> Sorry guys but you really cant do serious > Architechure with any pentax cameras or > Lenses because you need full camera movements > That only a view camera can provide for architecture. > Its amazing what you can do with a view for that. > jco
I thought tilt/shift lenses were designed to perform perspective correction? According to this page: http://www.ohse.de/uwe/articles/shift-tilt.html for Pentax K-mount cameras, there are shift and tilt/shift lenses available from: Pentax(!): SMC A 28mm f3.5 shift Schneider-Kreuznach: 28mm f2.8 shift, 35mm f4 shift (M42) Zavod Arsenal: 35mm f2.8 shift and tilt/shift, 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift Also, at: http://www.rugift.com/photocameras/pentax_cameras_lenses.htm There are 2 Russian lenses of interest - a 35mm f2.8 tilt/shift, and an 80mm f2.8 tilt/shift. So it seems all is not lost for Pentax users. The Zavod Arsenal and Russian lenses at least offer tilt/shift which should correct fully for perspective, at least within their design limits. Disclaimer: I have never used a view camera, so there may indeed be adjustments possible with a view camera, that cannot be similarly achieved with a tilt/shift lens on an SLR. I will be happy to be corrected. But anyway I guess I don't qualify as a "serious" architecture photographer... I'm not too concerned about perspective correction - I usually just try to hold the camera level, and I sometimes use the perspective distortion for dramatic shots. I'm more concerned about wavy/barrel distortion. > In fact, all the "wide-to-normal" or "wide-to-small tele" zoom lenses that I > know show too much distortion for "serious" architecture photography. That is > also the case with the 16-45, judging from the photos I have seen and user > reports. But I also think that many zooms lenses are useful for that > kind of photography if the photographer understands their limitations > and can live with them, or is prepared to correct the shots in post > processing. > Carlos Thanks for the inputs. Most of my picture-taking is done while travelling, so a zoom is definitely more convenient than a bagful of lenses. As for architecture, here are some examples of "architecture" that I photograph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the link works, you can see that I don't shoot brick walls ;-) so if the wavy/barrel distortion is not too obvious, I'm OK. Normally, the limiting factor is me, not the equipment. And if the final budget dictates either the 16-45 alone, or the kit 18-55 plus one (used) fast lens, then I'm going with the latter. Benjamin __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
