The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

A few with that crappy 5DSR

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
pfigen: excellent images!
Knorp: Besides the Coolpix A, I think the 5Ds(r) is currently the most underestimated camera on the market.
As far as the 24 and 90 TSE lenses are concerned, they are both good, buts suffer from rather strong curvature of field issues at least at distance.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
pfigen: excellent images!
Knorp: Besides the Coolpix A, I think the 5Ds(r) is currently the most underestimated camera on the market.
As far as the 24 and 90 TSE lenses are concerned, they are both good, buts suffer from rather strong curvature of field issues at least at distance.
Hi there Arne,

Thanks. I've no idea how well or bad the 5DS-R actually fares.
But I do know that I like what I see here ... :)

I noticed in the EXIF that Peter used the aforementioned TSE 24L&90 and also a 35L and perhaps some others (didn't check all of them).
All images to me are just great, but I'm always in particular interested when T/S lenses are involved.
For product shots like shown here, perhaps curvature might not be such a big issue.

Kind regards.
 

pfigen

Member
I love shooting with the tilt-shift lenses for product and I especially love what a wide angle does to add drama to many products. I've used the 24 and 90 t/s for so many types of shots and have never seen any meaningful amount of field curvature in them, but even it it were there, it wouldn't matter for these images, most of which are focus stacked. What you DO see, particularly in the 24mm t/s-e, when focused at or near minimal focusing distance, is a weird slight distortion or non-linearity about two thirds of the way to the edge of the frame. I'm pretty sure that it's because floating element groups in the two new lenses, the 17 and 24, but it's not something you see in every image anyway.

What you do see at a pixel level with 50mp, is that we really need v3 lenses with the 17 and 24 even while we're waiting for new 45 and 90mm tilt-shifts and hope that Canon can see to it to re-introduce the 35mm t/s-e but with whatever magic they infused the new 35L with. That 35L really is one of the most extraordinary lenses I've ever used. Frightening, really. It's not possible to make a perfect lens, but that's one of their closest.
 

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
I thought your images looked good on my laptop, but viewing them on my highres monitor today, they look even better. Lightning very effective too.
As for curvature of field, as I mentioned it is quite visible at or near infinity. (I tested two 24 mm to make sure). However it may well be a minor issue at close range, this I have not investigated.
Canon should update their TSE line asap IMO, none of them do justice to present sensors, the 45mm probably the weakest of the lot. Also having tilt and shift on separate axes would be useful.
I assumed focus stacking to get that front to back sharpness. If you dont mind a question regarding stacking at short distances: do you simply re-focus the lens for each shot, or do you move the camera+lens en-block without touching the focusing?
Btw, I also have the 1,4/35 II, and it is indeed a wonderful lens!
 

pfigen

Member
Arne - Unless I'm in some sort of ultra macro mode, where I might use a RRS macro rail, I always just change the focusing ring, starting with micro-increments for the very close up and then gradually increasing the steps as you get toward the back. I've found that it's always better, at least almost always better to not have the front of the lens move when you're really close to the subject - too much perspective change. The results are just better overall this way, but it's easy enough to try it both ways to see what works best for you. I generally use Helicon, but also have Zerene for the times when Helicon chokes. I just got a new computer so maybe Zerene won't be slow freaking slow once I get it set up. It's great but soooo slow. Sort of feels like a primitive scientific program written for a PC that doesn't adhere to any of the standard Mac software design conventions. It ain't pretty but it works.
 

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
Thank you for a comprehensive and elucidating answer. Focus stacking is a field I haven't gone into yet, but am considering, so very useful with first-hand experience. For me speed would probably be of less importance, but rather ease of use and quality of output.
Thanks again.
 

pfigen

Member
5DSR paired with a new Zeiss Milvus 100mm Makro. Yeah. Still sucks. Love though, how the seventy year old spruce top on the Martin 000-18 is reproduced. After that long it turns sort of a dark amber. These are the new tuners that will replace the old crappy Grovers, which, of course, I will keep for originality.
 

Attachments

pfigen

Member
And for something completely different from the same camera... Fort Ord, just north of Monterey, Ca. was decommissioned a few years ago and now is the home of Cal State Monterey Bay, but there are still a lot of old abandoned military buildings there and apparently no one to keep one from roaming. This one with a 24 t/s-e.
 

Attachments

pfigen

Member
Arne - those are quite beautiful. I particularly like the second image. Isn't great to see the weird and wild color palettes provided?
 

pfigen

Member
Was shooting at Sphere Recording Studio a few weeks ago and wouldn't normally shoot this wide, but it seemed to work pretty well. 11mm with the 11-24 Canon. I was halfway done shooting when the drummer came a switched out snares so I had to wait for another complete take and start over.
 

Attachments

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
Re. the Sphere Recording Studio shot: after the novelty of such an extreme FL wears off, my experience is that it sees relatively little use. Here you seem to have found a subject that lends itself particularly well to the UWA approach. There is a great feeling of depth and volume in this shot. Well worth the hassle :)
 

pfigen

Member
Arne - Even though I don't play golf, the golfing metaphor is always the best - the seldom used lenses are just another club in the bag, but when you need 'em, nothing else will do. I did the same shot with the 17 t/s-e and it just seems normal to me.
 

pfigen

Member
Y'know, with that limited dynamic range, you can't shoot in direct sun either. Here's a tourist snap from a recent trip to Austin where I was shooting a CD cover for a musician friend there. Found out that Austin is really a food town that just happens to have music - oh, and the best coffee anywhere.
 

Attachments

Arne Hvaring

Well-known member
That's a very nice B&W conversion!
There is no doubt that the 5Ds series has a lower DR than the competition (from my own experience D810 and A7R2) and I notice it when lifting shadows (a lot). Otherwise I rarely run into problems due to "limited" dynamic range. One should not forget that we are somewhat spoiled, having used film for a few decades, it is clear to me that even the 5Dsr has considerably better DR than chromes.
Two images from Denmark, the first is a reworked version of an earlier post. 5Dsr with 90 mm TS E and 1,4 TC.
 

Attachments

Top