Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/11/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] IMG: Fall Colors at Pt. Lobos
From: red735i at (Frank Filippone)
Date: Wed Nov 12 13:03:06 2008
References: <>

Tilt and shift might work, but you need your planes in the right orientation
to each other and to the camera   In this case, you have a slightly diagonal
plane of interest  and a background that is pretty much at infinity, all
over.  Compensating with only tilt ( swing in the orientation we see) is not
enough to capture even the foreground in a focus plane, relative to the
camera sensor plane.  And it confuses the eye/brain to see weirdly.  Front
to back focus areas work.  Left to right looks weird... it is our
optical-brain connection that is trained one way and not the other.

I think this might have worked just fine of you had used a landscape
orientation.  That would have given you just tilt from the lens, and the
"unfocus" plane would have been about equal for the infinite background.
Then the background would have been in the same amount of "unfocus" and
would have looked fine.  It is the right to left stuff that causes optical

Of course, the F64 group would have said you did not provide enough DOF from
your lens....

BTW, what is the minimum F stop with the Canon PC lens you used?  F32?

Frank Filippone

-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf Of Bob
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 8:18 AM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] IMG: Fall Colors at Pt. Lobos

Hi George and Frank,

Number 1 was photographed with a Tilt/Shift lens. I think the problem is
that the foreground and background are in focus because they are in the
plane of focus?produced by the tilt. The mid-ground area was down a cliff; a
drop of 20 - 30 feet. As this would put it out of the plane of focus created
by the tilt, the only way to try to get it in focus is through reducing the
aperture. I believe I should have shot at a smaller aperture than?f8, and
that may be the cause of?the slop you see.
I think?this would explain it as the right side was futher below me than the
left and, as Frank noted, the right side seems more out of focus. I think
the shift was centered.
Does this make sense to you?

Thanks for pointing this out. I'll?just have to go back! :-)

George, as for the darkness in the the other shots, it's not caused by any
adjustments by me. Pt. Lobos has a huge dynamic range. I could never get
anything when I shot Velvia?nor negative color. Even using N-2 with BW film
couldn't get it all. I had a .6ND Grad filter (I'm going to be buying a .9
now) and even with all that an the increased capture dynamic range of
digital, I couldn't get it.

So thanks for the input very much. Numbers?4 and the last image will be put
on my main gallery!
?Bob Adler
Palo Alto, CA 

From: Frank Filippone <>
To: Leica Users Group <>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 7:45:08 AM
Subject: RE: [Leica] IMG: Fall Colors at Pt. Lobos

Bob... were you using your perspective controlled lens for the first shot?
Does the lens offer swings and tilts?? Or Tilt only?? ( relative to a
landscape image configuration.)

Mid range focus on the right worse than midrange on the left.....? indicates
maybe your lens was not "centered" and set for some amount of tilt.... which
in this composition means swing... and therefore the focus planes are not
where we expect them.....? Although it certainly works for the

Is this just a case of focus distortion caused by the foreground focus being
right ( which it is) , and the background wrong for the foreground focus

Sometimes swings and tilts make the focus just look weird.... 

Certainly a colorful shot.... nicely composed.

Frank Filippone

the first - the mid frame lack of focus puzzles me

Fond regards,


>? Bob Adler
> Palo Alto, CA

Leica Users Group.
See for more information


Leica Users Group.
See for more information

In reply to: Message from rgacpa at (Bob Adler) ([Leica] IMG: Fall Colors at Pt. Lobos)