At 01:59 6/6/99 , Kenneth Norton wrote:
>Irvin Bennett wrote:
>> I am new to the list and compiling pictures of old dairy barns and
>>silo's in Virginia. I have come to the conclusion that I need a shift lens
>>to get the pictures I want and was hoping someone could steer me in the
>>right direction. Thanks!
>
>Back to your origional question... I would get the 35/shift instead. One
>main reason is that the 35mm angle of coverage is more "believable" for the
>farm images. Also, the cost and availability of the 35/shift is more
>acceptable. I have the 35/shift and rarely do I wish for the 24/shift and
>it is almost always while shooting interiors.
>
>Ken
Yep, would recommend it also . . . it is a half-stop faster, less elusive
and more affordable too. That was the excuse to sneak out and search for
the covered bridges today (which look like long low barns . . . some of
them were moved and converted to this) . . . to use the 35/2.8 shift lens .
. . they shift sideways too which can be handy for at least partially (if
not totally) correcting perspective of an object 20 feet high and 150 feet
long (or more). The problem is getting far enough from one of these
bridges still spanning a small river . . . many are tucked down in the
typical thick grove of trees that grows along river banks. Nature doesn't
often provide a convenient bend with clearing to get a clear shot of the
side at the center of the bridge.
You probably have a similar problem with barns and silos. Previous owners
of generations past had a bad habit of planting trees around buildings in
just the wrong places. After several generations they get huge (hmmmm,
where did I put the chain saw used to cut the black foam).
;-)
-- John
< 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 >
|