Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 42 of 42

Thread: TS-E 17mm versus TS-E 24mm (II)

  1. #41
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Upper Bukit Timah

    Default Re: TS-E 17mm versus TS-E 24mm (II)

    Having abilities to shift is always good to correct perspective distortions for cityscapes, especially in a dense environment with limited working space.

    Local context, you probably don't need shift as much for water front scapes because buildings are relatively further away. With a UWA, you can usually capture an entire scene and maintain straight verticals without shifting. These were all done without shifting.

    14-24mm at 16mm

    PC-E 24mm without shifting

    There are only a few instances which I can recall where shift was used. Here's one of them. I needed more sky.

    The TS-E 17mm is worth as much as its weight in gold if you can put it to good use. I hardly use mine for leisure, mostly for work and even that, I have to carefully consider its pros and cons. Some clients just don't like the over exaggerated perspectives. This photo was rejected by my client because of that. I had to re-shoot this with a PC-E 24mm.

    Assuming you already have a UWA lens, for what you do, I'd suggest getting the TS-E 24mm but 82mm filters can be costly.

  2. #42
    Member emlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Ang Mo Kio

    Default Re: TS-E 17mm versus TS-E 24mm (II)

    Thanks Kit. That was invaluable.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts