Richard wrote:
>Has anyone used either of the above lenses,
>does the 24 produce more distortion in the image or
>does the shift action lessen it.
The shift doesn't influence wide angle distortion (image compression at
the edges). The 35 mm shift has a more natural look in this sense.
>I assume they are designed to be used at different distances
>from the building, ie 24 can be used close up, is this so?.
>Presume they can double as a normal lens.
The choice between the 24 and 35 mm shift lenses depends on the size
and height of the building, shooting distance and your bank account.
The 35 mm, when shifted at the max, effectively becomes a 24 mm lens.
This means that if you can frame a building at a certain distance with
a normal 24 mm wide angle (by pointing the camera upwards and
introducing unwanted vertical perspective distortions) you can use the
35 mm shift in this case to eliminate this distortion.
>Can you really take good architectural shots with them
>or do you really need to use camera movements available
>on a larger format.
This is where the shift lenses are built for. A technical camera will
allow a larger shift and a greater variety of focal lengths. The other
possibilities of a technical camera (tilt, swing) are more usefull in
still life and landscape photography to influence depth of field and
horizontal perspective control.
Hans
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|