08-09-2010, 02:23 PM
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1281354930' post='1602']
I was thinking about the 24/3.5 II.
[/quote]
Yes, I know. I was replying to Brightcolours about the 10-22..
Nope, not true. If so, only marginally. The LV takes its initial reading from the metering already done, I reckon. I can very easily underexpose or overexpose with LV depending on what I point the camera at prior to framing in LV. If you put the camera on a tripod, possibly, yes. However, confusing LV is very easy to accomplish. I know I've taken plenty sample shots where this happened. Measuring beforehand with a seperate light meter is really the way to go with TS. An alternative, apart from measuring untilted and unshifted, is taking a few sample shots, adjusting till right, and hoping light conditions don't change too quickly.
Regarding shorter extension tubes: AFAIK, those don't exist. Some people did make their own, actually, especially for very short lenses, although that tends to be a semi-permanent solution (spacers between mount and lens). It may be possible with some tubes to shorten the height, provided there is enough space to create new holes for the screws affixing the mount, and provided the connection between the contacts is either a long springload or a flexible ribbon cable. It is also possible to turn your own of course, or have one turned, and to keep this a cheap solution cannibalize parts from a cheap extension tube for mounts and connectors.
I don't understand your remark about aperture being ok and cropping later, unless you mean you crop out the centre and hope you have enough DoF at maximum aperture. In that case you could just as well opt for a different TS-E, like the TS-E 45. Using extension tubes with that lens poses much less problems.
Kind regards, Wim
I was thinking about the 24/3.5 II.
[/quote]
Yes, I know. I was replying to Brightcolours about the 10-22..
Quote:Aperture: It's O.K. I could do without it and just crop later. Heaven knows I have enough MP. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' /> But are there shorter extension tubes at all?
Metering: LV is actually more accurate WRT to TS.
Nope, not true. If so, only marginally. The LV takes its initial reading from the metering already done, I reckon. I can very easily underexpose or overexpose with LV depending on what I point the camera at prior to framing in LV. If you put the camera on a tripod, possibly, yes. However, confusing LV is very easy to accomplish. I know I've taken plenty sample shots where this happened. Measuring beforehand with a seperate light meter is really the way to go with TS. An alternative, apart from measuring untilted and unshifted, is taking a few sample shots, adjusting till right, and hoping light conditions don't change too quickly.
Regarding shorter extension tubes: AFAIK, those don't exist. Some people did make their own, actually, especially for very short lenses, although that tends to be a semi-permanent solution (spacers between mount and lens). It may be possible with some tubes to shorten the height, provided there is enough space to create new holes for the screws affixing the mount, and provided the connection between the contacts is either a long springload or a flexible ribbon cable. It is also possible to turn your own of course, or have one turned, and to keep this a cheap solution cannibalize parts from a cheap extension tube for mounts and connectors.
I don't understand your remark about aperture being ok and cropping later, unless you mean you crop out the centre and hope you have enough DoF at maximum aperture. In that case you could just as well opt for a different TS-E, like the TS-E 45. Using extension tubes with that lens poses much less problems.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
