Jump to content
den_sh

Kipon Tilt & Shift adapter for $289

Recommended Posts

@veejaycee

"Thanks for clearing that up. Your explanation makes it all - clear as mud. Anyone who wasn't confused before, will be by now."

I'm sorry about your confusion! But I doubt my post did trigger that!

"We really needed another "expert" to explain the ins and outs of a ducks arsehole when none of this minutiae will actually lead to noticeably better pictures or better photographers or better cameras/lenses."

If you`re not interested in the topic, what then were you looking for here?

"There is so much c**p spouted here by apparently knowledgeable folks like yourself and several others (you know who you are). This c**p from all of you may correct c**p but what does it all amount to in the end? Exposure better by a half-stop? Dynamic range improved by 10%? Sharper images by a small amount?

"Nothing I can't improve with pp..."

Nothing?

TILT

Yes, you can correct diverging lines of buildings easily in PS, but you lose, depending on the amount of correction needed, up to 50% of horizontal resolution at the top of the picture. Most of my customers are satisfied with 21 Mpx resolution (Canon 5D Mk II), but not with 5 Mpx (at the top) (and yes, the math is correct!!)

SHIFT

But how would you correct missing depth of field in PS? For that you NEED the tilt function!

Or you apply focus stitching with 6 or more 37 Mpx files? From a moving subject like a controlled splash of water applied on a softdrink bottle? Good luck! You must have plenty of time and passion!

RESOLUTION

Do you really think upsampling will do the job when you need to produce a hi-res product shot for a big trade show billboard?

FLARE RESISTANCE

You will be happy to use a flare resistant lens in backlight situations since correction of flare in PS will never come close to the real thing.

SHALLOW DOF

A lot of work needed to simulate that plausibly in PS!

HIGH CONTRAST

The Sony A7R is far better than Canons when you need to push shadows. On a Canon you need to take 2 shots. Therefore you have to carry a tripod. Or you align the pics in PS, which isn´t always possible and, if possible, takes time. And, to me, time is money!

"If you were all really concerned about the very finest points of IQ you wouldn't be using these cameras - you be using MF at the very least."

I used to work with analog 6x4,5cm 6x6cm, 6x7, 6x9cm, 4x5inch, 5x7inch until 2009. Only for fine art I sometimes still use 5x7. For most commercial work the output of my 5D MkII proofed to be sufficient, and it would still be today.

Digital MF cameras these 37 Mpx-days are mostly needed for bragging. Some really famous photographers only use it to impress/convince customers. Just like an investment adviser needs to drive a Mercedes (wearing a bespoke suit) and loses credibility if he drives a Toyota! Top photographers need to own gear like that as a status symbol in order to stand out from the crowd.

My tiny Sony A7R offers superclean output with the same resolution and IQ as Hasselblad Backs did 5 years ago! This Hassy gear did cost you 30,000 bucks then (not to mention the 10 grands for additional lenses) to produce (then-)hi-end IQ. Guys who owned this stuff did the most demanding and profitable jobs on earth with "only" 30 or 40 Mpx! Today, 5 years later, we halt at 80 Mpx. So have 40 Mpx suddenly become inferior IQ??

Before the Nikon D800 came out I severely was thinking about buying a digital back for my monorail cameras too.

When I saw the IQ of the Nikon I decided not to do so and instead wait for a Canon equivalent (since I own a lot of expensive Canon glass). In my estimation this could have happened any time. But, as we know, it never did. As the A7R came out, I bought it immediately because all my Canon lenses could be adapted easily without loss of important functions.

"As you guys cannot all be correct, one assumes that most of you are talking rubbish and taking pictures which only you can appreciate. Of course that is not so - so why spend so much time testing, measuring, reading, linking to other so called experts, expounding and pontificating..."

This is my third post here! Your count is 2,261!! I test a lens after I bought it to make sure it isn´t a bad copy, and anybody who doesn´t is a fool. I also test lenses and camera IQ to help me decide which one to buy. If I can´t do that I read reviews, but only if I´m in the market for some new gear -which isn´t very often. I resisted to buy a 5D MkIII because high ISO performance is only slightly better than in the 5D MkII. Autofocus is definitely better, but I`m quite satisfied with it on my 5D MkIIs (doing no sports).

"...when it isn't going to make any real difference to the end product."

Your argument may be correct in many cases, but in many it isn´t (see my examples above!).

In any case you posted your comment in exactly the wrong thread!

Since it is a very practical and important question whether (all) full format lenses do have enough COC to rectify the purchase of a Tilt/Shift adapter for a APS-C camera!

And since a tiltable lens definitely can NOT be simulated in PS! Especially when you combine the tilt with shallow depth of field! This IS a REAL difference. Without it I´d be lost - at least when doing sophisticated (=well paid) product and advertising photography! Also when doing light painting during long time exposures you can´t do focus stacking in PS.

Furthermore it does make a real difference when in addition you do fine art photography and it is part of the message that the pictures are really big (3-6 feet) AND hi-res (take a look at the work of Andreas Gursky or Joel Sternfeld and you know what I mean!) For this kind of work I often shift my TS-E lenses on the A7R to take 2 pics and assemble them to a 74 Mpx square (parallax free, since the lens, not the cam is mounted on the tripod). Picture taking takes me 10 seconds by doing so. Before that for the same result I had to mount my 5D MkII on a pano adapter and needed to take about 6 overlapping pics and stitch them together. If there was water or fast moving clouds in the sujet it ended up in massive editing.

"Someone on this forum recently said they don't know of a picture ruined by a poor lens.

That pretty much says it all."

It heavily depends on the goals and requirements of your photography!

Summary: Be a little more careful with generalizations like the ones you posted here!

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just can't resist adding yet more techno waffle can you! I fell asleep after the first paragraph. Do you really think you haven't confused things far more than before your post? Isn't there a scientific forum where you'd be more happy or would you be out of your depth there?

I'm not a scientist - far from it but I've been taking photographs for over 50 years, many as a pro but I now consider myself an amateur. I've had my successes and I've managed fine without worrying about the stuff you mention - in fact since everything is computer designed and automatic these days I don't even need much of the knowledge I accrued over all those years let alone this techy stuff.

My point remains - you all consider yourselves to be infallible and each of you has their own irrefutable argument which opposes others - I say again - you cannot all be right and your heavy block capitals don't change that, they merely mark you down as someone who thinks that if they shout loudest they must be right.

We have lots of established "experts" already but at least they have better manners than to shout at other members that they are wrong, wrong, wrong - because you say so - even telling them they have posted in the wrong thread - you may think you're God but no one else does.

Great way to introduce yourself as a newcomer to the forum with your first posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@veejaycee

If, as you say, you "fell asleep after the first paragraph", what then entitles you to judge the contents of my post??

As I see from your reply you either indeed haven´t read my last post or you just didn´t understand the points I made. Really long term confusion going on with you? If I were you I wouln´t boast so loud here about my lacks of understanding (just a tip)...

In my last post I did nothing but to precisely and patiently reply to your (off topic) arguments! (in case you didn´t know: this is the way target-aimed debates work!)

My intention of all my posts was not to confuse things even further but to brighten things up - and I think I suceeded in doing so by really trying hard to avoid possible misconceptions. Confusion may well be on the side of those who don`t understand the information given!

What I wrote here is not "yet more techno waffle", it is simply the solution of an issue debated here! Plus an on-topic answer to your off-topic-whining...

You call science what I call competence of craftsmanship. I´m no scientist either, but the things here are not rocket-science to any extend!

I have no idea how you got away as a former professional by not knowing quite simple but essential facts like those discussed here! Might be the reason why you ended up as an amateur?

And yes, we cannot all be right - but this does not necessarily mean I am the one who is wrong!

"...in fact since everything is computer designed and automatic these days I don't even need much of the knowledge I accrued over all those years let alone this techy stuff."

Your computerized camera won´t tell you what depth of field you should use to make the best out of your subject. It does not know whether you intend to set your exposure on the sunset or on the people in front of it and how much fill flash (if any) suits your intentions (a dozen more reasons left unmentioned).

But the main point is: your computerized camera/lens won´t let you tilt/shift - be it computerized as it may! And PP won´t really help you out of that (see my last post!) So we are not talking about "minutiae" or "Exposure better by a half-stop? Dynamic range improved by 10%? Sharper images by a small amount?" No, we are talking about BIG improvements!

We are talking about tilt/shift here! Remember? If you can´t accept that, you are definitely off topic, or a moron, or, what is more likely, just an ordinary troll!

PS: My heavy block capitals are in purpose of making the text more readable and overseeable. Just as my spacings between paragraphs, quotations in italic and member names in heavy italic do. It´s a matter of structure, convenience and logic...

And if you should have problems accepting authorities - it´s not my fault!

Next time you`ll come up with my bad English, won´t you? But we can switch to German anytime, if you prefer!

...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What you see are HTML-tags that will look (not exactly) like that : < em> your text < /em>.

. These are symbols for the italic function.

If you switch to "Preview" at the top of your comment box, you will see the effect. The symbols will turn into the real thing. In "Write Comment" box you are writing a kind of HTML code. In "Preview", as well as when you finally post the comment, the code will be translated to what he stands for. In this case: italic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got, what I hope is, a relatively simple question. Has anyone used a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 with Kipon. 14mm would seem to be perfec, but I'm worried about the weight of the lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, with the weight of the lens and the space to shift, does anyone have any problem using kipon adapter on xt1 or xt2?

Thank you.
Oun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry to resurrect this thread but having some trouble, wondering if anyone had some advice

Just bought the Kipon NikonF to Fuji Tilt Shift adapter and I bought a Nikon 24mm f2.8 AI to go with it and the lens doesn't seem to fit. There's a metal fin protruding from the lens mount. Is this type of lens not compatible with this adapter? I couldn't find much info about this combo. I can still return both - I'm looking for a medium wide angle lens to mostly use tilt with the xPro-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2017 at 4:08 PM, ecp377 said:

sorry to resurrect this thread but having some trouble, wondering if anyone had some advice

Just bought the Kipon NikonF to Fuji Tilt Shift adapter and I bought a Nikon 24mm f2.8 AI to go with it and the lens doesn't seem to fit. There's a metal fin protruding from the lens mount. Is this type of lens not compatible with this adapter? I couldn't find much info about this combo. I can still return both - I'm looking for a medium wide angle lens to mostly use tilt with the xPro-2.

Maybe you've solved your problem already? But in case not, this is quite common. The lens designer never imagined a scenario where someone would slide the lens around with a shift adapter!

I use a Kipon T/S adapter on my Fuji X-T2 with Olympus OM lenses. Most mount and shift without trouble. But some have a fin or projection that was designed to control flare on an OM series camera. They tend to block shift more than tilt. Sometimes they only block in one direction (so you can shift left but not right). In rare cases they may get in the way of tilts too.

If you need the full range of motion, you may have to modify the lens (in other words, file or chop off a bit of the projecting fin, or remove the baffle part from the mount if that's possible).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recommended Discussions



×