Tilt Shift on a Z body

You won’t actually “lose” AF because tilt/shift lenses are manual focus to begin with.

 

I assume Nikon will have Z mount T/S lenses in another year or two, maybe three.

How do these perform on a Z body. (Z7). I know I would lose AF but any other issues? Think there might be a Z mount in the future? looking at the 85mm.

If I had a Z body, and I could afford a new Z T/S lens when it comes out, the Z mount should be an outstanding improvement for potential image shift, given the much larger mount diameter. On an adapter you likely won't see much difference from what you get on a DSLR, which can still be quite spectacular. A new T/S Z-mount lens might be the thing that eventually gets me to move to mirrorless. I'm still trying to justify my D500 and D810!

I have a lone T/S lens, the 24mm/f3.5 PC-E, which is manual focus as all other Nikkor T/S lenses. I just mounted that with the FTZ on my Z6. It works fine, but I don't particularly like that 30mm extension tube in the form of the FTZ. A dedicated PC-E lens to take full advantage of the short 16mm flange distance and the wide diameter of the Z mount should be spectacular, but I think that may be 2, 3 years away. Nikon still needs to fill out the telephoto selection for the Z mount.

 

A 19mm and/or a 24mm T/S lens should be a must for an architect. :rolleyes:

However, the F-mount 19mm/f4 PC-E is a $3400 lens. That is very expensive.

 

There may be some third-party T/S lenses in the Z mount, but I am not familiar with non-Nikkor lens availability and quality.

For example: Venus Optics Laowa 15mm f/4.5 Zero-D Shift Lens for Nikon Z

Edited April 8, 2022 by ShunCheung

the Z mount should be an outstanding improvement for potential image shift, given the much larger mount diameter.

There are other considerations than mount diameter, as we've already seen with most new mirrorless wide-angle designs. The microlens array on the sensor places restraints on the acceptable incidence angle projected from a lens. Vis; the colour fringing seen when using older shift lenses with digital sensors. Then there are optical design restraints on the size of image-circle that still gives acceptable definition and flatness-of-field, together with low geometrical distortion and vignetting.

So don't expect much more than the +/- 11 or 12mm shift we've been used to on (D)SLR design T/S lenses.

 

FWIW, there's a new Laowa 20mm shift lens recently announced in various mirrorless mounts, but it still only offers a maximum 11mm shift.

I think third party tilt shif lens for the Z is a good idea. I don't think you need to interface with the camera. Everything can be done manually. Even if meter doesn't work it won't matter much. Using the Z mount without adapter I think there is more room for better movements. Come to think of it, since the flange distance is so shallow someone should make a view camera with a Z as the back. With today high MP large format isn't really needed but a full movements of a view camera would be nice.

Come to think of it, since the flange distance is so shallow someone should make a view camera with a Z as the back.

But the minimum distance between front and back standards is limited on any monorail - even with a bag bellows - and technical cameras are even worse. So the few millimetres saved on flange distance becomes pretty irrelevant. Then there's the aforementioned lens incidence-angle issue, and the fact that LF lenses just don't have the definition expected for a (comparatively) small high-megapixel digital sensor.

 

Plus it's a bulky and cumbersome way to get a 55 or 65mm f/5.6 shift lens.

 

For the price of a new T/S lens, you can still buy and process quite a few sheets of 5"x4" film!

Edited April 9, 2022 by rodeo_joe|1

But the minimum distance between front and back standards is limited on any monorail - even with a bag bellows - and technical cameras are even worse. So the few millimetres saved on flange distance becomes pretty irrelevant. Then there's the aforementioned lens incidence-angle issue, and the fact that LF lenses just don't have the definition expected for a (comparatively) small high-megapixel digital sensor.

 

Plus it's a bulky and cumbersome way to get a 55 or 65mm f/5.6 shift lens.

 

For the price of a new T/S lens, you can still buy and process quite a few sheets of 5"x4" film!

I am not saying to use LF lenses but rather introducing new lens line with the view camera. These lenses won't have shutter like normal large format lenses. Also they do have to cover larger than FF but not anywhere near the LF coverage and should have higher resolution than LF lenses too.

I am not saying to use LF lenses but rather introducing new lens line with the view camera.

Been done by Rodenstock and, IIRC Schneider, with their digital lens lineups - all very expensive and mostly unexciting in their specs.

 

The issue of needing to be moderately telecentric in design to oblige a microlens array remains, and neither shortening the flange-distance nor widening the throat diameter address that need.

 

Also, there's no getting around the physical distance needed to accommodate any sort of tilt/shift mechanism - especially tilt. A conventional bellows simply isn't flexible enough to shift with a small, or zero extension, while any cylindrical rotating mechanism also needs some appreciable thickness.

 

There was actually a monorail camera with full movements designed several decades back that took 35mm film and lenses. Its sales were tiny and it quickly went out of production. In fact it was quite similar to a Nikon PB-4 bellows with a film-back directly attached; but if you've ever tried to use a PB-4 as a tilt/shift attachment, you'll know just how limiting it is in terms of what (non-Nikon) focal lengths can be used with it and still get focussing at infinity or a reasonably long distance.

 

But feel free to design your custom view camera and dedicated set of lenses. And good luck with finding a profitable market!

I think the tilt-shift lens for mirrorless cameras will be addressed by manufacturers eventually but it's not their priority as these sell in relatively small numbers (okay, they do make other lenses which also sell in small numbers such as 58/0.95 and 400/2.8 and 800 mm primes, but those have quite strong markets as action photography is popular and the cost per lens is very very high).

 

I personally love to work with tilt/shift lenses and use a bunch of them on my F-mount cameras. I expect it might take as long as 10 years for Nikon to produce a lineup of PC Nikkors for Z.

I think the tilt-shift lens for mirrorless cameras will be addressed by manufacturers eventually...

But how will a 'dedicated' Z-mount T/S lens substantially differ from an adapted current F-mount lens? Or from an adapted current Canon, Samyang or Laowa lens for that matter?

 

And 10 years is far too long to wait if you have an architectural assignment today.

But how will a 'dedicated' Z-mount T/S lens substantially differ from an adapted current F-mount lens? Or from an adapted current Canon, Samyang or Laowa lens for that matter?

 

And 10 years is far too long to wait if you have an architectural assignment today.

 

You can use the PC-E Nikkors on the Z today with adapters and no loss of functionality, or you can use a dSLR.

 

But if you want a lens that is designed to take advantage of the freedom of the Z mount then you need to wait until the manufacturer makes such lenses. I would expect more freedom of movements and better corner sharpness and illumination of such lenses, but only time will tell how they'll turn out. There is some vignetting on the PC-E 17mm which has been attributed to the constraints of the F-mount.

 

What I don't understand is why people have become so impatient. Existing gear still works and new products come out when they come out.

Disregarding shift; could tilt (schiemflug) be accomplished with enhanced IBIS tilting the sensor?

(on any brand)

I would expect more freedom of movements and better corner sharpness and illumination of such lenses..

Expect away, but unless Nikon do some magic with the sensor and its microlens array, that's unlikely to happen. Flange diameter and distance aren't really the limiting factors.

 

Do we have the lightweight, compact, wide-aperture wide angle lenses that were expected? Errr, no.

So pessimistic ;) Don't think in terms of the entire lens group shifting and tilting. There may be some interesting out-of-the-box things that can be done with the larger mount. Edited April 11, 2022 by conrad_hoffman

Disregarding shift; could tilt (Scheimpflug) be accomplished with enhanced IBIS tilting the sensor?

(on any brand)

I have often wondered about this, I don't see why it couldn't be possible. It would be very useful especially for FX and larger sensors where the depth of field is often insufficient using a single frame with an un-tilted sensor. Stopping down further to increase the depth of focus is not always practical. Beyond a certain point diffraction starts to rob the image of sharpness and it may require longer shutter speeds which increases the problems of subject movement. It may require higher ISOs which reduces image quality and the DoF may still be insufficient. Currently the only way around this is to use focus stacking, but that does not work well if the subject is moving, eg a landscape on a windy day, a flowing river, waves on the sea, people and wildlife.

 

Tilting the sensor will run into the same problems as tilting the lens - uneven illumination or color shifts due to light not striking the sensor optimally. If the amount of tilt is restricted to relatively small angles this shouldn't be a problem with most lenses. In most cases the amount of tilt required is not great anyway. The advantages are that tilt-only (no shift) does not require a larger image circle so it would work with any lens, and it would eliminate the bulky tilt mechanism needed on tilt lenses.

 

If we are going to have a sensor where one or other edge can tilt back, why not go the next step and allow the entire sensor to move forward and back? That would allow limited AF even with manual lenses :)

If we are going to have a sensor where one or other edge can tilt back, why not go the next step and allow the entire sensor to move forward and back? That would allow limited AF even with manual lenses :)

Please don't open that can of worms. :rolleyes:

I tend to agree with Shun. Allowing a Z-axis freedom would reintroduce issues of focus that mirrorless designs obviated at a stroke. But then again, maybe not, since we'd still be using the actual captured image as part of the AF servo loop. However, I think the degree of movement required would be beyond that currently needed for IBIS, and require a fair amount of R&D to implement.

 

What would be nice would be a tilt lens that automatically shifted to keep the optical axis centred on the frame (nodal tilt). Thus emulating back-tilt without the complication of tilting the sensor, or guessing at the amount of manual shift required to keep the sensor in the lens's sweet spot.

An afterthought: Maybe Z-axis adjustment could be used to neutralise all those badly-assembled and de-centred lenses with a tilted focal-plane that seem to be churned out by some makers? (Samyang springs to mind for some reason) :rolleyes:

 

It would certainly avoid some of the arguments and time-wasting returns that I've had with some suppliers! :confused::(

Auto keystone correction and auto focus stacking have pretty much (!) done away with the need of tilt-shift lenses, for stationary subjects regarding perspective distortion and limited DoF......:)

I happily still use my 85mm PC with my D850 and D500 for moving things or just as a technical exercise.

 

Waving fields of flowers from foot to horizon Spring (sorry!) to mind. Focus stacks can be blended with moving flowers, but I always end up looking at it as a stack and trying to spot the flaws rather than seeing the floral vista!

 

Seascapes are a similar issue....:D

Auto keystone correction and auto focus stacking have pretty much (!) done away with the need of tilt-shift lenses, for stationary subjects regarding perspective distortion and limited DoF......:)

 

 

A lot of subjects that are interesting have some moving elements to them. Stacking involves estimation and sometimes yields artifacts which can be hard to identify but still it's not the same as photographing a subject in one image. I often use tilt when photographing ice formations and rocks with water constituting a part of the image. It becomes rather tricky to deal with waves when you have multiple images.

 

If it is severe keystoning that is corrected in software there can also be uneven resolution in different parts of the image. Is the correction such that it automatically preserves the correct aspect ratio and perspective in the subject?

 

One aspect that is in favour of using regular lenses without movements is that automatic vignetting and distortion correction in software based on a profile doesn't work with lenses when movements have been applied.

I have and use the 24mm PCE and 45mm PCE lenses with my Z cameras and they work exactly the same as on an F mount body. I don't mind the adapter, especially the new one which allows more working space between the controls and locks.

 

Nikon knows that in order to sell a Z mount version of a T/S lens, it has to be a good optical improvement over the current ones. I have no doubt they are well on their way to announcing one or more for the Z mount.

I have and use the 24mm PCE and 45mm PCE lenses with my Z cameras and they work exactly the same as on an F mount body. I don't mind the adapter, especially the new one which allows more working space between the controls and locks.

 

Nikon knows that in order to sell a Z mount version of a T/S lens, it has to be a good optical improvement over the current ones. I have no doubt they are well on their way to announcing one or more for the Z mount.

Both of those lenses, along with the 85mm PC-E and PC-micro have the tilt and shift axis fixed (factory default is a 90° offset), and getting rid of that limitation is the biggest improvement I would want in their replacements (addressed with the 19mm PC-E). Of course, Nikon isn't going to do F-mount updates, but they can address that issue with Z-mount versions of these lenses.

Edited May 6, 2022 by tonybeach_1961

Both of those lenses, along with the 85mm PC-E and PC-micro have the tilt and shift axis fixed (factory default is a 90° offset), and getting rid of that limitation is the biggest improvement I would want in their replacements (addressed with the 19mm PC-E). Of course, Nikon isn't going to do F-mount updates, but they can address that issue with Z-mount versions of these lenses.

 

While more movements is fun and can be useful, the cost likely goes up substantially (it requires a larger image circle to offer those freedoms and additional mechanical systems), as it has for the 19 mm compared to the others. I personally use what movements are available, and don't really miss what isn't there. I've used the 19 mm's ability to level horizon, shift down, and tilt at the same time in the same direction (to get a near-far scene in focus without keystoning) but the result can look rather extreme compared to tilting the camera down and applying tilt to increase near-to-far sharpness, and I wouldn't really say that this is a "better solution" judging from the aesthetics of the outcome. It's just another option to have. The more restricted movements cover most situations for me. Having to pay 4k€ for each focal length is quite a lot of money if one wants to get a full range of focal lengths (that are manual focus and don't really replace any normal lens but are in addition to them). For me tilt is mostly useful on the longer focal lengths and shift on the shorter ones. If Nikon can make the PC Nikkors for Z mount optically simpler because of the larger opening and the space freed by the lack of mirror, great, this could reduce the price a bit. But it could take a decade or more before they get started with it, as tilt/shift doesn't seem to be a priority for Nikon, for many years they barely had any offerings in this segment. Canon recently updated their tilt/shift lineup for EF mount and haven't done anything for their mirrorless mount yet, and neither has Sony. It doesn't look like there is a lot of manufacturer interest.