24mmTS-E - extender or cropped body for extra focal length?

[tom_roe]

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>I'm looking to get some extra focal length from my 24mm tilt-shift Mark II and was wondering if anyone had any advice? I was looking at either getting one of the new canon 1.4x Extenders and using it with my 5DMII or getting a new body such as a 7D or 550D and using the 1.6 crop factor for the extra focal length. </p>

<p>Has anyone tried this? basically I'd like to know which would result in the least reduction of image quality - the addition of an extender or the use of a camera with a sensor of lesser size/quality.</p>

<p>Whilst I'm here, I was also wondering if anyone had any advice on longer tilt-shift glass as I'm looking to invest but I've heard that the Canon 45 and 90mm lenses aren't all that great compared to the 24mmMII</p>

<p>any thoughts welcome, thanks in advance,</p>

<p>tom</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Better to buy a 35mm lens for superior IQ from you FF body.</p>

<p>I suggest not buying a tilt-shift lens until you know what you're going to use it for. The fact that you're asking about the 45 and 90mm tells me that you don't know how you're going to use the 24mm or why you need the 24mm instead of the 17mm.</p>

<p>These are indeed super premium lenses, but most of us do not need their capabilities for our shooting. Don't think that because they're premium priced and high IQ that they'll be superior for your specific needs. Many of us will get a premium (L-series) zoom, or two, and supplement those with a prime or two that fill a very specific need.</p>

<p>Somebody will chime in, but I not certain that Canon's TCs will work with the 24mm TS-E.</p>

[stephan_matthies]

<p>Hi Tom,<br>

although I do not know what you're up to with your TS-E lens, it is clear that with each piece of extra glass you put between the object and the sensor image quality decreases . The price difference between the 1.4 Extender III and the 7 D is significant. But, if you have the spare cash, go for the 7 D. It is an excellent camera, gives you a 1.6 "magnification" factor and you have less glass between obejct and sensor than with the extender-solution.<br>

cheers </p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>The 1.4 TC MkII works superbly on the MkII 24 TS-E; results, even with shift or tilt are still higher than from the MkI 24, that route is much smaller and lighter with fewer complications, than getting another body just to use a lens differently. Having said that when I tested the 7D against a 1Ds MkIII cropped there was very little resolution or IQ difference even when used in optimum conditions and exemplary technique. For me TC's made much more sense than a 7D.</p>

<p>FYI, all Canon TC's work on all Canon TS lenses though they are not supported by Canon and some clearances are very tight.</p>

<p>With regards the 45 and 90, they are both great lenses, but the 24 MkII did break new ground in IQ and functionality, independent rotating shift and tilt planes are much better than the earlier fixed position lenses, the image circles for the 24 MkII and the 17TS-e are much bigger than the earlier three (24, 45 & 90). The lens coatings are way better and the distortions considerably less and much better controlled.</p>

<p>Philip Wilson, a regular here, hopefully will chime in with his experiences, he uses a Mirex (I think) T/S convertor and medium format lenses on his 5D MkII. He will know about longer focal length T/S options.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>The 7D is an excellent lens, but a crop-sensor does not increase reach or magnification. The lens sees the same thing that it "sees" on a full-frame camera, but the crop sensor is not large enough to take in the full image, merely cropping a portion of the full-frame image. You will get the same result with your full-frame body and simply cropping in post processing.</p>

<p>Differences in pixel-pitch will determine which body has the most detail if you crop a crop-sensor image. In this case, cropping a crop-sensor image, the 7D will have slightly more detail than a 5D MkII, but the 5D2 will have superior high-ISO performance. If you want 35mm of reach, then buy a 35mm lens or use a 1.6 TC or a 1.4 TC plus a little more crop on you FF body.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>I should have said, "The 7D is an excellent body,".</p>

[zml]

<p>> ...aren't that great...<br>

Well, the existing T/S 90 mm is one of the finest lenses in the Canon's lineup. It might be replaced someday with Mk. II but it won't take anywthing away from its quality. <br>

More on topic: I often use the old(er) Mk. II 1.4x TC with my Mk I 24mm T/S lens on a FF rig (1Ds3, 1Ds2) and except a bit of CA (get DxO Optics software...) the IQ is acceptable even for high profile jobs. <br>

As an aside, on a body with a built-in flash, you may need to get a bit creative while rotating/shifting a T/S lens because the knobs may hit the flash/prism housing.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>People seem to "hear" all sorts of things. You need to look at objective (literally) reviews to see what the actual performance is or even better try one yourself, not listen to an off-hand comment by some jerk on the internet who may very well have never seen the lens in question.</p>

<p>If you need more than 24mm TS-E, you need to get the appropriate tools. Maybe sell off the 24mm and get something longer.</p>

<p>I can't imagine that an extender and a TS-E are going to be "good idea", as Pooh used to say.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>JDM,</p>

<p>Out of the five posters two have actually used the TS-E lenses with TC's, a pretty good hit rate for these threads. Again, they are a very good idea and work very well.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Tom<br>

I don't have the 24mm TS (although I tested it when I bought my 17 F4 - the 24 II is sharper but I went for the 17 - I suspect when funds permit I will add the 24). In terms of using the 1.4x - I have used it with the 17 F4 (you need to be careful as the rubber end pretty much makes contact with the rear element). Using the 1.4x on the 5DII with the 17 F4 gives about a 24mm lens. While the IQ suffers slightly it works fine so I suspect (as Scott and Michael say) that the 24 + 1.4x will be fine. I own a 7D and have used the 17 on the 7D - this combination works well - perhaps the IQ is slightly better than the 17 + 1.4x on the 5DII. However, the 17mm TS fouls the prism on the 7D slightly - while the problem is not insurmountable, rotating the lens can be quite trick and you have to use maximum upward shift in landscape mode with the camera upside down.<br>

For longer lenses I bought a Mirex Tilt Shift adaptor and use it with my old Mamiya M645 lenses. This works well and costs about $400 (plus the MF lenses). They make the adaptor for Mamiya M645, Pentax 645 and Hassy 6x6. I suspect that the Canon 45mm and 90mm are slightly better but if (like me) you own a set of MF lenses the adaptor is a great way to go. I have used it with the full range of M645 lenses - all the way from 35mm to 210mm without any problems. The IQ of the old MF lenses is very good on the 5DII - especially when stopped down. In my case I get 35mm, 45mm, 55mm, 80mm, 120mm, 150mm and 210mm tilt shift lenses. Since the 5DII is full frame the MF 35mm lens is a 35mm lens on the 5DII. The Mirex adaptor is very well engineered (it is German) and has 10 degrees of tilt and 15mm of shift. The adaptor can also be rotated to change the shift or tilt plane and the shift and tilt can be combined. here is a good review although on a Sony. On the 5DII the prism restriction is not an issue. There is no focus confirmation with the adaptor so live view is often useful.<br>

Review http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/mirex-m645m42-tilt-shift-adapter-mini-review_topic51123.html<br>

Mirex http://www.mirex-adapter.de/tilt_shift_adapter.htm</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>The 35mm-on-FF angle of view with shift is a useful one for architectural work in my experience; I have not used tilt at that angle of view.</p>

<p>There are a number of ways to achieve it. I should say that my experience is with the original TS24, and by all reports the new version gives superior image quality alone or with an Extender.</p>

<p>1. Use the TS24 on a 1.6-factor body, in my case a 7D. This achieves the angle of view of a 38mm lens on FF, and a lot of good-quality shift can be obtained because the circle of coverage is a great deal larger than the crop sensor (an extension of the "sweet-spot" effect). This is my preferred solution. However, there are some mechanical constraints caused by the flash housing of the 7D. If you are shooting in landscape mode and shifting up, the lens body will reach the limit of its travel and touch the flash housing more-or-less simultaneously (so this is not a problem). If you rotate the lens, then the shift knob will foul the flash housing long before 90-degree rotation is achieved, but going the other way is OK – the shift lock knob just clears the flash housing, but is then pretty much inaccessible.</p>

<p>2. Use the TS24 with an Extender 1.4× on a FF body (5DII in my case). This achieves a focal length of 34mm. There is no clearance issue with the original TS24 and the Extender 1.4× original or II. Results are useable, but the aberration worst reinforced by an Extender is lateral CA, and the TS 24 original already has its fair share of that. The TS24 II would probably do much better than the original with an Extender.</p>

<p>3. Buy a Canon FD-mount 35mm TS lens and have it re-mounted for EF as a purely manual lens (it was, of course, never anything else!). Be prepared for cries of horror from the FD enthusiasts in their conservation body role. This would work out quite expensive in total, but I have seen comments from those who have done it that results are excellent.</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>I like 35mm as a Tilt or shift lens angle of view and was a big fan on the old FD 35mm f2.8. Indeed I still own and use this lens. On EOS as I said I use the Mirex adaptor and this works well - the FD lens is probably slightly sharper than the Mamiya 35mm f3.5 but stopped down a couple of stops they both work well. The great thing about the old MF lenses is their size - the FD 35mm is very compact and while the 35mm Mamiya is one of the bigger M645 lenses it is still smaller than the EOS Canon. Indeed the F2.8 M645 80mm lens is very small. Here is what they look like side by side - 35mm FD lens, 35mm Mamiya on Mirex adaptor and 17mm f4 Canon.</p><div></div>

[JDMvW]

<p>Actually, if you want an all-manual (it was never anything else) 35mm <em>shift</em> lens, you can do better than modifying an FD lens. Just buy a PC-Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 lens and a $15 adapter.</p>

<p>As said, this only works if you don't need tilt.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>.</p><div></div>

[dan_south]

I've used the 1.4x II extenderr with the TS-E 24 II. My opinion is that sharpness suffers too much for my taste.

Maybe the III version of the extender is better. I haven't tried a crop body, as I don't own one, but it would be worth

trying. A 35 mm TS equivalent (approx) would be useful for many subjects.

[scott_ferris]

<p>For a test situation comparison between TS-E 24mm MkII and one with a 1.4 TC on it.<a href="http://thedigitalpicture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=486&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=3&LensComp=486&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3"> Link.</a></p>

[michael_perlmutter]

<p>Whether using the Mirex TS adaptor with Mamiya N lenses, or the Canon TS-E 24 II with a 1.4x II or III extender, how does one handle the lens distortion issue in both cases?</p>

<p>And has anyone been able to check if the degradation in sharpness when using the Canon III extender is still acceptable for professional use?</p>

<p>I have a Canon 5d2, use Lightroom 3, PT Lens, and Photoshop CS5, and am trying to determine how best to get 35mm shift for architectural photography. I have no Mamiya lenses as of yet; just a whole set of LF Schneiders and Rodenstocks that I am sad to abandon....</p>