Panoramas and wide-angle lenses

[Panopeeper]

With all this conflicting info, I'm confused and I've shot perhaps-hundreds of these

Well, yes, according to your "rules" you are confused.

1. A tripod is not generally necessary for wide-angle panos. The confusion may come from the circumstance, that wide-angle shots, particularly in portrait orientation, include close areas at the bottom of the frames. This may or may not pose a problem.

Demonstrations:

a. Scenery: Lake Louise Fairmont Chateau
Hand held at 17mm (*1.6), portrait. The result on the pavement is in the attachment. This type of error is difficult to clean up, the solution is often cropping.

b. Scenery: Vermillion River
Hand held at 17mm (*1.6), portrait, standing on a very low, tiny bridge, but that distance was already enough to mitigate the closeness. There is no problem with the stitching.

c. Scenery: Paint Pots
Hand held at 17mm (*1.6), portrait. There must be parallax errors on the ground, but I did not notice them.

2. A "ball-head" does not allow for horizontal rotation. The rotating base does, which may or may not be part of a ball-head.

[lbalbinot]

Hey.

By looking at the EXIF data from my Nikon D700 I found out that there's one field called "ExitPupilPosition". I don't know how closely it matches the entrance pupil but the values seem too roughly match the nodal point on my 35mm lens. I know that physically they are not the same thing.

Some values I've found:

Nikkor 14-24mm @ 14mm: ExitPupilPosition = 85.3 mm
Nikkor 14-24mm @ 18mm: ExitPupilPosition = 93.1 mm
Nikkor 14-24mm @ 24mm: ExitPupilPosition = 102.4 mm
Nikkor 35mm @ 35mm: ExitPupilPosition = 58.5 mm

Luis