What I'd really like is a digital sensor with rear movements - it actually wouldn't be that hard to engineer, especially on a mirrorless system. Focus stacking is slow to expose - though some software will automatically rack the lens around for you, and in macro distances you can use a macro rail shift lenses have a single exposure, but setting them up takes a bit longer. This is how I've used tilt lenses in the past - but on a camera with a pentamirror, it's a bit painful because of dimness.Īs Ilkka says, tilt lenses don't give infinite DoF, they just rotate the focal plane. I still wish (and will implement if I ever get to hack the BIOS) that there was a way to split live view into quadrants, positioned independently - that would allow my ideal solution of setting the tilt approximately and then waving the camera around to achieve focus. Live view is a significant help here, though a really solid tripod helps when adjusting things. I believe there are issues with shifting some lenses that clash with the camera housing on smaller cameras, but that may not be much of an issue for tilt. In general I think for landscapes where you have trees at different distances, focus stacking with manual blending is what would work usually, usually tilt would not be the right tool to use for that. I have some focus stacked landscapes but unfortunately I haven't posted them in a gallery. To higher resolution than would be possible by stopping down instead of tilting. However, some cases are easy to handle with tilt: I posted that to illustrate the problematics of tilt and stacking. Here focus stacking would not help at all as the movement of the leaves would put them completely in a different position from shot to shot. But with tilt the shutter speed could be increased, leading to increased sharpness in the leaves that are floating with the water. Actually I might be able to do it with a bellows but it's difficult as the 200mm lenses should be supported from the lens mount to be safe, and the bellows needs separate support so it gets complicated. Here is a shot which was made with a 220mm lens at a fairly small aperture (f/11 if I recall correclty) the subject (leaves on water) could have been gotten in focus using tilt if I had had a 200mm tilt lens but I don't. Focus stacking (either by hand drawn layer masks or using automated software) can be used to solve some situations where tilt won't help, for sure.īoth techniques take a lot of practice and skill to perfect. I use tilt where it helps, usually it is for ice and flower shots in particular it's possible to get the sea ice into focus from near range to infinity, also it can be used to get two flowers into focus even with a wide aperture so as to create nice out of focus blur. But for landscape I guess this isn't as much of a problem though three movement can create problems. Sometimes also the scene doesn't stay still long enough to capture a sequence of shots, this is true of many macro situations. Focus stacking does produce artifacts which you need to deal with usually by manually editing the image in photoshop, and a lot of the time it may not be possible to get a completely artifact free result. But a lot of the time the subject isn't a tilted plane and so stopping down and/or focus stacking may still be needed, but then the tilt can help reduce the number of exposures needed in the focus stacking process. Sometimes tilt can help you achieve a shot where everything or most of the interesting parts are in focus in that case without needing to use more than one exposure to achieve the final result. when photographing ice or plants on the ground at an angle. What it is useful for is when the subject is approximately a plane but is not perpendicular to the optical axis. Tilt won't help you at all with a scene like that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |