Nikon tilt-shift vs. Lens Baby

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Steven wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>My mistake. It loses 2.8 focused closer than approx. 5 feet. It must have been a coincidence while changing rotation that I noticed the F stop change.</blockquote>

 

<p>Phew. I thought I was horrible confused there for a moment. :-)<br />

<br />

Oskar wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>If you shoot a building facade at an angle, shift up and tilt sideways corrects the perspective and puts everything in focus so there's actually a use for having the axes perpendicular.</blockquote>

 

<p>I agree that having tilt and shift out-of-plane can have its place, I'd just have thought the more common case is shooting the building straight-on. In which case, if you want to fix verticals <i>and</i> sort out the focal plane, you need them both in line. Maybe that's an unfair assumption - I've not used my TS lenses enough to claim expertise (at least in shift), and I've not yet picked up a 5x4. Some day...<br />

<br />

Joseph wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>Personally, I've always thought it was because in product, we sometimes have the product at a jaunty angle to the camera (3/4 on for a computer tower) and need our focus plane to match that, adjusting left and right, while we use the shift to be able to move up and down, such as moving down for a "heroic" perspective.</blockquote>

 

<p>I guess that makes sense, but it still doesn't feel like it would be more common than, for example, trying to take a squared-off shot without the camera in the way of the product lighting, or dodging reflections. Not that the alternative isn't useful, just that I've have thought in-plane was <i>more</i> useful. I bow to the fact that you and Oskar have both claimed a good use for it, though - my previous discussions with people using T-S lenses gave me the impression that most people switch them to being in-plane most of the time. I'll miss my super-rotator a bit when I get around to ebaying it (but it's Canon-fit, so I can't really justify keeping it for my back-up body).<br />

<br />

Thanks for the feedback, everyone.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>If you want to experiment with variable focal plane effects cheaply before committing to the purchase of another lens (even the Lensbabies are pricey for what they do), you can use any lens you already own to see if you like the effect well enough to justify buying a specialized lens.</p>

<p>Google <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=qhD&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&q=freelensing&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=">freelensing</a> and check out the illustrations showing how it's done and the hundreds of sample photos on Flickr and elsewhere. It's easy to do with most SLRs/dSLRs and interchangeable lenses. As long as you can adjust the exposure to compensate and the camera will function with the lens detached, it's easy to experiment with. Even if you have to guess at the exposure the histogram makes it a snap.</p>

<p>If you're worried about dust getting on the sensor you can rig up a simple plastic bag between the lens and body. Cut holes in the plastic bag for the lens and body lens mount opening. Tape the bag to the lens and body. I'd recommend painter's blue masking tape - works great, doesn't leave a gooey residue behind.</p>

<p>I've used it mostly with an old 80mm enlarger lens and black plastic bag from an empty container of b&w enlarging paper. I use a T-mount fastened to the bag for the body mount, and a jam nut on the side where the lens goes. It's easier to use this trick with the camera mounted on a tripod. Leaves one hand free to waggle the lens around and another hand free to operate the camera.</p>

<p>You'll probably quickly tire of the hassle of this improvised trick, but at least it'll help you decide whether buying a specialized lens is worthwhile.</p>