Like Jostein, I kind of had the idea that this was for 645 lenses, but as you say, a TC already projects a wider image circle than the attached lens. The only downside is that you'd lose resolution and speed. Speed wouldn't be much of a problem for the applications you'd use a tilt/shift lens in, as the subject generally isn't going anywhere ;-), but resolution would be. However, starting with a really sharp lens like the 24/2 it wouldn't be too bad...
I was tempted by a second hand 28/2.8 shift once, but I wouldn't have used it nearly enough to justify the cost. An adaptor for my 24/2 would be a different story altogether (at 1.4x, you get a 35/2.8, which is still very useful) - or you could just get silly and see what a 280/5.6 shift lens can do ;-) A converter for the 645 lenses still seems like the most likely prospect, though. From a marketing point of view, it even makes sense- as it gets 35mm users into the 645 system without them having to buy a 645 body ;-) -- Kristian On Monday, Sep 2, 2002, at 07:29 Europe/Dublin, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 1 Sep 2002 at 15:39, Jostein wrote: > >> A converter for which lenses? t/s demands that the lens can cover a >> larger >> negative size than what's inside the camera. Maybe this is a >> converter for >> using 645 or 67 lenses on 35mm. > > Interesting prospect, I'd guess that MF lenses wouldn't be necessary > to afford > T/S as a TC can be engineered to project a larger image circle, its > effect is > magnification after all. > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html >
