PC-E 17 mm

Consanesco

More than three years ago, Nikon filed patent for a 17 mm tilt and shift. Do we have a realistic chance for an official announcement this year?

WestEndFoto

That would be a great lens to complement the 24 PC, especially if it could tilt and shift.

Consanesco

I'm desperately waiting for this lens. Actually even seriously thinking about switching to Canon only for the 17 mm. It's perfect for architectural photography.

paulr

An interesting in depth report on the Canon PC lens
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-TS-E-17mm-f-4-L-Tilt-Shift-Lens-Review.aspx. Compared to the Schneider PC version at more than double the price the Super Angolan 28mm 4,5 PC/TC Lens http://diglloyd.com/prem/s/DAP/SchneiderPCTS_28f4_5/movements.html?dglyPT=true. In view of Schneider's technology it's strange that they considered 28mm the widest they would go.

spraynpray

What about that Venus/Laowa 15mm tilter that was on the blog a couple of weeks back? Thomas Shahan rates it.

Snowleopard

I am waiting for a PC-E 17mm also.

kepler

Please Nikon make a PC-E 17mm, I don't want to switch to Canon but I really need that lens!!!

WestEndFoto

kepler said:

Please Nikon make a PC-E 17mm, I don't want to switch to Canon but I really need that lens!!!

What are you shooting? If you shoot at f/5.6 you will have massive DOF at 17mm - everything will be in focus past 0.9m all the way to infinity if you focus on something 2.0m away.

You can then correct perspective in Photoshop. What will PC control give you that these options will not?

I have the 24mm 3.5 PC on order, for which the DOF is between 1.24m and 5.19m using the above parameters.

My guess is that knowing this, Nikon has likely correctly determined that there is no real market for a 17 PC lens because it can't accomplish anything that stopping down and using a basic software package cannot accomplish.

At 24mm on the other hand, no amount of post processing can fix the areas that are outside of the DOF.

There is one thing that you may want to accomplish. Perhaps you want to shoot at f/2.8 or f/4.0, in which case the DOF if only 4 or 15 metres respectively. However, if you are trying to achieve a really blurry effect outside of the DOF, you will not accomplish much except a softish almost in focus area. Remember that the Canon does not shoot at f/2.8 - it is only f/4.0. So maybe there is something you are trying to do, but it is likely not architecture or landscapes.

My calculations were done here:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm

WestEndFoto

Consanesco said:

I'm desperately waiting for this lens. Actually even seriously thinking about switching to Canon only for the 17 mm. It's perfect for architectural photography.

As I said in my previous post, unless you refuse to do your perspective control in post, there is no benefit to this lens. I cannot imagine that there would be any perceptible difference in the final image between a 17mm PC lens and regular 17mm lens with the perspective corrected in post. It certainly won't benefit you in architecture photography where depending on your lens, you should be shooting at f/5.6 or f/8.0 to maximize sharpness which gives you infinite DOF at 17mm. Just shoot at f/5.6 or f/8.0 and correct the perspective in post.

WestEndFoto

WestEndFoto said:

That would be a great lens to complement the 24 PC, especially if it could tilt and shift.

Based on a careful consideration of DOF and my prior two comments, I now humbly take back this endorsement of a 17mm PC lens from Nikon. I am however, looking forward to my 24mm, where there are significant DOF limitations at f/8.0. I am also looking forward to the sheer joy and educational value that the lens will provide.

heartyfisher

:-) out of the square but there is the 18-50 Nikon DL with built in soft PC :-)

spraynpray

Neither built-in soft PC or perspective correction in post are going to be anywhere near the same IQ as the result from a tilt-shift lens. You greatly distort an image taken with a standard rectilinear ultra-wide on the one hand in comparison to moving the area used around in a larger image circle with a tilt-shift.

WestEndFoto

spraynpray said:

Neither built-in soft PC or perspective correction in post are going to be anywhere near the same IQ as the result from a tilt-shift lens. You greatly distort an image taken with a standard rectilinear ultra-wide on the one hand in comparison to moving the area used around in a larger image circle with a tilt-shift.

Do you think this is true for all focal lengths, or just for ultra-wide focal lengths?

WestEndFoto

heartyfisher said:

:-) out of the square but there is the 18-50 Nikon DL with built in soft PC :-)

My Coolpix A has this. It can work well, though it seems to struggle in certain circumstances keeping lines straight. I can't remember why. Perhaps when I was getting extreme.

heartyfisher

spraynpray said:

Neither built-in soft PC or perspective correction in post are going to be anywhere near the same IQ as the result from a tilt-shift lens.
...

Of course that's true :-)

Still the DL1850 will meet many of the OP set of the requirements.. we really dont know for certain what level of requirements the OP has.

spraynpray

WestEndFoto said:

spraynpray said:

Neither built-in soft PC or perspective correction in post are going to be anywhere near the same IQ as the result from a tilt-shift lens. You greatly distort an image taken with a standard rectilinear ultra-wide on the one hand in comparison to moving the area used around in a larger image circle with a tilt-shift.

Do you think this is true for all focal lengths, or just for ultra-wide focal lengths?

Gets worse the wider the lens because the distortion needing correction in post gets worse. Tele's need hardly any normally.

WestEndFoto

I see what you mean. That is my experience as well.