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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] Samyang 8 mm fisheye review

Expand Messages
  • Wim Koornneef
    Here is another comparison, with both lenses on the same camera (450D). http://www.dmmdh.nl/forum_images/comparison_sigma8_tokina10-17@10mm_450D_1.jpg I hope
    Message 1 of 21 , Aug 3 4:17 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Here is another comparison, with both lenses on the same camera (450D).
      http://www.dmmdh.nl/forum_images/comparison_sigma8_tokina10-17@10mm_450D_1.jpg

      I hope that Michel is willing to do a in depth comparison about the flare
      and reflection control of the Samyang8/Sigma8/Tokina10-17 lenses.

      Wim


      Wim Koornneef wrote:
      >
      > http://www.dmmdh.nl/forum_images/comparison_sigma8_tokina10-17@12_1.jpg
      > ......

      --
      View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Samyang-8-mm-fisheye-review-tp24770525p24789022.html
      Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
    • Ken Warner
      The difference is very noticeable.
      Message 2 of 21 , Aug 3 8:55 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        The difference is very noticeable.

        Wim Koornneef wrote:
        > Hello Ken,
        >
        > For shooting 3D images I often use a dual DSLR camera system with a Sigma8
        > f3.5 lens+450D (left image) and a Tokina 10-17@12mm+5D (right image).
        > Both images are shot with the same aperture, ISO, shutterspeed etc.
        >
        > This is a part of the stitched equirectangulars of such a stero pair:
        > http://www.dmmdh.nl/forum_images/comparison_sigma8_tokina10-17@12_1.jpg
        >
        > The difference is obvious and it is clear that the Tokina is superior in
        > flare and reflection control.
        >
        > Please don't take me wrong, I am pleased with my Sigma8 lens and I use it a
        > lot but when I have to shoot a pano in a difficult light situaton and I have
        > both combinations at hand the choice is easy....
        >
        > Wim
        >
        >
        > Ken Warner-3 wrote:
        >
        >>Do other people feel the same way about Tokina vs. Sigma?
        >>
        >>Just asking....
        >>
        >
        >
      • bigwade
        Hi Michel, nice report !! Thanks Some questions: Is it really necessary to shave the the hood that far ??? (can t imagine) As Wim said, the flare and lensspots
        Message 3 of 21 , Aug 3 2:12 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Michel,
          nice report !! Thanks
          Some questions:
          Is it really necessary to shave the the hood that far ??? (can't imagine)
          As Wim said, the flare and lensspots are annoying.
          How does it compare to the Tokina and Sig 8/3.5
          Let us know.

          The biggest plus is the sharpness at edges.
          The Tokina @12 always gives a blurred star at nadir and this one is crisp.
          Crisp enough to clone the nadir without extra shot, and that's a plus :-)

          grtz
          Frank












          .

          michel thoby wrote:
          >
          > Hi list,
          >
          > The review of the shaved Samyang 8 mm lens has been complemented with
          > consideration apropos of flare resistance and radial mapping
          > comparison with other fisheyes. Some example panoramas were added.
          > http://tinyurl.com/n2hqna
          >
          > Feedback would be welcome, including request for topics that still
          > could be missing.
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          > Michel Thoby
          >
          >
          >
          >

          --
          View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Samyang-8-mm-fisheye-review-tp24770525p24798279.html
          Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
        • Ingemar Bergmark
          ... I ve had my Tokina 10-17mm (shaved) for a little over a month now, and I have to say that I m impressed with how it handles flare. I havn t used the Sigma
          Message 4 of 21 , Aug 3 9:34 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
            >
            > Do other people feel the same way about Tokina vs. Sigma?
            >
            > Just asking....
            >

            I've had my Tokina 10-17mm (shaved) for a little over a month now, and I have to say that I'm impressed with how it handles flare. I havn't used the Sigma lens, however when I compare it with the Nikkor 10.5, I have to say that so far the Tokina handles flare even better.
            I've also noticed that the Tokina seems to be a little sharper in the edges of the lens (FF camera).

            / Ingemar
          • michel thoby
            ... Hi Frank, 1) There were two main independent reasons to shave the Samyang hood down to its root . The first one has been obvious to me right from the
            Message 5 of 21 , Aug 4 2:25 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Le 3 août 09 à 23:12, bigwade a écrit :

              > Hi Michel,
              > nice report !! Thanks
              > Some questions:
              > Is it really necessary to shave the the hood that far ??? (can't
              > imagine)
              > As Wim said, the flare and lensspots are annoying.
              > How does it compare to the Tokina and Sig 8/3.5
              > Let us know.
              >
              > The biggest plus is the sharpness at edges.
              > The Tokina @12 always gives a blurred star at nadir and this one is
              > crisp.
              > Crisp enough to clone the nadir without extra shot, and that's a
              > plus :-)
              >
              > grtz
              > Frank
              Hi Frank,

              1) There were two main independent reasons to shave the Samyang hood
              "down to its root".
              The first one has been obvious to me right from the beginning: In
              contrast to the Tokina for instance, I had discovered that the hood
              wasn't an integral part of the lend body. It is thick black plastic
              moulded and it surrounds the front of the lens. Additionally and to
              my amazement, the diameter of the front of the metallic lens barrel
              was measured to be 70.8 mm: this is coincidentally just fine to fit
              inside the NN R1/R10 ring (for Sigma) but the hood had then to be
              totally out of the way! After a small adaptation done on the ring
              (i.e. insertion of a lens support in aluminum), here is an
              illustration of the project:
              http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Samyang+NN-R1.jpg
              The second reason is a posteriori: designing a lens cap adaptation to
              fit conveniently around the tip of the Samyang lens would have been a
              real challenge for me if the hood was only partially shaved as the
              first optical element surface is unusually highly convex and
              protrudes by about 15 mm.

              2) I might make ASAP a comparison of the Samyang 8 to the Tokina
              10-17 but not to the Sigma 8/3.5 since I do not have the latter for
              testing. I may then try the Nikkor 10.5 instead.

              3) In a lesser extent but similarly to rectilinear, the dimensions of
              a same object on a stereographic image is much larger (both radially
              and laterally) when it's near the edge than if it is at the center
              (on the contrary to the equi-solid angle projection where the
              compression is very high near the edge). The warping stage
              interpolation leads to a reduction rather than upsizing: the image is
              crisper at the poles as a result and this also balances the very
              slight softness at the edge of the lens coverage. The overall image
              sharpness looks evenly good at the VR viewing stage.

              Regards,

              Michel

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Roger D. Williams
              On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:25:55 +0900, michel thoby ... That s fascinating, Michel. Very desirable from the point of view of stitching VR
              Message 6 of 21 , Aug 4 2:39 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:25:55 +0900, michel thoby <thobymichel@...>
                wrote:

                > 3) In a lesser extent but similarly to rectilinear, the dimensions of
                > a same object on a stereographic image is much larger (both radially
                > and laterally) when it's near the edge than if it is at the center
                > (on the contrary to the equi-solid angle projection where the
                > compression is very high near the edge). The warping stage
                > interpolation leads to a reduction rather than upsizing: the image is
                > crisper at the poles as a result and this also balances the very
                > slight softness at the edge of the lens coverage. The overall image
                > sharpness looks evenly good at the VR viewing stage.

                That's fascinating, Michel. Very desirable from the point of view of
                stitching VR images!

                I was not clear how you judged the flare. Contrast seemed quite good
                if a direct light source was not in the field of view. With my Sigma
                8mm f/3.5 I usually try to avoid having the sun in direct view for
                that very reason... Do you feel that flare is good/acceptable given
                this care?

                Roger W.

                --
                Work: www.adex-japan.com
              • Hans Nyberg
                ... Question is how is the focusplane. The focusplane of all fisheyes is flat meaning that to get it sharp at the edge you have to focus at around 20cm or stop
                Message 7 of 21 , Aug 4 3:00 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, michel thoby <thobymichel@...> wrote:
                  > Le 3 août 09 à 23:12, bigwade a écrit

                  > > The biggest plus is the sharpness at edges.
                  > > The Tokina @12 always gives a blurred star at nadir and this one is
                  > > crisp.
                  > > Crisp enough to clone the nadir without extra shot, and that's a
                  > > plus :-)
                  > >
                  > > grtz
                  > > Frank
                  > Hi Frank,

                  > 2) I might make ASAP a comparison of the Samyang 8 to the Tokina
                  > 10-17 but not to the Sigma 8/3.5 since I do not have the latter for
                  > testing. I may then try the Nikkor 10.5 instead.
                  >
                  > 3) In a lesser extent but similarly to rectilinear, the dimensions of
                  > a same object on a stereographic image is much larger (both radially
                  > and laterally) when it's near the edge than if it is at the center
                  > (on the contrary to the equi-solid angle projection where the
                  > compression is very high near the edge). The warping stage
                  > interpolation leads to a reduction rather than upsizing: the image is
                  > crisper at the poles as a result and this also balances the very
                  > slight softness at the edge of the lens coverage. The overall image
                  > sharpness looks evenly good at the VR viewing stage.

                  Question is how is the focusplane.
                  The focusplane of all fisheyes is flat meaning that to get it sharp at the edge you have to focus at around 20cm or stop down to have a DOF from 10 cm to infinity.
                  http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/fisheye-focus.jpg

                  The Tokina is very sharp at the edge if you just focus for it.
                  This is focused at 0.7m and full aperture http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/Tokina10mm-0.7m-F3,5.jpg
                  The Nikkor is very bad at full stop and it looks like the focusplane actually moves the "wrong way"
                  http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg

                  The ideal for using it at full aperture would be that you had a slightly concave focusplane

                  Hans
                • michel thoby
                  Hi Hans, ... I should then make some test on that topic. Thanks for reminding me of this important factor. Michel [Non-text portions of this message have been
                  Message 8 of 21 , Aug 4 3:12 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Hans,

                    Le 4 août 09 à 12:00, Hans Nyberg a écrit :

                    > Question is how is the focusplane.
                    ....
                    > The ideal for using it at full aperture would be that you had a
                    > slightly concave focusplane
                    >
                    > Hans

                    I should then make some test on that topic. Thanks for reminding me
                    of this important factor.

                    Michel

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Roger D. Williams
                    ... What is the hyperfocal setting for maximum depth of focus from infinity at f/2.8, Hans? Is 0.7m about it? I must say I am a little disturbed at this
                    Message 9 of 21 , Aug 4 3:15 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:00:00 +0900, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:

                      > The Nikkor is very bad at full stop and it looks like the focusplane
                      > actually moves the "wrong way"
                      > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg

                      What is the hyperfocal setting for maximum depth of focus from infinity
                      at f/2.8, Hans? Is 0.7m about it?

                      I must say I am a little disturbed at this effect, although I have very
                      seldom has anything close enough to need to worry about depth of focus.
                      I do like to use the full f/2.8 aperture, though, and your information
                      tells me I need to be careful.

                      Roger W.

                      --
                      Work: www.adex-japan.com
                    • Hans Nyberg
                      ... For the 10,5mm on a Canon 5D it is 1.31 at 2.8. That gives you focus from 0,7m in front of you. In real world focusing precisely at 1.3 m is not possible
                      Message 10 of 21 , Aug 4 3:31 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Roger D. Williams" <roger@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:00:00 +0900, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > > The Nikkor is very bad at full stop and it looks like the focusplane
                        > > actually moves the "wrong way"
                        > > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg
                        >
                        > What is the hyperfocal setting for maximum depth of focus from infinity
                        > at f/2.8, Hans? Is 0.7m about it?
                        >
                        > I must say I am a little disturbed at this effect, although I have very
                        > seldom has anything close enough to need to worry about depth of focus.
                        > I do like to use the full f/2.8 aperture, though, and your information
                        > tells me I need to be careful.

                        For the 10,5mm on a Canon 5D it is 1.31 at 2.8.
                        That gives you focus from 0,7m in front of you.
                        In real world focusing precisely at 1.3 m is not possible as the focus scale does not have anything at all from 0.5 to infinity and you have no autofocus using it on a 5D.

                        Only experimenting and doing tests will give you the correct spot.

                        As you can see it will also give you an unsharp nadir/zenith with a diameter of at least 1.4 m

                        Hans
                      • Hans Nyberg
                        ... UPS I can see that the Nikkor one was one focused at 2m. ttp://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg Thats what you get if you
                        Message 11 of 21 , Aug 4 3:36 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans Nyberg" <hans@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, michel thoby <thobymichel@> wrote:
                          > > Le 3 août 09 à 23:12, bigwade a écrit
                          >
                          > > > The biggest plus is the sharpness at edges.
                          > > > The Tokina @12 always gives a blurred star at nadir and this one is
                          > > > crisp.
                          > > > Crisp enough to clone the nadir without extra shot, and that's a
                          > > > plus :-)
                          > > >
                          > > > grtz
                          > > > Frank
                          > > Hi Frank,
                          >
                          > > 2) I might make ASAP a comparison of the Samyang 8 to the Tokina
                          > > 10-17 but not to the Sigma 8/3.5 since I do not have the latter for
                          > > testing. I may then try the Nikkor 10.5 instead.
                          > >
                          > > 3) In a lesser extent but similarly to rectilinear, the dimensions of
                          > > a same object on a stereographic image is much larger (both radially
                          > > and laterally) when it's near the edge than if it is at the center
                          > > (on the contrary to the equi-solid angle projection where the
                          > > compression is very high near the edge). The warping stage
                          > > interpolation leads to a reduction rather than upsizing: the image is
                          > > crisper at the poles as a result and this also balances the very
                          > > slight softness at the edge of the lens coverage. The overall image
                          > > sharpness looks evenly good at the VR viewing stage.
                          >
                          > Question is how is the focusplane.
                          > The focusplane of all fisheyes is flat meaning that to get it sharp at the edge you have to focus at around 20cm or stop down to have a DOF from 10 cm to infinity.
                          > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/fisheye-focus.jpg
                          >
                          > The Tokina is very sharp at the edge if you just focus for it.
                          > This is focused at 0.7m and full aperture http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/Tokina10mm-0.7m-F3,5.jpg
                          > The Nikkor is very bad at full stop and it looks like the focusplane actually moves the "wrong way"
                          > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg
                          >
                          > The ideal for using it at full aperture would be that you had a slightly concave focusplane


                          UPS

                          I can see that the Nikkor one was one focused at 2m.
                          ttp://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor10.5-f2.8-2m.jpg
                          Thats what you get if you want to have max DOF for infinity.

                          To compare real edge focus when focused close it should have been this 2.8 - 0.4m
                          http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor-0.4m.jpg

                          and the Tokina
                          http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/Tokina10mm-0.7m-F3,5.jpg

                          Hans
                        • Hans Nyberg
                          ... Check the white measuring stick on the Nikkor. You can see that even if that one is straight 90 degree vertical it is sharp at the bottom but very unsharp
                          Message 12 of 21 , Aug 4 3:43 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans Nyberg" <hans@...> wrote:

                            > To compare real edge focus when focused close it should have been this 2.8 - 0.4m
                            > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/nikkor-0.4m.jpg
                            >
                            > and the Tokina
                            > http://www.panoramas.dk/panorama/fisheye-focus/Tokina10mm-0.7m-F3,5.jpg
                            >

                            Check the white measuring stick on the Nikkor.
                            You can see that even if that one is straight 90 degree vertical it is sharp at the bottom but very unsharp at the centre.
                            This means that the focusplain is not flat but actually bowed "the wrong way"

                            Hans
                          • Roger D. Williams
                            ... Thank you. I suppose I may have a slightly easier time because I use cameras with a 1.5x factor... And I can always use the auto focus on something 70cm
                            Message 13 of 21 , Aug 4 8:00 AM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:31:21 +0900, Hans Nyberg <hans@...> wrote:

                              > For the 10,5mm on a Canon 5D it is 1.31 at 2.8.
                              > That gives you focus from 0,7m in front of you.
                              > In real world focusing precisely at 1.3 m is not possible as the focus
                              > scale does not have anything at all from 0.5 to infinity and you have no
                              > autofocus using it on a 5D.
                              >
                              > Only experimenting and doing tests will give you the correct spot.
                              >
                              > As you can see it will also give you an unsharp nadir/zenith with a
                              > diameter of at least 1.4 m

                              Thank you. I suppose I may have a slightly easier time because I use
                              cameras with a 1.5x factor... And I can always use the auto focus
                              on something 70cm away and then switch over to manual focus. (I know
                              that auto focus is not thoroughly reliable in this situation and will
                              definitely do some experimenting and testing.

                              Roger W.


                              --
                              Work: www.adex-japan.com
                            • bigwade
                              Thanks Michel, The R1 mounting looks promissing.. :-) (just what I wanted) No need to change the Sig insert ??? I ordered the lens, but no idea what and
                              Message 14 of 21 , Aug 4 2:46 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Thanks Michel,
                                The R1 mounting looks promissing.. :-) (just what I wanted)
                                No need to change the Sig insert ???

                                I ordered the lens, but no idea what and when I get it.
                                The R1 ring just holds the tiny part of frontlens, is it ?
                                So the bridge you made is needed.

                                Maybe Nick Fan has an other solution.
                                Thanks for sharing.
                                grtz
                                Frank



                                michel thoby wrote:
                                >
                                >
                                > Le 3 août 09 à 23:12, bigwade a écrit :
                                >
                                >> Hi Michel,
                                >> nice report !! Thanks
                                >> Some questions:
                                >> Is it really necessary to shave the the hood that far ??? (can't
                                >> imagine)
                                >> As Wim said, the flare and lensspots are annoying.
                                >> How does it compare to the Tokina and Sig 8/3.5
                                >> Let us know.
                                >>
                                >> The biggest plus is the sharpness at edges.
                                >> The Tokina @12 always gives a blurred star at nadir and this one is
                                >> crisp.
                                >> Crisp enough to clone the nadir without extra shot, and that's a
                                >> plus :-)
                                >>
                                >> grtz
                                >> Frank
                                > Hi Frank,
                                >
                                > 1) There were two main independent reasons to shave the Samyang hood
                                > "down to its root".
                                > The first one has been obvious to me right from the beginning: In
                                > contrast to the Tokina for instance, I had discovered that the hood
                                > wasn't an integral part of the lend body. It is thick black plastic
                                > moulded and it surrounds the front of the lens. Additionally and to
                                > my amazement, the diameter of the front of the metallic lens barrel
                                > was measured to be 70.8 mm: this is coincidentally just fine to fit
                                > inside the NN R1/R10 ring (for Sigma) but the hood had then to be
                                > totally out of the way! After a small adaptation done on the ring
                                > (i.e. insertion of a lens support in aluminum), here is an
                                > illustration of the project:
                                > http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Samyang+NN-R1.jpg
                                > The second reason is a posteriori: designing a lens cap adaptation to
                                > fit conveniently around the tip of the Samyang lens would have been a
                                > real challenge for me if the hood was only partially shaved as the
                                > first optical element surface is unusually highly convex and
                                > protrudes by about 15 mm.
                                >
                                > 2) I might make ASAP a comparison of the Samyang 8 to the Tokina
                                > 10-17 but not to the Sigma 8/3.5 since I do not have the latter for
                                > testing. I may then try the Nikkor 10.5 instead.
                                >
                                > 3) In a lesser extent but similarly to rectilinear, the dimensions of
                                > a same object on a stereographic image is much larger (both radially
                                > and laterally) when it's near the edge than if it is at the center
                                > (on the contrary to the equi-solid angle projection where the
                                > compression is very high near the edge). The warping stage
                                > interpolation leads to a reduction rather than upsizing: the image is
                                > crisper at the poles as a result and this also balances the very
                                > slight softness at the edge of the lens coverage. The overall image
                                > sharpness looks evenly good at the VR viewing stage.
                                >
                                > Regards,
                                >
                                > Michel
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                                >
                                >

                                --
                                View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Samyang-8-mm-fisheye-review-tp24770525p24816889.html
                                Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                              • juanpeque
                                very good review Michel! The minimum nº of photos to cover 360º for equirectangular pano (vertical camera position)with 1.6x canon crop sensor and nikon 1.5x
                                Message 15 of 21 , Sep 11, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  very good review Michel!
                                  The minimum nº of photos to cover 360º for equirectangular pano (vertical camera position)with 1.6x canon crop sensor and nikon 1.5x crop sensor are (4 + zenith + nadir) or more?
                                  Thanks
                                • michel thoby
                                  ... The horizontal angle of view in portrait mode on a Canon EOS 20D (r= 1.6) is just a bit less than 100°. Thus (4 + Z + N) are enough for a complete 180 x
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Sep 11, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Le 11 sept. 09 à 17:43, juanpeque a écrit :

                                    > very good review Michel!
                                    > The minimum nº of photos to cover 360º for equirectangular pano
                                    > (vertical camera position)with 1.6x canon crop sensor and nikon
                                    > 1.5x crop sensor are (4 + zenith + nadir) or more?
                                    > Thanks


                                    The horizontal angle of view in portrait mode on a Canon EOS 20D (r=
                                    1.6) is just a bit less than 100°. Thus (4 + Z + N) are enough for a
                                    complete 180 x 360°.

                                    regards,

                                    Michel Thoby

                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • bigwade
                                    cross post from panoguide Inspired by Michel Thoby s NN-R1 lensring modification: http://tinyurl.com/ntcg8n I asked Tobias Vollmer
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Sep 17, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      cross post from panoguide



                                      Inspired by Michel Thoby's NN-R1 lensring modification:
                                      http://tinyurl.com/ntcg8n

                                      I asked Tobias Vollmer (http://www.360pano.de/en/tokina-sigma-nikon.html) if
                                      he could shave my Samyang lens and make a similar solution.

                                      I also asked for a new lenscap (with a modest signature)
                                      He did ! 2!
                                      With the second lensring it's even more save.
                                      Mounting is very easy and precise
                                      http://tinyurl.com/l9gxna
                                      grtz
                                      Frank
                                      --
                                      View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Samyang-8-mm-fisheye-review-tp24770525p25492255.html
                                      Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.