I’ll make a comment on reviewer, not on the lenses… You’re so full of yourself (bs) that this was awfully hard to read, your ego was in the way! And your photos are mediocre at best… Like anyone who reads this doesn’t know what basics of photography are?
The camera compatibility chart shows limited use with the Nikon D90. However, this lens will not mount on the D90, unless one forces it past the built in flash, which does not seem advisable.
Unfortunately out of the box you can not tilt and shift the PC-E Nikkor 24mm on the same axis. But fortunately it is very easy to modify the lens on your own. You can find a short tutorial on how to change axis here:
Best regards Achim
daniel de Kievith
March 27, 2013 2:59 pm
Dag Nasim,
I’m 40 years photographer,i love my pcr for two things:first i can put my foreground where i want it’s very important in city’s where almost erverything is in the way to make o sight and from your particular position you can’t move an inch…..(this lens made me ritch ).
Secondly it’s a fantastic macro lens!
Whth a pce 24 mm and a 24-70 mm lens you can survive and make a living an prof photographer.
Don’t need more the rest is talent and creativity.
Thanks for the tips Nasim, i thought i knew everything but i learned something!
Daniel de Kievith(Belgium)
Billy Joe
August 6, 2012 3:42 pm
Hi Nasim, I recently purchased a Nikon 24mm PC-E lens. So far, I have only used it in test situations. In the manual it states that for a surcharge, Nikon will modify the tilt/shift to be in the same direction. You have stated that the modification is an advantage if you are shooting landscapes. What is the advantage of not having the lens modified? What type of shooting would you use it for, unmodified? Thanks, Billy joe..
Here is a tutorial to modify the lens on your own.
Best regards Achim
Brenda
June 19, 2012 4:17 pm
Hi Nasim, I really enjoyed your article on the 24mm PC-E. You mentioned you were going to write an article on how to use them? I couldn’t find one can you point me to it? Kind Regards, Brenda
Michael
May 21, 2012 9:04 am
Hi Nasim, Sorry but I am back on my favourite subject, the 24mm PCE Nikon I have been conducting some extensive testing on the difference in sharpness between the lower part and upper part of the image when shifted up 8mm. Tests on a D800, tripod, mirror up, camera levelled, wireless release, f5.6 focus at approx 50 feet away. Subject was a church with a bell tower and steeple.
My unhappy conclusions are: The sharpest image is the one without shifting and no perspective correction in Photoshop. After perspective correction in Photoshop of the non shifted image, the image was similar to the PCE version, with the Photoshop version being very marginally sharper in the upper part of the image. I have always had this problem but it is much more noticable with the D800. I am now wondering what I am gaining from my shift lens? Would I be better off with the very sharp 14-24 and settling for photoshops converging verticals correction option? help!!
Hi Michael, I’ve been reading the reviews of this post and noted no one has replied to your 2 comments, so albeit with 7 years delay, I will try to! Firstly, these lenses are far from perfect and the “wedge shaped” focus plane when tilted is probably quite curvy. I have got my 24PCE to work at close focus & infinity but did not pay too much attention to the middle bit. It’s always a compromise (regrettably). The question of whether a PC-E lens is better than a perspective-corrected version shot on a normal lens and edited in photoshop is not always clear. My testing has indicated that there is very little, if any, discernible benefit from using a shifting lens for a tell building in image quality. The more you shift up, the more the upper section turns to blurry smudge. In many cases barely acceptable! But you do gain 2 important things – you keep the full width of the image without having to crop out what you thought you would get on the top half before the perspective correction, and even more importantly the proportions of the subject (ie building) do not change. This is very important in architectural photography!! But a slight perspective correction and a subsequent stretching up tweak of the image shot on a fantastic lens such as the Zeiss Milvus 25mm would undoubtedly lead to much better image quality than with this Nikon 24mm PC-E which on today’s (2019) cameras is bordering on too poor to be useable. Much better are Nikon’s 45mm and especially the newer 19mm PC-E lenses. I have the 24mm and use it a lot for my professional interiors, architectural, cityscape and landscape work, but am seriously now thinking of selling it. The corner resolution on one side is too bad but the lens repair technicians tell me it’s within “Nikon’s performance standard”. In other words…..a lens that badly, badly needs an upgrade. Hope this helps! Adam ;-)
I found the sharpness results surprising. Like you, I found a smudging effect happens when shifting the lens. It’s bothered me too the point where I rarely use the shift feature of the lens, limiting my use of the lens to landscapes.
RAT
May 13, 2012 11:01 pm
which one would u choose for landscape and architecture photography? the 24mm PCE or the 14-24mm and which one do you think is sharper, less vignetting, and less distortion. I will be travelling to Tibet next week so I am still deciding which one to buy.
I was in tibet a few years ago with a guide and driver, solely to take photos. Your choice is a difficult one if you cant afford both. the pce lens will be great for Monasteries, stupas etc in Tibet, I took a 24 pce. You will also be able to cover a good variety of landscape shots with the 24. The only advantage I see in the Zoom is the wider angle which could be put to creative use in Tibet, the landscapes are beautiful and different. If I had to choose again I would take the 24 and a good compact tripod.
One more thing, ifvyou take a laptop, make sure it has a SSD drive, not th normal with flying heads, they tend to crash at altitudes over 3500 metres and you will be going much higher than that, take a good supply of medicines, syringes and altitude sickness remedies, bowel stoppers are an essential also. Do try not to ascend more than 200 to 300 metres per day, Lhasa where you fly in is at 3500 metres from what I remember.
Have a great trip
Michael Dont eat anything that is not piping hot, avoid the salads and any fruit that you do not have to peel. Last but not least, dring plenty bottled water, my guide put a 24 pack in the car every day and insisted I drink half of it. I am not trying to put you off, its a fabulous country, the people are wonderful, its very safe, just watch what you eat, the less time you spend eating, the more time for photos.
Michael
May 11, 2012 4:07 am
Hi Nasim, I have used the 24mm Nikon PCE lens in shift mode for a number of years. Recently I decided I must get my head around the tilt function. after a lot of reading I decided not to use the focus far, tilt near method and use the calculated numbers on the cambridge colour web site. This says with my camera mounted on a tripod, the back levelled, the centre of the lens to the gound( hinge point) equal to 700 mm, the tilt angle should be 2 degrees if you can set this angle on the lens, which is difficult in some lights. It goes on to explain with the lens focussed on infinity, the plane of focus will run along the ground. If the ground runs uphill you must focus closer and focus nearer if the ground runs downhill.
In order not to complicate matters, I set small boxes with nice clear type along my level patio at 3,6,9,12,15,18 feet from the camera. this allowed me to see a television mast in the distance, at least 1000 feet away for my infinity marker. Focussing on the tv mast at infinity, with a 2 degree tilt, I could see that the closet box looked very sharp, great I thought, cracked the problem.
When I looked at the image on my computer the infinity and closest box were sharp at all apertures from f4 to f11 but the boxes at 6 feet onwards were progressivly unsharp, proving that my focus plane was not running along the ground as described.
I then tried the focus at infinity, tilt till the nearest box was sharp, recheck the infinity focus, take the shot again focussing at infinity, still the middle boxes were unsharp. The only way I could get the box at 15 sharp was to focus at that distance.
Having reread all the previous articles, the focus plane which is wedge shaped and should run along the ground when focussed at infinty, varying the aperture should just alter the angle of near and far points of acceptable sharpness around the focus plane.
I am now really confused, what am I doing wrong, why are my boxes on the ground not sharp when I had sufficient dof around the focus plane.
I concluded that the actual focus plane was running up at an angle from the ground, but why, I do not know.
I’ll make a comment on reviewer, not on the lenses…
You’re so full of yourself (bs) that this was awfully hard to read, your ego was in the way!
And your photos are mediocre at best…
Like anyone who reads this doesn’t know what basics of photography are?
Wow
Nasim,
The camera compatibility chart shows limited use with the Nikon D90. However, this lens will not mount on the D90, unless one forces it past the built in flash, which does not seem advisable.
Hi Nasin,
Do you know if the lens works well on a D750?
Thank you and kind regards,
Karl
Of course.
Unfortunately out of the box you can not tilt and shift the PC-E Nikkor 24mm on the same axis.
But fortunately it is very easy to modify the lens on your own.
You can find a short tutorial on how to change axis here:
Best regards
Achim
Dag Nasim,
I’m 40 years photographer,i love my pcr for two things:first i can put my foreground where i want it’s
very important in city’s where almost erverything is in the way to make o sight and from your particular position you can’t move an inch…..(this lens made me ritch ).
Secondly it’s a fantastic macro lens!
Whth a pce 24 mm and a 24-70 mm lens you can survive and make a living an prof photographer.
Don’t need more the rest is talent and creativity.
Thanks for the tips Nasim, i thought i knew everything but i learned something!
Daniel de Kievith(Belgium)
Hi Nasim,
I recently purchased a Nikon 24mm PC-E lens. So far, I have only used it in test situations. In the manual it states that for a surcharge, Nikon will modify the tilt/shift to be in the same direction. You have stated that the modification is an advantage if you are shooting landscapes. What is the advantage of not having the lens modified? What type of shooting would you use it for, unmodified?
Thanks,
Billy joe..
Architecture = vertical walls, shifted up/down
Product shot = vertical sides, shifted up/down
Landscape = horizontal plane, shifted up/down
(mostly)
Here is a tutorial to modify the lens on your own.
Best regards
Achim
Hi Nasim,
I really enjoyed your article on the 24mm PC-E. You mentioned you were going to write an article on how to use them? I couldn’t find one can you point me to it?
Kind Regards,
Brenda
Hi Nasim,
Sorry but I am back on my favourite subject, the 24mm PCE Nikon
I have been conducting some extensive testing on the difference in sharpness between the lower part and upper part of the image when shifted up 8mm.
Tests on a D800, tripod, mirror up, camera levelled, wireless release, f5.6 focus at approx 50 feet away. Subject was a church with a bell tower and steeple.
My unhappy conclusions are:
The sharpest image is the one without shifting and no perspective correction in Photoshop.
After perspective correction in Photoshop of the non shifted image, the image was similar to the PCE version, with the Photoshop version being very marginally sharper in the upper part of the image.
I have always had this problem but it is much more noticable with the D800.
I am now wondering what I am gaining from my shift lens? Would I be better off with the very sharp 14-24 and settling for photoshops converging verticals correction option?
help!!
regards
Michael
Hi Michael,
I’ve been reading the reviews of this post and noted no one has replied to your 2 comments, so albeit with 7 years delay, I will try to!
Firstly, these lenses are far from perfect and the “wedge shaped” focus plane when tilted is probably quite curvy. I have got my 24PCE to work at close focus & infinity but did not pay too much attention to the middle bit. It’s always a compromise (regrettably).
The question of whether a PC-E lens is better than a perspective-corrected version shot on a normal lens and edited in photoshop is not always clear. My testing has indicated that there is very little, if any, discernible benefit from using a shifting lens for a tell building in image quality. The more you shift up, the more the upper section turns to blurry smudge. In many cases barely acceptable! But you do gain 2 important things – you keep the full width of the image without having to crop out what you thought you would get on the top half before the perspective correction, and even more importantly the proportions of the subject (ie building) do not change. This is very important in architectural photography!!
But a slight perspective correction and a subsequent stretching up tweak of the image shot on a fantastic lens such as the Zeiss Milvus 25mm would undoubtedly lead to much better image quality than with this Nikon 24mm PC-E which on today’s (2019) cameras is bordering on too poor to be useable.
Much better are Nikon’s 45mm and especially the newer 19mm PC-E lenses.
I have the 24mm and use it a lot for my professional interiors, architectural, cityscape and landscape work, but am seriously now thinking of selling it. The corner resolution on one side is too bad but the lens repair technicians tell me it’s within “Nikon’s performance standard”. In other words…..a lens that badly, badly needs an upgrade.
Hope this helps!
Adam ;-)
Check out www.adambutlerphography.com
I found the sharpness results surprising. Like you, I found a smudging effect happens when shifting the lens. It’s bothered me too the point where I rarely use the shift feature of the lens, limiting my use of the lens to landscapes.
which one would u choose for landscape and architecture photography? the 24mm PCE or the 14-24mm and which one do you think is sharper, less vignetting, and less distortion. I will be travelling to Tibet next week so I am still deciding which one to buy.
Thanks
I apologize for my rudeness, but Hi Nasim :)
Hi,
I was in tibet a few years ago with a guide and driver, solely to take photos.
Your choice is a difficult one if you cant afford both. the pce lens will be great for Monasteries, stupas etc in Tibet, I took a 24 pce. You will also be able to cover a good variety of landscape shots with the 24.
The only advantage I see in the Zoom is the wider angle which could be put to creative use in Tibet, the landscapes are beautiful and different. If I had to choose again I would take the 24 and a good compact tripod.
One more thing, ifvyou take a laptop, make sure it has a SSD drive, not th normal with flying heads, they tend to crash at altitudes over 3500 metres and you will be going much higher than that, take a good supply of medicines, syringes and altitude sickness remedies, bowel stoppers are an essential also.
Do try not to ascend more than 200 to 300 metres per day, Lhasa where you fly in is at 3500 metres from what I remember.
Have a great trip
Michael
Dont eat anything that is not piping hot, avoid the salads and any fruit that you do not have to peel.
Last but not least, dring plenty bottled water, my guide put a 24 pack in the car every day and insisted I drink half of it.
I am not trying to put you off, its a fabulous country, the people are wonderful, its very safe, just watch what you eat, the less time you spend eating, the more time for photos.
Hi Nasim,
I have used the 24mm Nikon PCE lens in shift mode for a number of years. Recently I decided I must get my head around the tilt function. after a lot of reading I decided not to use the focus far, tilt near method and use the calculated numbers on the cambridge colour web site.
This says with my camera mounted on a tripod, the back levelled, the centre of the lens to the gound( hinge point) equal to 700 mm, the tilt angle should be 2 degrees if you can set this angle on the lens, which is difficult in some lights.
It goes on to explain with the lens focussed on infinity, the plane of focus will run along the ground.
If the ground runs uphill you must focus closer and focus nearer if the ground runs downhill.
In order not to complicate matters, I set small boxes with nice clear type along my level patio at 3,6,9,12,15,18 feet from the camera. this allowed me to see a television mast in the distance, at least 1000 feet away for my infinity marker.
Focussing on the tv mast at infinity, with a 2 degree tilt, I could see that the closet box looked very sharp, great I thought, cracked the problem.
When I looked at the image on my computer the infinity and closest box were sharp at all apertures from f4 to f11 but the boxes at 6 feet onwards were progressivly unsharp, proving that my focus plane was not running along the ground as described.
I then tried the focus at infinity, tilt till the nearest box was sharp, recheck the infinity focus, take the shot again focussing at infinity, still the middle boxes were unsharp. The only way I could get the box at 15 sharp was to focus at that distance.
Having reread all the previous articles, the focus plane which is wedge shaped and should run along the ground when focussed at infinty, varying the aperture should just alter the angle of near and far points of acceptable sharpness around the focus plane.
I am now really confused, what am I doing wrong, why are my boxes on the ground not sharp when I had sufficient dof around the focus plane.
I concluded that the actual focus plane was running up at an angle from the ground, but why, I do not know.
Any help would be greatly appreciated
Regards
Michael
Google [Scheimpflug].
Hi Nasim,
I know this is an old post, May 2012 but I would appreciate any advice you can off on the problems I have raised with this lens
Regards
Michael
Try checking out – www.northlight-images.co.uk/alter…lted-lens/