Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: 35mm digital options for stitching?  (Read 18103 times)

parasko

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2008, 06:00:23 am »

Quote
As far as body and lens goes, I believe that the best option on the market today for stitching is the Nikon D300 with a micro nikkor 60 mm AF-S.

Thanks Bernard. I will look into this. This is a much more affordable setup than my initial thinking of a 1ds series with Zeiss/ Leica R lenses. I hadn't really considered the crop bodies but based on this post and my previous one (thanks for your advice there also!), it does seem to make sense for stitching.
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 06:01:23 am by parasko »
Logged

Panopeeper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1805
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2008, 12:12:10 pm »

Quote
Not even a tripod is really necessary based on your explanation, though I'm assuming that using one makes alignment of images in postprocessing much easier
The alignment is not a consideration in praxis. The tripod is necessary (in conjunction with a pano braket) to avoid parallax errors. This becomes an issue in short distances (for example indoor), or if short and close objects appear in several frames. This is too complex to describe in short.

Another consideration is cropping. If you have a tripod and you levelled it, you can frame better than hand-held. I shot at least the half of my panos hand-held, and sometimes I made errors. Example: Devil's Garden in Utah.  was standing on top of one of the hoodoos and shooting a wide, single row scenery, about 265°. The result is this:



I had to crop away a large part of it. When shooting wide sceneries hand-held, I swing back and forth several times looking through the viewfinder before clicking, to judge the correct hight and to avoid being led by the scenery, but this time I did not (honestly, the top of that hoodoo was not a prime place for shooting, but I needed the height).

Two more notes:

1. At the beginning you should shoot only with fixed exposure. Preparing the image frames before stitching can be very tedious, practical only in raw, and required only in few cases, namely when the dynamic range of the scenery far exceeds that of the camera.

2. There is no basis to think of a single prime lens. I suggest you to start out with a very good, wider zoom, like the Nikkor 17-35mm; you will need another one, like 24-70mm. I find the snobbish attitude tireing, that you frame better using a prime. I have used primes for pano, 20mm, 50mm, 85mm, 200mm, but often I needed the zoom. Particularly when shooting pano, one does not have the freedom to "walk to the right place" with the prime, because I need to stay on a spot, from where the entire wide and/or tall scenery can be shot. The snobs reiterating that rubbish have never shot anything from an outcropping on a steep hill or standing on a small rock in water. To avoid losses due to cropping, the field of view needs to be selected as it fits best for that scenery from that position.
Logged
Gabor

Misirlou

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 711
    • http://
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2008, 12:53:28 pm »

Doesn't anyone else see LiveView as a valuable tool for shooting panos? I haven't done any panos since I got my latest DSLR, but I'm thinking the next time I do one, it will be from LiveView. No way I'd want shoot a whole pano sequence throught the viewfinder if I could avoid it.
Logged

CJL

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 96
    • http://www.imageswest.ca
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #23 on: June 11, 2008, 02:03:35 pm »

Quote
As far as body and lens goes, I believe that the best option on the market today for stitching is the Nikon D300 with a micro nikkor 60 mm AF-S.

I have been using a D2x and D3 with excellent results, but I indeed believe that AP-S sensors are probably a better option for stitching, and the D300 is clearly the best APS camera on the market today.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Bernard, I'm curious why you feel the D300 is a better choice than the D2x?  

Some people (Bjorn Rorslett, Thom Hogan) have suggested the D2x resolves a bit more fine detail than the D300, which I think would be beneficial for stitching landscape panos.
Logged

JeffKohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1668
    • http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #24 on: June 11, 2008, 03:52:29 pm »

Quote
Bernard, I'm curious why you feel the D300 is a better choice than the D2x? 

Some people (Bjorn Rorslett, Thom Hogan) have suggested the D2x resolves a bit more fine detail than the D300, which I think would be beneficial for stitching landscape panos.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200952\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've seen no concrete evidence that the D2x outresolves the D300. I shot with a D2x for over 2 years (still have it), and now use the D300 since last November. Resolution is pretty much identical, but there's noticeably more dynamic range with the D300 and I find that it handles the very brightest tones better than the D2x. The D300's excellent LCD and LiveView are also very useful for manually focusing or using tilt/shift lenses.
Logged
Jeff Kohn
[url=http://ww

JeffKohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1668
    • http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #25 on: June 11, 2008, 03:58:33 pm »

Quote
Particularly when shooting pano, one does not have the freedom to "walk to the right place" with the prime, because I need to stay on a spot, from where the entire wide and/or tall scenery can be shot.
I'm primarily a zoom guy, and I would say that's true for single-shots; but not really panos. After all with a pano you can just take more shots so framing isn't much of an issue at all. I usually try to shoot a wider FOV than I think I'll need anyway so that I have plenty of flexibility for cropping.
Logged
Jeff Kohn
[url=http://ww

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #26 on: June 11, 2008, 07:25:24 pm »

Quote
Bernard, I'm curious why you feel the D300 is a better choice than the D2x? 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200952\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mostly:

- Lighter, and thesefore more pano head friendly
- more DR
- less noise makes it possible to use slightly higher ISOs to reduce the lenght of the exposures in some situations

Cheers,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #27 on: June 11, 2008, 08:34:16 pm »

Quote
Thanks Bernard. I will look into this. This is a much more affordable setup than my initial thinking of a 1ds series with Zeiss/ Leica R lenses. I hadn't really considered the crop bodies but based on this post and my previous one (thanks for your advice there also!), it does seem to make sense for stitching.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200886\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, as I said I am now using a D3 and am getting this kind of results (this one was shot with a 17-35 f2.8):



So the D3 is definitely usable, but even with an excellent prime like the 60 mm AF-S stopped downh, there is still a certain amount of light fall off that can be bothering in some cases. The main reasons I am using a D3 are:

- DR
- future proofness of the body + lenses (I believe that Nikon will not go much higher than the D300 on DX pixel count wise)

This being said, the D3 is a brilliant tool for genral photography, even if DX has some clear advantages for landscape work

Regards,
Bernard

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #28 on: June 11, 2008, 08:45:16 pm »

Quote
2. There is no basis to think of a single prime lens. I suggest you to start out with a very good, wider zoom, like the Nikkor 17-35mm; you will need another one, like 24-70mm. I find the snobbish attitude tireing, that you frame better using a prime. I have used primes for pano, 20mm, 50mm, 85mm, 200mm, but often I needed the zoom. Particularly when shooting pano, one does not have the freedom to "walk to the right place" with the prime, because I need to stay on a spot, from where the entire wide and/or tall scenery can be shot. The snobs reiterating that rubbish have never shot anything from an outcropping on a steep hill or standing on a small rock in water. To avoid losses due to cropping, the field of view needs to be selected as it fits best for that scenery from that position.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200924\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My view is that the main advantages of using a 60 mm prime over the excellent 24-70 are weight and bulk. Not just weight to carry in the pack (49 pounds is not that different from 50 pounds) but the weight carried by the pano head.

A 2 row pano with the 60 mm will basically cover the same field as a one row with the 24-70 on a wider focal lenght, and this will of course offer more interesting options with very wide panos whose width to height ratio are often impractical.

I have used both extensively, and I tend to use the 60 mm recently. It is also a bit sharper and has less distsorsion, but these are comparetively less important for all but the very largest prints.

Another advantage of the 60 mm is that it is a little bit less prone to flare, which can be critical in wide panos including the sun like this one. This was shot with a 17-35 f2.8, and, although I used all the possible tricks to reduce the problem, I am not very pleased with the way it flares:



Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: June 11, 2008, 09:04:25 pm by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #29 on: June 11, 2008, 09:05:58 pm »

Quote
Doesn't anyone else see LiveView as a valuable tool for shooting panos? I haven't done any panos since I got my latest DSLR, but I'm thinking the next time I do one, it will be from LiveView. No way I'd want shoot a whole pano sequence throught the viewfinder if I could avoid it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=200933\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why do you need to look through the viewfinder when shooting a pano?

Regards,
Bernard

NikoJorj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1082
    • http://nikojorj.free.fr/
35mm digital options for stitching?
« Reply #30 on: June 12, 2008, 04:36:38 am »

Quote
Another advantage of the 60 mm is that it is a little bit less prone to flare, which can be critical in wide panos including the sun like this one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=201008\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Two very nice panos, as usual,  .

I fully agree : for wide panos, the main quality of a lens may often be flare resistance. I can only talk about my gear, but by Canon the 10-22 is a reaaally good performer at that (and the rest ain't bad either).
Resolution? Not a problem - you just stitch more frames   .
Distortions, transverse chromatic aberrations? They can quite easily be corrected in post-processing (that's what a good stitcher is for, after all).
Light falloff is a tad more tricky, but still manageable when not too severe.
Logged
Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up