And T&S lenses are brilliant at shift-panoramas, with no distortion and amazing sharpness. T&S lenses also don't have a massive amount of movement (compared to say a camera with movements) and when you push to the max you're right on the edge of the lens' image circle where there may be some optical reduction in sharpness.īut you can't replicate the manipulation of depth of field in post. The reality is that large shifts, in correcting converging verticals say, looks unnatural (makes buildings look top-heavy) so is best avoided anyway.
I think the loss of sharpest in post processing is mostly hypothetical, though of course it exists.
#TILTSHIFT ROUTES SOFTWARE#
The attractive thing about software shift is that it applies to all your lenses, all focal lengths. This is just a back of an envelope speculation to get an idea of where the image quality trade offs are between optical shifts (with a tilt shift lens) and using software shift. That suggests to me that really sharp A3 architectural prints using software shifting would be just possible at a stretch with the best of today's DSLRs and lenses using software perspective shift instead of optical, but that if sharp A4 prints are your top required print size then today's best DSLRs and lenses are probably comfortably up to it. So if you lose 50% to software perspective shifting you need to start with 36MP. Let's say you want a maximum print size of A3, approx 12" by 16". 50% loss is a simple number which is probably not too far off as a general maximum. You can replicate the effects of lens shift in software, at the cost of losing some resolution, depending how far you push it.
0 kommentar(er)
