Canon 16-35 f2.8L II vs 17-40 f4L vs Olympus OM Zuiko 24.

A little while back I borrowed a 16-35 f2.8L v2 from Canon Professional Services, so that I could make a direct comparison against my own 17-40 F4L.

At the time I was looking for the Holy Grail of wide angles for my landscape work, even though my 17-40 was doing OK. The 16-35 was a new model so thought it was worth checking out. Here is what I found……

Part 1: Lens Flare Comparison

Both lenses produced flare in extreme circumstances, but as you can see from the following images, it was the 17-40 that controlled flare the best.

Flare aside, it should be noted that the 16-35's circular iris produces a great star effect around the sun. The 17-40 is no slouch in the area and is often praised for it's great looking specular highlights, but 16-35 trumps it here!

Canon 16-35 @ 16mm f16:


Canon 17-40 @ 17mm f16:


As much as I love the sun's star effect (pun intended) in the 16-35's image, the 17-40's sun is perfectly acceptable (and not really on test here), so when considering 'flare only' I gotta give the thumbs up to the 17-40.

Part 2: Focal Length 24mm

"Why test at 24mm?" I hear you say. This is so I can make a direct comparison with my Olympus OM Zuiko 24mm 2.8 that I use for a few of my landscapes. I have long held this lens up as a stand out resolver, so if this new lens can out-resolve the Oly I will be in heaven!

Detail Crops: These are small sections from the full image (seen below in the distortion test) at 100% native size.....

Canon 16-35:


Canon 17-40:


Olympus OM Zuiko 24/2.8:


From these crops it is neck and neck between the 16-35 and 17-40, with the edge just going to the Oly. The difference between these is minimal and could easily be levelled out by using a little USM.

Corner Crops:

Canon 16-35:


Canon 17-40:


Olympus OM Zuiko 24/2.8:


In the corners it's a different matter, with the Oly being King, while the 17-40 is a way behind in second and the 16-35 behind that. (This result was the same for all four corners)

Distortion:

Well this is where I expect the Oly 24mm to lead.....

Canon 16-35:


Canon 17-40:


Olympus OM Zuiko 24/2.8:


Well a bit of a surprise with this one..... the 16-35 shows pincushion distortion, while both the 17-40 and Oly 24 show barrel distortion. While none of them are "bad" in my opinion (remember this is 24mm), I would have to give the gong (just) to the 17-40 over the Oly 24 in this case.

Well that's 24mm and I think that the tiny Olympus 24mm wins overall here. The other lenses put up a good fight in detail and distortion, but the Oly trumps them with it's outstanding corner performance and that is the main area in which I am seeking improvement.

So it looks like the Oly stays in my kit for a little while longer..... but how will the Canon lenses stack up at the super wide angles of 16 & 17mm? Will they come into their own and give me the corner performance of the Oly, or do I need to start rethinking my compositions and shoot at 24mm for all of my landscapes?

Part 3: Wide Angle

Let's see how the 16-35 and 17-40 compare at their widest angles.

First up the overall images and distortion.

Canon 16-35 @ 16mm f16:


Canon 17-40 @ 17mm f16:


Barrel distortion is present in both lenses at these wide FOVs (no surprise there), with the 17-40 displaying slightly less. I guess this is to be expected with the 1mm wider FOV of the 16-35, so for distortion I would be happy go with no clear winner.

Corner Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 16mm f16


Canon 17 - 40 @ 17mm f16


Both lenses display a little red fringing in the contrast area where shadow meets sun, but it is the 17-40 that has the edge in sharpness here.

Canon 16-35 @ 16mm f16


Canon 17 - 40 @ 17mm f16


In the bottom corners the tables have been turned however, with the 16-35 now having the edge in sharpness.

So once again I believe that there is no real winner here and the turn about in form from top to bottom corners, is most likely be due to a slight variation in focus distance.

Middle Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 16mm f16


Canon 17 - 40 @ 17mm f16


Well you could throw a blanket over these they are so close..... no clear winner... again!

Part 4: The Long End

Until now I have been dealing with the wide FOVs of these lenses, this is primarily because it's where I am seeking improvement in my current lens line-up.

The wide images displayed have been focused using hyperfocal methods, so as to maximise the DOF from as close to the camera as possible and out to infinity. Again this is because it's the area in which I am seeking improvement (...I like to shoot wide angle landscapes if you haven't noticed )

Once we hit the long end of these lenses however, we cannot expect to achieve the huge DOF that the wider angles offer. So in the following images I have focused on the building and will display corner crops from the building only and not from the foreground grass. This will effectively display the lenses "flat field" performance in the corners, as all the area of the building should remain within the plain of focus.

First the full images displaying the difference in FOV between 35 and 40mm.....

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f16:


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f16:


As you can see, 5mm makes a considerable difference in FOV. Both lenses display only slight curvilinear distorion.

Middle Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f16:


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f16:


Not much in this, but I gotta give sharpness and detail to the 17-40. This may be due to a slight difference in focus distance, or perhaps the fact that the longer focal length is taking us just a tad closer and this is allowing more pixels to render the fine detail.

So I guess the 5mm difference in focal length does make for a bit of an unfair comparison, but I am still glad that I own the 17-40.

Corner Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f16:


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f16:


Again, there is very little in this. I think the fine detail of the brick is rendered better in the 17-40 image, but once again the 5mm advantage must be considered here.

Please note that the left corner images display the same results, so I won't waste bandwidth and display them here.

Part 5: Wider Apertures & Longer Focal Lengths

So how do these lenses go at the wider apertures? These first images display the light fall-off experienced at wide open apertures.

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f2.8


Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f4


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f4


Both lenses display light falloff when wide open, but here you can see that the 16-35 at f4 is already minimising the falloff and is way better than the 17-40. In fact, the 17-40 does not get as good as this until it reaches f8.

Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f2.8


Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f4


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f4


Both lenses are stellar performers in the middle when wide open..... no clear winner here.

Corner Crops:

Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f2.8


Canon 16-35 @ 35mm f4


Canon 17-40 @ 40mm f4


No contest !! The 16-35 beats the 17-40 in the corners when wide open without question. The 16-35 provided much better results than the 17-40 at the sides when wide open also. The 17-40 is quite soft, while the 16-35's edge performance is only marginally less than the middle.

Up until now things have been going pretty well all the 17-40's way, but now that we are looking at the wide apertures it's a different story.

The Low Down

If you are trying to make up your mind between the two lenses, I guess you should ask yourself what you intend to use it for. If you are a landscaper like me and never venture toward the wider apertures, then the 17-40 would be just fine.

But if you are a wedding/portrait person, who regularly shoots at wider apertures in dark locations (churches etc) then perhaps the 16-35 is the way to go.

Another thing to consider that is not shown in these tests, is AF speed and accuracy. Being a 2.8 lens the 16-35 will allow the camera's cross type AF sensors to be use to their full potential (ie sensitive to both horizontal and vertical areas of contrast), while the 17-40 f4 will limit these to horizontal sensitivity only.

This is no biggee to a landscaper, but I think a sports shooter would want to go the 2.8 for sure. As would the low light photographer, as true cross type sensors would aid low light focusing greatly.

Cheers

Rusty
AustralianLight - Landscape Photography

UPDATE: Since making this comparison I have been using a Canon 24mm TS-E Tilt/Shift lens. While I have no direct image/crop comparisons to post here, I have to say that it makes these 3 lenses look like toys.

I have not used the 17mm TS-E myself, but from all reports it too is amazing lens and on par with the 24 TS-E. So if you are like me and ultimate image quality is more important than zoom, then the TS-E lenses should be considered also.

Check out these lenses at the following providers:








Tags: canon 17-40 f4 l canon 16-35 f2.8 l II olympus om zuiko 24mm 2.8 lens test review comparison image samples

Web Resize & Sharpen Action for Photoshop

Do you want an easier and faster way to resize your images for the web?

This photoshop web resize and sharpen action set has been a favourite action set of mine for ages now and I still use it for each and every image that I upload to the web.
It provides both high-pass and lab sharpening methods.



To download, simply "right-click" this link and save the target file:
http://www.pixelpix.com.au/downloads/ADPOTDSharpening-WebResize.atn

To install, place the file in Photoshop's Action folder and restart Photoshop.  As with any Photoshop image modification, I can't stress enough the need to WORK ON A DUPLICATE FILE and BACKUP THE ORIGINAL FILE AND STORE SAFELY before making any alterations.

If you have any questions about the use of this action, please feel free to use the comments section below.

Cheers

Rusty

Tags: photoshop actions adpotd web sharpening resize action

Lightning and How To Photograph It

An updated version of this post may now be found at http://www.australianlight.com.au/blog/post/how_to_photograph_lightning_the_easy_way/  This blog will soon close down, so please link to the new location.


Qu: How do I photograph lightning?   Ans: Very very quickly!

Actually nothing could be further from the truth.  Photographing lightning requires patience, time and whole lot of luck.

But before we get into the topic, let me say this….

STORMS AND LIGHTNING ARE VERY DANGEROUS!!!!!

The first thing to consider when photographing lightning is your own safety.  No shot, NO PHOTOGRAPH, even if it's worth 10 bazillion Racknoids on the planet Meopter is worth jeopardising your own safety for.

Lightning storms are both predictable and unpredictable at the very same time.  We know that there will be lighting… "predictable".  But we don't know where it will be… "UNpredictable". 

Lightning can occur OUTSIDE of the main storm cell.  For every one person that I have heard describe a tornado as "like a freight train", I have heard another say "the lightning came out of nowhere!".  

I teach my kids this very simple rule…. "When you hear thunder, you better get under".  It really is as simple as that.  If you are close enough to hear a storm, then you are close enough to be at threat from a lightning strike, so it is at this point that you should seek shelter.... and "shelter" is NOT a tree!!  Hide under a tree during a lightning storm and you might as well paint a target for the lighting on your head.

So find yourself shelter under a structure or inside your car.  Naturally this can make shooting a little difficult, but hey…. if you miss the shot this time around, at least you are alive to try again next storm. 

OK we are now under cover or in our car and quite safe.  We can see the storm's approach and lightning is active but it is not yet dark.  Bugga! It's not dark…. well that just make things a little bit harder.   Lightning happens in the blink of an eye and we are simply not fast enough on the draw to shoot it.  

Sure you can luck it sometimes, as you may be exposing a shot anyway and right in the middle of it there is a flash of lightning, but this is rare, very rare!  So if your intention is to get a lightning shot and this is your approach, then you will return home disappointed time and time again.

The best thing to do is maximise the time your shutter stays open.  The longer it's open, the more chance you have of lightning happening within that time.  This is why daytime lightning is far more difficult, as we have no choice but to expose for the regular ambient light of the scene and this generally requires a short exposure.  

There are a number of things you can do to extend your daylight exposure times however…

* Use a smaller aperture (bigger f-number)

Keep in mind the characteristics on your lens however.  If your lens turns too moosh after f11 for example, then use f11… consider that the maximum f-number for that lens.  After all, there is no point sacrificing the image quality… do that and you may as well not take the image in the first place.

* Use your lowest ISO rating.

Most cameras will provide 200 or 100 as their low ISO rating, while some can be extended down to 50.  Use your camera's lowest setting, but once again keep in mind what provides the best image quality from your camera.

* Use a neutral density filter.

Neutral density filters cut down the amount of light entering the lens and can greatly increase exposure times.  While most people may not have a neutral density filter, there is a good chance that they will have a Polarising filter.  These work perfectly well as a neutral density filter.  Place it on your lens, adjust for polarisation and you will pretty well double your exposure time.  :-)

The things to watch out for here though:  Don't use a very dark neutral density filter, as a very long exposure may increase the effect of movement in trees and clouds.  This could be a good or bad thing and that is your call, it's your image after all.  You also don't want to go too dark, as you may inhibit the exposure of the lightning itself.  Lightning is always very bright compared to surrounding scene, so you have good leeway, but just keep this in mind.

Now at this point I must mention the tripod as an essential tool in lightning photography.  Long exposures require still cameras, without a tripod your long exposure images will be soft & fuzzy due to movement.  

But what about if I am in my car for safety, how do I use a tripod?

Well depending on your car you have a number of options.  I have a Land Cruiser and I am able to sit in the back with my tripod and have the tail gate open, while a mate with a regular sedan uses a "window mount", as this allows clear and stable vision out of the driver's window.  This also makes it easy to reposition the car as need be for better composition.

So we have now extended our exposure times and got the daylight shot…. terrific! ….but what if it's dark? 

Well this is where it gets easy… real easy!  During darkness we need not do anything to extend our shutter times, because our shutter times will be long anyway… it's dark remember!

The particular technique that I favour is as follows….

1:  Manually focus on the point of interest in your "composed" shot.  This avoids AF hunting in darkness.  OR  1a: Manually focus on a distant light or set the lens to just under the infinity focus mark, if your composition is a distant open landscape scene or of the sky only.

2:  Set the f-number to f8 (based on ISO100)  This gives me some depth of field, plus it exposes lightning well.  Close the lens down too far and the lighting will be dull, open the lens up too far and the lighting becomes a big fury bolt with little definition.

3:  Manually set my exposure time to 30 seconds.  Keep in mind your surroundings though, as 30 seconds may be too much for your "scene" if you have included one, so adjust to suit. (10 secs still gives a good chance of lightning if the storm is active.)

4:  Using a remote to avoid shake or bumping, trip the shutter.

I will mention "Mirror LockUp" here.  Some may like to use it to help cut down camera shake, but personally I don't see the point, as it's a dark scene anyway. Mirror LockUp and self timers just take add to the chance of missing lightning IMO.

5:  Wait and hope that a strike happens in the field of view.

I would suggest that you keep your image review times to a minimum, as this too adds to the chance of missing new lightning strikes.

6: Repeat steps 4 & 5 as required.

If you are super-dooper lazy like me, you can use a timer remote and set it to just keeping talking 30 second exposures until the card is full.  My favourite lightning image was shot like this, while I was inside watching TV.

What if the storm is really active and there is more than one strike in the 30 seconds?

Then you are lucky!!  Multiple strikes add drama and excitement, plus clouds can become lit from within and then become secondary subjects within the image.  However, if you feel that there is too much going on in the 30 seconds, then a simple trick is to cover your lens with a hat or similar.  This effectively ends the exposure and allows the remaining time to complete normally.

Now before I go, I have to stress again.... LIGHTNING AND STORMS ARE DANGEROUS! Please be sensible and do not put yourself at risk.

I hope that you found this helpful and I would love to see some of your results. Please feel free to post some image URLs in the comments section below.  They won't directly hyper-link, but those interested will be able to "copy and paste" them into a new browser window to view.

btw..... This is my favourite lightning image, as shot from the cover of my front verandah while I was inside watching TV. Titled: "No Earth"

Cheers

Rusty

Tags: photographing lightning storms storm photography clouds lightning strike

  

Panoramic photography on the cheap! - PART 2

It's been quite a while since my first blog entry was posted on this subject (see: Panoramic photography on the cheap!) and I have managed to pick up a few bits & pieces to make my pano setup just that little bit more convenient.

While my original setup worked and worked well. It was not all that convenient and added to the weight in the camera bag quite considerably. So I was always on the lookout for a lighter, more compact and easier solution, as I often found myself not bothering to get the gear out.... it just required too much effort for a lazy sod like me.

So here is what I use now....

As you can see, it's very neat and there is a whole lot less "putting together" and this makes it sooooo much more convenient to use. In fact, it is such a nice and easy solution, that I use this as my standard setup every single time I put the camera on the tripod!

This means that I am always ready to shoot a regular single frame image and a nodally rotated stitched panorama... PLUS with the 24mm TS-E II Tilt/Shift lens on there, I can also shoot linear shift panoramas as well... without changing a thing.

OK, that is cool, but what about shooting with the camera in portrait orientation?

Again, it's just too easy! (why do I feel like I am about to offer you a set of steak knifes at this point?...oh well...) The Kirk Enterprises L Bracket makes swapping from landscape to portrait orientaion very fast and easy. Simply undo the one quick release plate, rotate the camera and lock it in the plate once again.

So what are the other parts used?....

Well there is a standard ball head on the tripod that uses the arca/swiss release mechanism. (Although as you can see in the topmost image, I have adapted it via a Manfrotto plate, to maintain tripod compatibility with my older system)

On the tripod's arca-swiss is mounted the Really Right Stuff PCL-1 Panning Clamp ...thats the round thing.

I will mention that the Panning Clamp is not really required, as the sliding rail (mentioned below) can be mounted directly to the tripod, but using the Panning Clamp makes things a whole lot easier. As it removes tripod levelling from the equation. Instead, the Panning Clamp is levelled using the ball head and then the ball head can be locked and forgotten, as the rotation happens within the Panning Clamp itself.

Mounted to the Panning Clamp is an arca-swiss style sliding rail. This can slide back and forward within the Panning Clamp to adjust for lens nodal distance.

Permanently fixed to the rear of the sliding rail (using a stainless bolt from the hardware) is an arca-swiss style clamp. This can be of any brand and need not be the more expensive ones that contain their own bubble level, as the Panning Clamp takes care of all levelling.

Surely this setup is not cheap?

Well... no I guess it's not, ...BUT it is a heck of a lot cheaper than buying "quality" ready made panoramic solutions!

Here are a few tips for putting this kit together on the cheap like I did....

* Buy your generic sliding clamp off eBay and avoid the big name "nodal sliders" with the built in arca-swiss clamp.

I got my 8 inch slide rail for about AUD30 delivered. (Ensure that you have checked what nodal offset you require for your lens and buy the appropriate length.)

* Buy a lesser known brand of clamp like "PhotoClam" I have found their equipment to be of the utmost quality, yet their prices are much more pleasing.

* Keep an eye on eBay and other online Buy & Sell forums like FredMiranda.com It took a little while, but with regular checks, I managed to get my Panning Clamp & L Bracket through Fred's site and paid less than 1/2 of new price.... and that's including delivery!

OK Russ, this is a great setup, but you cant do multi-row panoramas anymore can you?

Ummm... Yes and no. The setup as you see here does allow me to create multi row panoramas. The 24mm TS-E can shift both up and down. So it's a simple matter of shooting one row with the lens shifted up and the a second with the lens shifted down.

But you are correct in such that I cannot do a full "global" view. For this I will need to swap back to my original setup.... the good thing is that I don't do global views. :-)

So there its, my new panorama setup that allows for quick and easy transition between shooting styles. No longer is it a time consuming chore and more time can be dedicated to doing what I love - taking images like these.....

Linear Shift Panorama with 24mm TS-E and camera in landscape orientation:

Nodally Rotated Panorama with 24mm TS-E and camera in portrait orientation:

Two very different Fields Of View, one very simple camera setup.

Cheers

Rusty

Tags: canon 24mm ts-e II tilt linear shift landscape photography panoramic panorama panoramas pano panos nodal rotation

Using Lens Tilt for Landscape Photography.

NOTE: I am in the process of moving this blog to our new web site. Because this blog will be removed in the near future, please share or link to the new location. Thanks

http://www.australianlight.com.au/blog/post/using_lens_tilt_for_landscape_photography/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Beginners Guide to using a Tilt / Shift lens in Landscape Photography

I just love wide expansive landscape views that include close foreground interest, as well as distant detail... sadly though, the combination does not always come easy.

Wide angle lenses are an important part of the landscape photographer's kit, but finding a good one, I mean a "really good one!" is not that easy. Curvilinear Distortion (straight lines don't stay straight) and Chromatic Aberration (colourful light bleeds around the edge of high contrast edges) are just two foes that the wide landscape photography shooter must battle.

Yes wide angle lenses have got better and some are real standouts, but even if a newer lens controls Curvilinear Distortion and Chromatic Aberrations well, there is still the issue of DOF (or 'Depth Of Field' ie. How much depth there is to the focus or sharpness of objects within an image). So just how does one keep close foreground objects in focus, while still maintaining acceptable sharpness in the distant background?

On a regular wide angle lens this is done by using a small aperture (big f number) and hyperfocal focusing. "Hyper what?" I hear you say... well I will talk more about hyperfocal focusing in another blog, but for now, lets just say that every lens, regardless of focal length or aperture used, has various "focus sweet spots". These sweet spots (focus distances), when coupled with a particular aperture, will provide DOF from near to very far.

To help explain, let's think about DOF for a second... imagine DOF to be an invisible vertical wall, that is built upon the point that we have focused on. Use a wide open aperture (small f number) and that wall will be very thin, perhaps only a 1/2m deep for example. Anything in front of the wall will be out of focus and anything behind the wall will also be out of focus. As we close down the aperture to a smaller one (remember this is a bigger f-number) DOF increases, or our wall becomes much thicker.

"That's simple then, let's just stop our lenses down to their smallest aperture and get the most DOF we can… problem solved!"

If only it was so simple.

Unfortunately, stopping a lens down can come at a cost. That cost is a loss in image sharpness due to diffraction. As light passes though a small aperture, some of it is diffracted (bent) and this diffracted light is recorded as softness in your image. The amount of softness produced will vary from lens to lens, so some lenses may work well with smaller apertures where others may not. (To find out what your lens does, shoot the same scene with each aperture on your lens and then view your results at 100% size on screen)

So does this make our wide angles lenses useless for landscapes?

Of course not, many MANY great landscape IMAGES have been shot with regular wide angle lenses... but that doesn't mean that there isn't a better way.

Enter theTilt/Shift Lens.....

What makes a tilt/shift lens so special for landscapes is that it has movements. The lens can "shift" from side to side or up and down independently from the camera. The lens can also "tilt" and make the light approach the camera's sensor at an angle.

This image displays some of the shift and tilt positions possible with the Canon 24mm TS-E II

The red line indicates the normal centre line of the lens and helps to highlight the movements.

So now that we have an understanding of the landscape image and its DOF, plus also an understanding of what a Tilt/Shift lens is, we can look at how its movements can be beneficial. For this blog I will first deal with the "Tilt" function only and tackle the other movements later.

Tilting the lens off its axis has a profound effect on it's focal plane. Remember the invisible wall? To create a deeper DOF or a thicker wall, we used a smaller aperture...

In this very simplified view, you see that closing the lens down to a smaller aperture has resulted in the DOF coming closer to camera, as well as extending into the distance.

But if a tilt lens is used, it has the effect of laying the DOF down in a wedge shape...

Once again this is a VERY simplified graphic, but it displays how we are now achieving a very deep DOF without the need to use a smaller aperture. This does not mean that we can shoot wide open and have everything sharp however, as the wedge will vary in thickness (mostly in the vertical) with aperture just as our wall did.

It does mean however, that larger more open apertures can be used to avoid diffraction, while still achieving effective DOF from near to very far.

(For the REALLY technically minded, I will mention that this laying down of the focal plane is called the "Scheimpflug Principle" and much, much more can be learned via Google.)

So how does this work in practice?

Pretty darn well actually! Take this image as an example...

The foreground rocks were only about 30cm from the lens, yet focus extends from them to the horizon. Because I was so close to the rock, this image required 6mm of down tilt and quite simply, I could not have done it with any other lens in my kit without shooting multiple images at different focus points and then stacking them together later in post production.

The following image is taken from a standing height, so much less tilt of only about 1/2-1 degree was required to lay the focus plane/DOF area down.

So what are the pitfalls of using this kind of lens?

Well personally I have found a couple. Using tilt can require very fine adjustments, as little as 1/2 a degree in some cases and these can be VERY difficult to see in the view finder of a DSLR.

Live view is one way around this, but sadly my current camera does not have live view. A magnified angle eyepiece is another good aid, as this will give a view around 2.5x the size of a standard view finder, but I don't find them the easiest thing to work with, as the 90 degree angle is not always convenient.

My best solution so far has been to practice. I now have a fair grasp on how much tilt to apply for any given height that I am shooting from. This is still not the perfect solution, as it is effected by camera angle, but until my new camera with live preview and perhaps even a feed to my iPad becomes available, it will have to do.

My other main issue that I have to contend with is "Me".

When swapping the camera from portrait to landscape orientation, I will often forget to rotate the lens so that tilt is in the right plane. This of course leads to disaster, with vertical planes of focus running through images that require horizontal, or visa versa.

To combat my ever increasing memory issues (I'm getting old you know), I have taken on the pilot's practice of vocalising a small check list whenever the camera is repositioned. I may look like easy prey for those playing "Spot The Looney".... but running through a checklist does seem to work for me.

So there we have it.... "Using Lens Tilt for Landscape Photography". A very basic tutorial, but one that should give you a fair understanding of what tilting the lens can do for focus.

Please contact us if there is a particular subject that you would like covered and either Bernie or myself will do our best to answer in a future blog post.

Cheers

Russell
AustralianLight - Landscape Photography