KrisCarnmarker said:
I'm just curious to hear from a professional.
Nicolas, I see you do not own a tilt-shift lens. Are these type of lenses considered obsolete now? Considering today's quite effective and easy-to-use post-processing solutions such as DxO and PS?
It would seem to me that while there are probably quite a few advantages to them, the expense may not be justifiable?
Bonjour Kris
you've hit a never ended subject!
I'll try my 2 cts on it:
First of all, I'm a complete self made man (may be that's the reason why I like so much good forums and why I'm so thankfull to them!), I left school before being graduated for a transatlantic crossing on a sail boat...
Hence I cannot argue technically a lot, but I'm sure some others around here will do!
So, back to your question, the main reason I do not use tilt-shift lense is that they are not.....wide enough.
BTW this also one of the reason why I went to FF. This goes the cheaper way between APS size sensors and MF.
On the other hand for outside action shots, MF is not the way to go, even if I wonder sometime... and I can't afford having both high end DSLR and MF backs...
Since I've bought a good copy of the Sigma 12-24 I'm quite happy, it is a very uncredible lense, quite cheap and really powerfull, provided that:
you shoot at least ƒ11
do not have something too close on the sides of foreground (still some blured corners).
AND
(this goes with Doug comment just above)
Have sensor plane parallel to the plane your focusing.
Then vertical lines will be vertical.
I also use this ultra wide lense for action shoots when I wish some special effects, like speed.
As for the workflow, I bough DXO a few weeks ago, this is not a very easy software (and so loooooooong), for most of the deraw work I much prefer Capture One (Sorry Michael, still waiting for a RSE for the mAc!), however on some pictures it does wonderfull work, saving file as DNG (direct tifs are awfull, can't get them right..) and opening the DNG file into ACR.
Great job!