All mechanical Canon 24mm TS-E L ii?

[dnercesian]

As some of you might already know from a previous thread, I've been working with a lens manufacturer to modify the Canon tilt shift lenses into fully mechanical operation. Simply put, they will no longer need electronic connections and would operate via a mechanical aperture ring making them easier to adapt to any system. After a long meeting today, the remaining elephant in the room remains whether or not such a conversion could be done at a price point that would make it reasonably marketable. Obviously, this would not be a high-volume product and it seems the cost of the conversion could be near or even slightly exceed the cost of the lens itself.

While the title mentions the 24mm, ultimately we would be looking to convert the 17mm as well and the longer lenses afterwards if there is any demand. Other options we are looking at include the Canon 11-24mm and the 16-35mm. Since I am essentially paying for the up front design and manufacturing, I would most likely do a crowd funding type of deal for the first run. I am curious what peoples opinions might be on a lens like this that cost around $4500 or a conversion that might cost $2500.

Worth it, or not really?

 

[Abstraction]

I think it would be a difficult sell at this price given that a smart adapter can be purchased for under $1,000 and the lens remains unmodified, thus easier to sell on the used market.

I think there's definitely a market for this, but your pricing has to be more in the $300-$400 range to appeal to a broad enough audience there you're not just doing a few conversions and then winding up closing shop.

 

[Vivek]

I agree with Abstraction.

This implies that the source and the seller has to be the same. There are versions for a MF camera that are already available.

 

[dnercesian]

I think it would be a difficult sell at this price given that a smart adapter can be purchased for under $1,000 and the lens remains unmodified, thus easier to sell on the used market.

I think there's definitely a market for this, but your pricing has to be more in the $300-$400 range to appeal to a broad enough audience there you're not just doing a few conversions and then winding up closing shop.

Thanks for your opinion. I don't really think that there is any lens re-housing that exists in the 300-400 range much less a re-housing that converts an electronic iris to a manual one. Also keep in mind that you need a smart adapter for every camera you use the lenses on. For instance, I shoot on the Leica SL and the GFX and a Cambo Actus...

I know it is a niche group, but there are also certain situations where a smart adapter is not possible. for instance I use the HCAM dual shift adapter on the SL and will be using their shift adapter for the GFX when it comes out. These setups allow you to shift the camera and eliminate parallax for stitched images, and it is not really possible to employ a smart adapter in those situations.

 

[tcdeveau]

I think you'll find a few people willing to go for it, as you said it's a niche product that provides functionality that other solutions can't, but I'm not sure how many you'll actually sell at that price point. It's even more niche because you also aim to use it in conjunction with a specific adapter, the HCAM dual shift adapter, and the advantages your solution confers over other solutions seems to be pretty specific to using the HCAM dual shift adapter. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Crowd funding could be a good way to go about the first run as it will allow to gauge market interest to a degree.

Something to consider regarding adapters is I also feel that the majority of people adapting lenses are doing so on one system with multiple lenses (say a 17mm TS-E in addition to a 24mm TS-E), and not across systems as you are, so smart adapters also are a one time cost which allows use of many lenses on one system. They may not work in 100% of the situations you need, but are cheaper than your solution and allows use of multiple lenses, so most likely represent a more practical option for many looking to adapt. Smart adapters can also change in the future, and maybe i'm wrong, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of someone coming out with a smart adapter in the future that allows one to use it in ways that you say they can't be currently.

Also regarding parallax, don't forget that many photographers still simply use rails and rotate about the nodal point of the lens to address this issue. Not addressing the merits of one method vs the other, but using a rail and rotating about the nodal point plus photoshop's stitching algorithms is a much cheaper option that works well enough for any system and any lens compared to adapting one lens at the price point you threw out plus adding another shift adapter. I do plenty of stitching and I find even just photoshop to be sufficient for my stitching needs without adding a nodal slide most of the time.

 

[gerald.d]

My suggestion would be to reach out to the cinematography market. I would imagine there would be a much larger potential market there, than with MF still shooters.

You'd ideally want to modify the lens so that both shift and tilt functions were driven radially.

Have you thought of speaking with Duclos about this?

Kind regards,

Gerald.

 

[dnercesian]

I think you'll find a few people willing to go for it, as you said it's a niche product that provides functionality that other solutions can't, but I'm not sure how many you'll actually sell at that price point. It's even more niche because you also aim to use it in conjunction with a specific adapter, the HCAM dual shift adapter, and the advantages your solution confers over other solutions seems to be pretty specific to using the HCAM dual shift adapter. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Crowd funding could be a good way to go about the first run as it will allow to gauge market interest to a degree.

Something to consider regarding adapters is I also feel that the majority of people adapting lenses are doing so on one system with multiple lenses (say a 17mm TS-E in addition to a 24mm TS-E), and not across systems as you are, so smart adapters also are a one time cost which allows use of many lenses on one system. They may not work in 100% of the situations you need, but are cheaper than your solution and allows use of multiple lenses, so most likely represent a more practical option for many looking to adapt. Smart adapters can also change in the future, and maybe i'm wrong, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of someone coming out with a smart adapter in the future that allows one to use it in ways that you say they can't be currently.

Also regarding parallax, don't forget that many photographers still simply use rails and rotate about the nodal point of the lens to address this issue. Not addressing the merits of one method vs the other, but using a rail and rotating about the nodal point plus photoshop's stitching algorithms is a much cheaper option that works well enough for any system and any lens compared to adapting one lens at the price point you threw out plus adding another shift adapter. I do plenty of stitching and I find even just photoshop to be sufficient for my stitching needs without adding a nodal slide most of the time.

It wouldn't be specific to the HCAM adapter. The HCAM has a Canon mount so these would mount to any canon mount adapters. Your point on the smart adapters being used to adapt many lenses on one system is a good one. There is definitely that side of the coin as well. Personally I shy away from electronics every chance I get, but I think that is simply a preference of mine towards mechanical solutions. Although, I must admit that there are advantages in both directions.

On the nodal slides, I have used them in the past but I really don't like that level of software interpretation. Call it a trust issue on my part. I have also long since moved away from cheap being a pro on my list of pros and cons. No doubt there are less expensive ways to achieve results sometimes that do quite well, but I have been a bit non compromising when it comes to my work gear. This is in particular why the IQ3100 and technical camera still reign supreme.

In any event, I am leaning more and more towards just biting the bullet and having a couple of these for my use and not making any more.

 

[dnercesian]

My suggestion would be to reach out to the cinematography market. I would imagine there would be a much larger potential market there, than with MF still shooters.

You'd ideally want to modify the lens so that both shift and tilt functions were driven radially.

Have you thought of speaking with Duclos about this?

Kind regards,

Gerald.

Cinema is a great use for these, however, to swap the mount to a PL properly would negate the shift function and leave us with a tilt lens only. Perhaps in the cinema world they may only need tilt, or perhaps some setups could use the EF mount. The housings are very cinema oriented actually, but I have little connection to that world at this time. I have spoken to Duclos and they were not interested in doing such an in depth conversion at this time.

 

[Bernard]

Film makers who want this effect can use an unmodified lens on a Canon cinema camera (C100, C200, C300, C700).