lengths for the price of one.

Any down-sides I'm failing to spot?

Thank you!

AmateurArchitectural wrote:

You can consider a 400D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you low quality higher ISO, usability problems with tilt judgement. No live view to aid you either.

You can consider a 650D with 17mm TS-E. Will give you much better higher ISO possibilities, a great high res. LCD which swivels (and offere live view) and has a nifty touch interface that you can use or leave, and will give you much better judgement of focus and tilt.

You can consider a 6D with 24mp TS-E II. Will give you a better than the 400D LCD, with live view. Will offer a bigger and brighter view finder, which helps a bit judging focus and tilt too.

You can consider a 6D with Samyang 24mm tilt shift. You get a tad lower quality optics than the Canon powerhouse, less build quality for a lower (more affordable) price.

You can consider a 6D with the old 24mm TS-E, 2nd hand.

This is a fantastically knowledgeable, helpful and clear answer - thank you so much. I hadn't thought of a cheapo new crop body as a clever way to keep costs down but get Live View! Along with Mike CH's observation about the limitations of polarisers at wide angles this is sounding like a great option:

EOS650D+TS-E17mm:

- decent resolution

- good quality Live View for focusing, especially with tilt

- excellent IQ (including avoiding the less good edges of TS-E)

- I don't lose my EF-S standard zoom

From the reviews of the EOS650D it sounds as if I might even be able to get the occasional shot at a quality and resolution needed for a smallish poster-sized print, if I get my technique bang-on.

Any down-sides I'm failing to spot?

I think so, yes. The 17 TS-E has a huge bulbous front element which is a problem if you want to use filters; the 24 TS-E takes screw-in filters. Sharpness is not an issue with either of these lenses, but FWIW the 24 mm lens is sharper (and of course the 6D image would be cleaner and slightly higher resolution). The 17 is more expensive - not by a huge amount, but if you are buying a new body the difference will take you that much closer to the price of a 6D.

I don't own a T/S lens so take what I say with a pinch of salt, but if I was investing that much I'd want a full frame body, and the 6D makes that relatively affordable. You could also consider a used 5DII if you don't need the specific features of the 6D.

Marcos Villaroman wrote:

AmateurArchitectural wrote:

I shoot architecture, largely exteriors, for work but not for income. Mostly photos I only use at PowerPoint resolutions and for book/article illustrations. Really large prints are an occasional treat.

I really want to move to a TS-E, firstly because I much prefer to compose and problem-solve in-camera rather than in PS, and secondly because I loved my old Nikon shift and want to play with tilt too.

My question is, is it too bad a waste of a beautiful lens (17mm TS-E) to put it on a 7-year-old EOS400D?

- Will I be able to focus through the 400D’s little view-finder?

- Is the image quality in camera too low to be worth it?

My alternative is to shell out another £1000+ to get the 6D and the 24mm TS-E instead (17mm on FF the angles are too un-natural-looking for my kind of architecture), and consign my EFS to spare.

Any advice welcome!

(If you want to see the sort of thing I shoot, there's some here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/barnabas_calder/)

I would go for the 6D and 24mm TS-E. Full frame and wide glass go very well together. You get other pluses like better high ISO performance.

That is debatable. If you set equivalent -f-ratios to get similar DOF, you need to set the ISO at an equivalent setting too. You will lose 1 1/3rd stop of "high ISO performance" right there. Then the difference is not so big anymore...

Another option would be to research used bodies that have adequate live view implementation (factor in screen size and resolution) that you could use in the meantime. If you find a few models that work that are readily available in your area at an acceptable price, you could go for the 17mm TS-E now and buy a slight body upgrade later.

Otherwise, I recommend that you continue to save your money by sticking with post processing. You do state that you typically stay with smaller prints. CS6's capabilities are very decent in smaller prints of building exteriors.

I found using a the tilt/shift capabilities effectively can take a lot of time to master. I would definitely want to do such things on a sturdy tripod with live view, rather than trying to squint through a really small view finder.