Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [PanoToolsNG] Field of view question

Expand Messages
  • Mark D. Fink
    I frequently shoot with a Sigma 14mm on a 1.6X crop camera, and do three rows of eight; one row at +60 degrees, one at 0 degrees, and one at -60 degrees. That
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
      I frequently shoot with a Sigma 14mm on a 1.6X crop camera, and do three
      rows of eight; one row at +60 degrees, one at 0 degrees, and one at -60
      degrees. That is a little overkill, but gives plenty of overlap. I then
      shoot one extra nadir with the tripod moved out of the way.

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com [mailto:PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com] On
      > Behalf Of Keith Martin
      > Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 1:05 PM
      > To: PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [PanoToolsNG] Field of view question
      >
      > I've just been asked how the field of view compares between a Nikkor
      > 14-24 f2.8 fx lens and a 16mm fisheye. This is on a full-frame
      > camera, the Nikon D3.
      >
      > This guy is trying out his first panos, but he's using that 14-24mm
      > wideangle rectilinear lens. Assuming he uses it at 14mm, how many
      > shots around is he likely to need, and how much work would it be to
      > make a spherical pano?
      >
      > k
    • crane@ukonline.co.uk
      ... I found best thing was to look through viewfinder. mick ... This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
        Quoting "Mark D. Fink" <markdfink@...>:

        > I frequently shoot with a Sigma 14mm on a 1.6X crop camera, and do three
        > rows of eight; one row at +60 degrees, one at 0 degrees, and one at -60
        > degrees. That is a little overkill, but gives plenty of overlap. I then
        > shoot one extra nadir with the tripod moved out of the way.

        > > I've just been asked how the field of view compares between a Nikkor
        > > 14-24 f2.8 fx lens and a 16mm fisheye. This is on a full-frame
        > > camera, the Nikon D3.

        I found best thing was to look through viewfinder.
        mick

        ----------------------------------------------
        This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
      • Scott Highton
        The 14-24 Nikkor can be used at its widest focal length (14mm) just like a traditional Nikkor 14mm. In portrait orientation, it has a fov(y) of 104° and a
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
          The 14-24 Nikkor can be used at its widest focal length (14mm) just
          like a traditional Nikkor 14mm.

          In portrait orientation, it has a fov(y) of 104° and a fov(x) of 82°.
          Six shots (one every 60°) provides adequate overlap for stitching a
          360° panorama. Tilting the camera upward 45° and downward 45° for two
          additional rows would add the multi-row coverage needed for a full
          cubic or spherical panorama (360°x180°).

          The zoom Nikkor 14-24mm is a very nice lens (I've used it on the D3),
          but is somewhat expensive and heavy (it does balance nicely on the D3,
          though). At 14mm, it also has noticeable barrel distortion, which not
          all stitching applications handle well. I've found that PTGUI does a
          fine job stitching these images, but other stitchers MAY require you
          to run the source images through Nikon's View NX or Capture software
          to remove the barrel distortion before stitching.


          For a details on choosing a VR lens, including information about this
          14-24mm Nikkor, check out the Technical Notes on the VR Photography
          web site. In particular, see:

          http://vrphotography.com/data/pages/techtutorials/technotes/panolenschoice.html

          Regards,




          Scott Highton
          Author, Virtual Reality Photography
          Web: http://www.vrphotography.com
        • Keith Martin
          ... Exactly, hence the question. :-) Thanks for the fov_pan_calc link, that is interesting and looks like it has everything... although I have to say that it
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
            Sometime around 31/3/09 (at 20:41 +0200) Erik Krause said:

            >Since the 16mm fisheye uses a different mapping it covers a far larger
            >FoV than the rectilinear lens.

            Exactly, hence the question. :-) Thanks for the fov_pan_calc link,
            that is interesting and looks like it has everything... although I
            have to say that it is presented in a rather dauntingly (dare I say
            unhelpfully?) technical manner! Heh- I guess that's the nature of the
            subject, eh?

            Harry's post and link to the imaginatorium.org page was also useful;
            I think a couple of rows of 8 around will be the next thing for this
            chap to try, then see how much z & n space is left.

            Thanks all!

            k
          • Keith Martin
            Superb detail, thanks Scott. k
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
              Superb detail, thanks Scott.

              k
            • Carl von Einem
              I use my 12 mm rectilinear lens (Voigtländer Heliar, now on a very nice Zeiss-Ikon SW) like this: 6x -20°, 4x +45°, plus zenith and nadir shots However the
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
                I use my 12 mm rectilinear lens (Voigtländer Heliar, now on a very nice
                Zeiss-Ikon SW) like this:
                6x -20°, 4x +45°, plus zenith and nadir shots
                However the 14 mm is closer to my 15 mm which I use rarely (for no real
                reason).

                Another comparable rectilinear lens is the 43 mm of my Mamiya 7II which
                is comparable to 20 or 21 mm (different w/h ratio). With that lens I
                shoot 7x -35°, 7x 25°, zenith and nadir. BTW my rotator has seven click
                stops :-)

                8 clicks around / 2 rows would easily work with a 14 mm lens. Plus z&n.

                The easiest way to find a good "matrix" of shots that has enough overlap
                is to use dummy images in hugin or ptgui. I also have a habit of trying
                to start with the lower row in a way so it doesn't include my rotator.
                Less work to mask unwanted details... just calculate enough overlap for
                the upper row and start shooting. Hey, the D3 is a DSLR! =8-)

                Carl


                Posted by: "Harry van der Wolf"
                >
                > check <http://imaginatorium.org/stuff/angle.htm>
                >
                > So for a 14 mm rectilinear in portrait mode, you have a hfov of 81 degrees
                > (remember: in portrait mode) and with 30% overlap (approx. 50 degrees hfov),
                > you would need 7+, preferably 8 images around. Probably 2 rows.
                > one shot for nadir and zenith with 2 horizontal rows in portrait?
                > 2x2 shots for nadir and zenith with 1 horizontal row in portrait?
                >
                > 2009/3/31 Keith Martin <keith@...>
                >
                >> > I've just been asked how the field of view compares between a Nikkor
                >> > 14-24 f2.8 fx lens and a 16mm fisheye. This is on a full-frame
                >> > camera, the Nikon D3.
                >> >
                >> > This guy is trying out his first panos, but he's using that 14-24mm
                >> > wideangle rectilinear lens. Assuming he uses it at 14mm, how many
                >> > shots around is he likely to need, and how much work would it be to
                >> > make a spherical pano?
              • Klaus Hilsenbeck
                ... You may have a look at this lens database (unfortunately discontinued): http://vrwave.com This is a source I like very much. (should be continued by
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 31, 2009
                  --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Keith Martin <keith@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I've just been asked how the field of view compares between a Nikkor
                  > 14-24 f2.8 fx lens and a 16mm fisheye......
                  > ..... how many shots around is he likely to need,
                  > and how much work would it be to make a spherical pano?

                  You may have a look at this lens database (unfortunately discontinued):
                  http://vrwave.com
                  This is a source I like very much.
                  (should be continued by somebody ....)

                  Salu2,
                  Klaus

                  http://www.panocanarias.com
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.