# TS-E lineup: What upgrades would you like?



## scottburgess (Dec 7, 2016)

I've been thinking about the 45mm TS-E lens and why I won't buy it, but realized there were several TS-E upgrades that in general I would like. Specifically:

i) Sharpness into the corners. The 45mm is a good example of this, can't sharpen across the frame even when stopped down a long way. I know there's field curvature with TS-E designs, but geez! The 24mm TS-E ii performs much better in this regard. IMHO this should be mandatory for landscape and architectural work.

ii) Wider maximum aperture. With the 45-55mm range, I would like an f/2 or f/1.8 if possible. Yeah, that may push the filter size beyond 82mm and therefore out of range of the Cokin P style filter systems which are widely used. Yeah, I could adjust to that (up to a Lee 150 system) and the higher price. One of my uses for TS-E's in landscape is focus slicing across the frame, and shallower depth of field could enhance this.

iii) Put a tripod ring on the darned thing! Sheesh! Users should be shifting the camera relative to the lens anyway for pano stitching and the like. Start making the feet on these rings Arca-Swiss compatible, too, please. [All lens feet for lenses over 2 lbs. should have multiple threaded mount points, too!]

iv) I would still like a longer TS-E with macro or near-macro focus capability (maybe to half life size if 1:1 isn't reasonable). Yeah, I love macro work.

The original TS-E 24mm has been upgraded well even though the mark ii lacks the integrated tripod ring. But both the 45mm and 90mm have been around a long time (though the latter seems reasonably sharp and contrasty in tests and perhaps therefore is less due for an update). The 17mm is more recent than the first TS-Es. Anyone have other thoughts about possible improvements, particularly for different applications like product photography or video which I don't do much of? How about other focal lengths for the set?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

Add to your list: the 45/90mm lenses should have the ability to easily alter the relative orientation of tilt and shift like the 17/24mm lenses (i.e. being able to change it with a lever press rather than having to disassemble the lens and even then being limited to a 90° change).

Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).

For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.


----------



## keithcooper (Dec 7, 2016)

Giving the 45 and 90 the design updates of the 17/24ii would be nice.

I have a PPL lens mount for the 17/24ii that I'm sure Canon could charge a fortune for ;-)

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/ppl-tse-adapter-lens-shift-review/

Some time ago I was told that there was another 'all-new' TS-E on the way, but I've heard nothing since and filed that one in the round filing cabinet.

It would be nice to see movement encoding and a bit more tilt range on the 90, but having experimented with an external tilt and shift adapter (an old 5x4 MPP camera) there are limits imposed by the EF lens mount and mirror box.

I have shiftable lens options with an M645-EF shift adapter and a pile of Mamiya M645 lenses that work quite well in the mean time ;-)

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/using-645-mf-lenses-as-shift-lenses/


----------



## scottburgess (Dec 12, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Add to your list: the 45/90mm lenses should have the ability to easily alter the relative orientation of tilt and shift like the 17/24mm lenses (i.e. being able to change it with a lever press rather than having to disassemble the lens and even then being limited to a 90° change).
> 
> Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).
> 
> For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.



Lovely suggestions! I forgot that the new designs allow arbitrary shift/tilt relationships. I too would like the EXIF data.


----------



## Antono Refa (Dec 12, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.



I can see how fixing for shift would be easy enough, but would it be as easy (A) for tilt, (B) the many combinations of tilt and shift?


----------



## keithcooper (Dec 12, 2016)

Antono Refa said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.
> ...



Oh and focus setting too, to calculate where the image plane is?

Once you've worked this out there is the tricky matter of how you apply this info to the captured tilted image in a meaningful way?

Correction of a shift only image would be ideal for me, since in 99.5% of my usage of the TS-E17 and 24 I've the tilt firmly locked off.

Knowing the shift amount would be good for CA, distortion and vignetting adjustment


----------



## LDS (Dec 12, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).



Just got my TS-E 24 II (hope a new version doesn't come too soon,  ) , it doesn't look there's much space for a tripod ring in the actual design. Maybe a detachable tripod "foot", yet it should leave enough space for controls, even when rotated, and still avoid to introduce vibrations. Still, it looks it would require a lens re-design.


----------



## keithcooper (Dec 12, 2016)

LDS said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).
> ...


See the specialist TS-E tripod support I mentioned above - the 17/24 have a design specifically designed for such support.

A bit pricy for casual use though...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 12, 2016)

Antono Refa said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.
> ...



Correcting for all the possible combinations would be the software makers' jobs (although Canon could choose to take that on with a module for DPP). Obviously, encoders for the independent rotation of tilt and shift would also be necessary, in addition to the magnitude. 

Vignetting correction should be feasible for tilt, others would be more difficult.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 12, 2016)

LDS said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).
> ...



Hartblei make one that fits the 17 and 24 II lenses. 

http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm

A detachable foot would be better, given that rotation is already built into the lens.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 12, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Hasselblad have had this feature in their T/S adapter for years.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=607602&gclid=CK3Ll9vl7tACFdY8gQodTFsMwA&is=REG&ap=y&m=Y&c3api=1876%2C91439130122%2C&A=details&Q=


----------



## fussy III (Dec 12, 2016)

Since I have come to enjoy operating the Pentax 645 FA 45-85 as a tilt-shift lens for landscapes and after Sigma came up with a short range Zoom (24-35/2.0), I would hope that Canon can create an optically stunning line-up of zooming tilt-shifters for landscape photographers. IS is perhaps not ideal or feasable when tilted but I would sure like to have IS in the lenses to make them more universal. Sensor-stabilization would be even better. An accustic signal for optimum tilt-angle (after placing manual markers in viewfinder) and focus-peaking in an electronic viewfinder are also near indispensable when it is about maximum dof.
I would assume these Zoom lenses are better created lightweight with nothing wider than f4 as max aperture.
But I agree that there should be a tilting wide open portrait lens as well.

So these are my wish-lenses:

TS-E 20-30mm/4.0 IS
TS-E 35-60mm/4.5 IS
TS-E 65-120mm/5.6 IS Macro

and perhaps rather than updates to 45mm and 90mm the following:
TS-E 40/2.0 IS
TS-E 80/2.0 IS


----------



## LDS (Dec 12, 2016)

keithcooper said:


> See the specialist TS-E tripod support I mentioned above - the 17/24 have a design specifically designed for such support.
> A bit pricy for casual use though...



When I read PPL I thought about someone else, as an adapter to use the lens on a different camera. Price puts Canon prices to shame.... also, it the rotation lock accessible easily enough once the collar is mounted and the lens attached to the camera? Looks to me a good solution for a specific need, not exactly a generic one.


----------



## scottburgess (Dec 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Hartblei make one that fits the 17 and 24 II lenses.
> 
> http://www.hartblei.de/en/canon-tse-collar.htm
> 
> A detachable foot would be better, given that rotation is already built into the lens.



This design is the same as Keith already noted. It is a terribly flawed design--controls blocked, has to be mounted off-center for verticals, requires 1-2 extra Arca-Swiss feet which have to be moved constantly... this is not a reasonable way to work, especially with the outrageous prices for these brackets.

Several other designs have been made, some of which are improvements but are no longer available. I have a draft of a simpler, more effective design that works perfectly but I don't have access to a CNC lathe to make a prototype. If I find the time, I will contact a firm I know that can do prototypes and see if they can make one at a reasonable price.


----------



## Antono Refa (Dec 24, 2016)

If I understand correctly, the current design allows shifting on one axis and tilting on the other, and the rotation allows to switch the axis.

How about the ability to shift & tilt on both axis at the same time?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Dec 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Add to your list: the 45/90mm lenses should have the ability to easily alter the relative orientation of tilt and shift like the 17/24mm lenses (i.e. being able to change it with a lever press rather than having to disassemble the lens and even then being limited to a 90° change).
> 
> Agree that a tripod ring would be nice (and nice for Canon to be able to sell a $150 accessory).
> 
> For the flying pigs file: encoders for the amount of tilt and shift applied. That would add cost and complexity and I think would necessitate additions to the EXIF data format, which means updating the firmware on all bodies, but it would be great in that it would allow RAW converters to have correction modules that account for the different magnitude and direction of vignetting/distortion/etc. that you get with shift and tilt.


Definitely added complexity :'(

The other alternative is to make it perfect corner to corner so no corrections are needed


----------

