Re: [PanoToolsNG] Gigapan & Canon G9 examples
- Hello Eric,
I agree with your findings. Comparing lightness and ease of use of the
setup with the results, i'm really trilled by the results. In the
future, i'll probably often prefer the Gigapan over large and heavy DSLR
setups - especially if i can't go by car to the shooting location ... it
_does_ make a difference if you have to carry 1 kg or 4-5 kg over a long
Still, i'm full of expectation about a larger Gigapan. I hope, the SLR
model will contain the same key features that make the current model
such a useful device...
Regarding pushing the limits, i'm interested to hear about your
progress. What i can tell from different experiments with my own robots,
a G9 with tele extender (400mm if i'm right) already reaches the
physical limits (air, temperature and haze) of what you are able to
shoot. I personally have set my own limit to about 300mm (~450mm) for
usable panoramas. I also tried with a 500mm lens but stopped further
experiments because setup (e.g. focus) and atmosphere limits prevented
much increase of image quality...
Regarding PTGui and robotic setups, i exchanged mails a few days ago
with Joost, who is already aware of the demand. I am confident that we
will see some clever pre-alignment methods in his software in the near
Also, Autopano Giga is available as an alpha version - doesn't work
perfect at the moment, but it already includes import options for
various imaging robots, including the Gigapan.
- That should be obvious.. heh.
Prime versus zoom.
The problem, is 28 isn't really wide enough to be really useful for a lot of
interior work, and composition without zoom and difficult to say the least,
since you often don't have placement luxury.
As an exterior lens, I'm sure it's a great lens to have.
I've always wondered how the MK2 stacks up against, the 10-22, since you
aren't using the outer parts of the lens with the 10-22.
Southern Digital Solutions LLC
From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Matthew Rogers
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: [PanoToolsNG] Re: Visible image degadation
Well I've tested the 28 f1.8 and 28 f2.8 against the 16-35 MKI/MK2 and
even the 28 f2.8 easily beats the 16-35 @28 for resolution and
sharpness. The 28mm f1.8 kills it.
On 23 Sep 2008, at 15:50, Sacha Griffin wrote:
> I thought the resolution displayed on the landscape was "decent".
> The shot
> was just a little fuzzy, most likely due to the obvious aberration
> all over the image.
> From what I've heard the 16-35 canon zoom, (canon, zoom, even wider)
> is a
> real hummer of a lens and a different beast altogether than this
> The portrait was a good display of the highlight priority perhaps.
> The landscape wasn't a good example of anything really.
> Sacha Griffin
> Southern Digital Solutions LLC
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]