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

There's been discussion here about the ideal simple camera...

Expand Messages
  • Ken Warner
    ...would this be a candidate? http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
    Message 1 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      ...would this be a candidate?

      http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
    • panovrx
      ... Nice camera but even though there will be different adapters for it there is no full circle fisheye suitable for it that I know of. Even the longest of the
      Message 2 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
        >
        > ...would this be a candidate?
        >
        > http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
        >
        Nice camera but even though there will be different adapters for it there is no full circle fisheye suitable for it that I know of. Even the longest of the Fujinon Cmount series are too short for it
        http://www.fujinon.co.jp/en/products/cctv/fish.htm
        and the Sunex, Sigma and Coastal SLR fisheyes are too long

        Particularly nice for video though I read somewhere
        Peter M
      • Roger D. Williams
        On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:16:21 +0900, Ken Warner ... The Japanese camera magazines are very positive about the Olympus micro 4/3
        Message 3 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 09:16:21 +0900, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>
          wrote:

          > ...would this be a candidate?
          >
          > http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/

          The Japanese camera magazines are very positive about the Olympus micro 4/3
          (neo-Pen) cameras, and will doubtless be the same over Panasonic's model,
          the subject of your link. They are astonished at the good S/N ratio (me,
          too) and appreciate the in-camera anti-shake mechanism. I can use that as
          my hands are no longer as steady as they were when I was a young man in my
          sixties.

          The micro 4/3 adaptors cost as much as a lens. I will become interested
          when
          there is a good, reasonably priced fisheye (either circular or rectangular)
          for this format.

          I used and loved my Pen F, upgraded to the Pen FT (keeping the F for B&W
          and using the FT for transparencies), and bitterly regretted parting with
          them when I did so over 15 years later. That's the longest I've ever used
          the same camera.

          Roger W.


          --
          Work: www.adex-japan.com
        • Ken Warner
          Yeah, I was wondering about the lens problem. Probably by the time I can afford one, there will be one or more lenses for it. There is a Zuiko
          Message 4 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Yeah, I was wondering about the lens problem. Probably
            by the time I can afford one, there will be one or more
            lenses for it.

            There is a Zuiko

            panovrx wrote:
            > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
            >
            >>...would this be a candidate?
            >>
            >>http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
            >>
            >
            > Nice camera but even though there will be different adapters for it there is no full circle fisheye suitable for it that I know of. Even the longest of the Fujinon Cmount series are too short for it
            > http://www.fujinon.co.jp/en/products/cctv/fish.htm
            > and the Sunex, Sigma and Coastal SLR fisheyes are too long
            >
            > Particularly nice for video though I read somewhere
            > Peter M
            >
            >
          • Ken Warner
            fisheye... :-)
            Message 5 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              fisheye... :-)

              Ken Warner wrote:
              > Yeah, I was wondering about the lens problem. Probably
              > by the time I can afford one, there will be one or more
              > lenses for it.
              >
              > There is a Zuiko
              >
              > panovrx wrote:
              >
              >>--- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >>>...would this be a candidate?
              >>>
              >>>http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
              >>>
              >>
              >>Nice camera but even though there will be different adapters for it there is no full circle fisheye suitable for it that I know of. Even the longest of the Fujinon Cmount series are too short for it
              >>http://www.fujinon.co.jp/en/products/cctv/fish.htm
              >> and the Sunex, Sigma and Coastal SLR fisheyes are too long
              >>
              >>Particularly nice for video though I read somewhere
              >>Peter M
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
            • Bjørn K Nilssen
              ... Why would you want a full circular fisheye for it for shooting panoramas? I always zoom in so that the circle is cropped on the long sides, for 4 around.
              Message 6 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                On 7 Aug 2009 at 0:20, panovrx wrote:

                > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > ...would this be a candidate?
                > >
                > > http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
                > >
                > Nice camera but even though there will be different adapters for it there is no full circle fisheye suitable for it that I know of. Even the longest of the Fujinon Cmount series are too short for it
                > http://www.fujinon.co.jp/en/products/cctv/fish.htm
                > and the Sunex, Sigma and Coastal SLR fisheyes are too long

                Why would you want a full circular fisheye for it for shooting panoramas?
                I always zoom in so that the circle is cropped on the long sides, for 4 around. And
                zooming in even further to get more pixels with nadir/zenith shots.
                The new m-4/3 system is the first one that actually makes it tempting to change from my
                trusty old Olympus C7070/Raynox fisheye ;)
                Wouldn't the Sunex or Sigma 4.5mm both give a cropped circle on the 4/3 sensor, if they
                give a full circle on 1.5/1.6 crop cameras? IMHO they would be better suited for panorama
                work on a 4/3 sensor?

                It's great to see that they finally scrapped the mirror/prism :)

                --
                Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
              • AYRTON
                2009/8/6 Bjørn K Nilssen ... yeah Bjørn, that s what I do think too. ... same here :-) best AYRTON ... -- ... + 55 21 9982 6313
                Message 7 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  2009/8/6 Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>

                  >
                  > Why would you want a full circular fisheye for it for shooting panoramas?


                  yeah Bjørn, that's what I do think too.


                  > I always zoom in so that the circle is cropped on the long sides, for 4
                  > around. And
                  > zooming in even further to get more pixels with nadir/zenith shots.


                  same here :-)

                  best
                  AYRTON


                  >
                  >
                  > --
                  > Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------------------
                  >
                  > --
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  --
                  ------------
                  | A Y R |
                  | T O N |
                  ------------
                  + 55 21 9982 6313
                  http://ayrton360.com
                  follow me :
                  http://twitter.com/ayrton360


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • panovrx
                  ... Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have full
                  Message 8 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, AYRTON <avi@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > 2009/8/6 Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                    >
                    > >
                    > > Why would you want a full circular fisheye for it for shooting panoramas?
                    >
                    >
                    > yeah Bjørn, that's what I do think too.
                    >
                    >
                    > > I always zoom in so that the circle is cropped on the long sides, for 4
                    > > around. And
                    > > zooming in even further to get more pixels with nadir/zenith shots.
                    >
                    >
                    > same here :-)
                    >
                    > best
                    > AYRTON
                    >
                    >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --
                    > > Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ------------------------------------
                    > >
                    > > --
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    >
                    > --
                    > ------------
                    > | A Y R |
                    > | T O N |
                    > ------------
                    > + 55 21 9982 6313
                    > http://ayrton360.com
                    > follow me :
                    > http://twitter.com/ayrton360
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have full frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there is even a 180 degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses. The problem is not not being able to zoom in enough but not being able to zoom out if you are talking zoom fisheye.
                    Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm adapter -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think this last with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont know if there are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.

                    Peter M

                    Peter M
                  • Rodolpho Pajuaba
                    Summing up things: 4,5mm on cropped DSLR=8mm on FF DSLR= [o] = full circle, 180dgs all around 8mm on cropped DSLR=10mm on FF DSLR=[( )] = cropped circle,
                    Message 9 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Summing up things:
                      4,5mm on cropped DSLR=8mm on FF DSLR= [o] = full circle, 180dgs all around
                      8mm on cropped DSLR=10mm on FF DSLR=[( )] = cropped circle, 180dgs on
                      vertical
                      10mm on cropped DSLR=15mm on FF DSLR=([ ]) = rectangle, 180mm diagonal
                      I don't know how things go in the 4/3 world.
                      Regards,
                      Rodolpho Pajuaba

                      2009/8/7 panovrx <panovrx@...>

                      > Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that
                      > has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have full
                      > frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there is even a 180
                      > degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses. The problem is not
                      > not being able to zoom in enough but not being able to zoom out if you are
                      > talking zoom fisheye.
                      > Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm adapter
                      > -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think this last
                      > with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont know if there
                      > are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.
                      >
                      > Peter M
                      >
                      > Peter M
                      >
                      >
                      >


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • AYRTON
                      ... PERFECT !!! regards AYRTON ... -- ... + 55 21 9982 6313 http://ayrton360.com follow me : http://twitter.com/ayrton360 [Non-text portions of this message
                      Message 10 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Rodolpho Pajuaba <rpajuaba@...>wrote:

                        > Summing up things:
                        > 4,5mm on cropped DSLR=8mm on FF DSLR= [o] = full circle, 180dgs all around
                        > 8mm on cropped DSLR=10mm on FF DSLR=[( )] = cropped circle, 180dgs on
                        > vertical
                        > 10mm on cropped DSLR=15mm on FF DSLR=([ ]) = rectangle, 180mm diagonal
                        > I don't know how things go in the 4/3 world.
                        > Regards,
                        > Rodolpho Pajuaba



                        PERFECT !!!


                        regards
                        AYRTON



                        >
                        >
                        > 2009/8/7 panovrx <panovrx@...>
                        >
                        > > Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that
                        > > has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have
                        > full
                        > > frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there is even a 180
                        > > degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses. The problem is
                        > not
                        > > not being able to zoom in enough but not being able to zoom out if you
                        > are
                        > > talking zoom fisheye.
                        > > Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm adapter
                        > > -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think this last
                        > > with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont know if there
                        > > are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.
                        > >
                        > > Peter M
                        > >
                        > > Peter M
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ------------------------------------
                        >
                        > --
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >


                        --
                        ------------
                        | A Y R |
                        | T O N |
                        ------------
                        + 55 21 9982 6313
                        http://ayrton360.com
                        follow me :
                        http://twitter.com/ayrton360


                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • panovrx
                        ... No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF. I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                        Message 11 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have full frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there is even a 180 degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses. The problem is not not being able to zoom in enough but not being able to zoom out if you are talking zoom fisheye.
                          > Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm adapter -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think this last with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont know if there are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.
                          >
                          > Peter M
                          No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF.
                          I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
                          In fact, if I read it right, it is the same, except with a shallower lens to sensor distance

                          Peterm
                        • Ken Warner
                          That s pretty much the way I do my own little panos with my current El Cheapo gear. It s a nice pattern to shoot. Two around are really hard to stitch right
                          Message 12 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            That's pretty much the way I do my own little panos with my current
                            El Cheapo gear. It's a nice pattern to shoot.

                            Two around are really hard to stitch right unless you have really
                            high end stuff and a more static scene. Outdoors two around is
                            really hard to pull off -- IMHO

                            Bjørn K Nilssen wrote:

                            > Why would you want a full circular fisheye for it for shooting panoramas?
                            > I always zoom in so that the circle is cropped on the long sides, for 4 around. And
                            > zooming in even further to get more pixels with nadir/zenith shots.
                            >
                            > It's great to see that they finally scrapped the mirror/prism :)
                            >
                          • Ken Warner
                            And the adapters add the distance so that the lens to sensor distance become the same as a mirror box. So you can use non-M43 lenses on an M43 camera -- or so
                            Message 13 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              And the adapters add the distance so that the lens to sensor distance
                              become the same as a mirror box. So you can use non-M43 lenses on
                              an M43 camera -- or so I read.

                              The M43 camera will become more popular and there will be more lenses
                              built for them. Hear my predictions.... :-0 as if I know what I'm
                              talking about.

                              panovrx wrote:
                              >>Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one that has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses have full frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there is even a 180 degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses. The problem is not not being able to zoom in enough but not being able to zoom out if you are talking zoom fisheye.
                              >>Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm adapter -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think this last with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont know if there are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.
                              >>
                              >>Peter M
                              >
                              > No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF.
                              > I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                              > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
                              > In fact, if I read it right, it is the same, except with a shallower lens to sensor distance
                              >
                              > Peterm
                              >
                              >
                            • Roger D. Williams
                              ... The 4.5mm Sigma is a very expensive item in Japan. And the micro 4/3 adaptors currently on offer are for Leica lenses. But since this format has a 2x FL
                              Message 14 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 12:40:33 +0900, panovrx <panovrx@...> wrote:

                                >
                                >> Yes you dont want a full circle lens necessarily but you do want one
                                >> that has 180 degrees vertical coverage. All regular dslr fisheye lenses
                                >> have full frame coverage on this format I think -- I dont think there
                                >> is even a 180 degree diagonal coverage option with regular dslr lenses.
                                >> The problem is not not being able to zoom in enough but not being able
                                >> to zoom out if you are talking zoom fisheye.
                                >> Though fisheye adapters would work -- or a Brevis or similar 35mm
                                >> adapter -- or a mini fisheye lens with a compact 2X convertor. I think
                                >> this last with a Fujinon would be best quality and compact but I dont
                                >> know if there are Cmount 2X convertors -- I guess there are.
                                >>
                                >> Peter M

                                > No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF.
                                > I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                                > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
                                > In fact, if I read it right, it is the same, except with a shallower
                                > lens to sensor distance

                                The 4.5mm Sigma is a very expensive item in Japan. And the micro 4/3
                                adaptors currently on offer are for Leica lenses. But since this
                                format has a 2x FL multiplier that makes it the equivalent of a 9mm
                                circular fisheye. So if the adaptor problem could be solved, this
                                would be a good choice.

                                I know I would miss the "real" (= optical) viewfinder, but come to think
                                of it I never even glance through the viewfinder these days. just choose
                                the point to take the panorama from. So I probably wouldn't miss it
                                for long. And it makes for mechanical simplicity and so hopefully a more
                                robust and reliable camera.

                                Roger W.

                                --
                                Work: www.adex-japan.com
                              • Andrey Ilyin
                                ... Wow! Thank you for great news! I ve got Panasonic Lumix LX3 and can say that it is a camera that makes you want to carry it with your self all the time -
                                Message 15 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > ...would this be a candidate?
                                  >
                                  > http://www.4-3system.com/modules/news/
                                  >

                                  Wow! Thank you for great news!

                                  I've got Panasonic Lumix LX3 and can say that it is a camera that makes you want to carry it with your self all the time - unlike bulky and heavy D300 (am I getting old and lazy?).
                                  GF-1 looks very attractive. It would be great to have lightweight compact camera for shooting panos inside limited spaces (like cars) or pole panos. (BIG) IF - if there will appear proper fisheye for this camera.

                                  The only conscern - the price of accesories (and lack of them). Panasonic is famous for charging crazy $$ even for simples ones - like $200 for a primitive external viewfinder.

                                  Andrey
                                • Roger D. Williams
                                  On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:32:08 +0900, Ken Warner ... Then Peterm chipped in... ... I ve just checked Sigma in Japan. No catering for 4/3
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:32:08 +0900, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>
                                    wrote:

                                    > And the adapters add the distance so that the lens to sensor distance
                                    > become the same as a mirror box. So you can use non-M43 lenses on
                                    > an M43 camera -- or so I read.
                                    >
                                    > The M43 camera will become more popular and there will be more lenses
                                    > built for them. Hear my predictions.... :-0 as if I know what I'm
                                    > talking about.
                                    >

                                    Then Peterm chipped in...

                                    >> No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF.
                                    >> I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                                    >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
                                    >> In fact, if I read it right, it is the same, except with a shallower
                                    >> lens to sensor distance

                                    I've just checked Sigma in Japan. No catering for 4/3 or Micro 4/3 bodies,
                                    no intention to do so. Limited support for Pentax.

                                    The 4.5mm circular fisheye is f/2.8, has a 12.3mm image circle, and
                                    costs WELL OVER USD1,000!

                                    Ouch!

                                    Roger W.

                                    Oh yes, I found a supplier of Micro 4/3 adaptors. Novoflex currently
                                    offers Olympus OM, Leica R, Minolta MD, Yashica/Contax, and M42. Hmmm.
                                    I have a whole collection of excellent M42 lenses...

                                    --
                                    Work: www.adex-japan.com
                                  • Roger D. Williams
                                    On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:32:08 +0900, Ken Warner ... I ve now confirmed that there are two types of Nikon adaptor for Micro 4/3 bodies
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Aug 6, 2009
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:32:08 +0900, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>
                                      wrote:

                                      > And the adapters add the distance so that the lens to sensor distance
                                      > become the same as a mirror box. So you can use non-M43 lenses on
                                      > an M43 camera -- or so I read.

                                      I've now confirmed that there are two types of Nikon adaptor for Micro 4/3
                                      bodies so that they can take Nikon lenses. One copes with G-series lenses
                                      and the other with Nikon F lenses.

                                      The G-series adaptor allows the aperture setting to be changed but does
                                      not support auto functions. No details about the Nikon F adaptors.

                                      The M42 adaptors support lenses with AND without the button for manual/auto
                                      selection.

                                      Roger W.

                                      --
                                      Work: www.adex-japan.com
                                    • Bjørn K Nilssen
                                      ... Here in Norway the Sigma 4.5mm costs about the same as the Olympus 8mm fisheye, which is around $1100. The Sigma 8mm costs a lot more here - about $1400..
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Aug 7, 2009
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On 7 Aug 2009 at 15:35, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                                        > On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:32:08 +0900, Ken Warner <kwarner000@...>
                                        > wrote:
                                        >
                                        > > And the adapters add the distance so that the lens to sensor distance
                                        > > become the same as a mirror box. So you can use non-M43 lenses on
                                        > > an M43 camera -- or so I read.
                                        > >
                                        > > The M43 camera will become more popular and there will be more lenses
                                        > > built for them. Hear my predictions.... :-0 as if I know what I'm
                                        > > talking about.
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        > Then Peterm chipped in...
                                        >
                                        > >> No I was wrong -- a 4.5mm Sigma would be fine == like a 10.5mm on FF.
                                        > >> I had a notion that Micro 4/3 was smaller formatwise than 4/3
                                        > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
                                        > >> In fact, if I read it right, it is the same, except with a shallower
                                        > >> lens to sensor distance
                                        >
                                        > I've just checked Sigma in Japan. No catering for 4/3 or Micro 4/3 bodies,
                                        > no intention to do so. Limited support for Pentax.
                                        >
                                        > The 4.5mm circular fisheye is f/2.8, has a 12.3mm image circle, and
                                        > costs WELL OVER USD1,000!
                                        >
                                        > Ouch!

                                        Here in Norway the Sigma 4.5mm costs about the same as the Olympus 8mm fisheye, which is
                                        around $1100. The Sigma 8mm costs a lot more here - about $1400..
                                        Still a lot cheaper than the Zuiko 7-14mm, which costs $2000+ here, but works fine for
                                        6x2row panos (not bad for a rectilinear lens!)..
                                        But you're probably spoilt over there, pricewise ;-)
                                        Adapters should be readily available already from Nikon to micro 4/3 too, although they
                                        seems to cost a lot more than from Nikon to 4/3. Around $80 on eBay at the moment.
                                        Another advantage of the 4/3 sensor is that it is closer to a square with its 4:3 ratio
                                        instead of 3:2, which means less pixels lost.

                                        --
                                        Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                                      • Bjørn K Nilssen
                                        ... If it has a 12.3mm image circle I guess it should be full circular also on the 4/3s 18x13.5mm sensor? Guess a Sunex would be a better choice then, with its
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Aug 7, 2009
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          On 7 Aug 2009 at 15:35, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                                          >
                                          > The 4.5mm circular fisheye is f/2.8, has a 12.3mm image circle, and
                                          > costs WELL OVER USD1,000!

                                          If it has a 12.3mm image circle I guess it should be full circular also on the 4/3s
                                          18x13.5mm sensor?
                                          Guess a Sunex would be a better choice then, with its 14.5mm image circle - unless you
                                          really want a full-circle fisheye for 2-shot panos?
                                          The Sunex is cheaper too :)

                                          --
                                          Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                                        • Ken Warner
                                          Me too -- I only look at the LCD to set the camera up. I do a lot of head swivel to look all around the sphere and then I pick the right place to start --
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Aug 7, 2009
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Me too -- I only look at the LCD to set the camera up. I do
                                            a lot of head swivel to look all around the sphere and then
                                            I pick the "right" place to start -- depending on the Sun; clouds;
                                            trees etc. Then let the pano head go to work...

                                            Roger D. Williams wrote:

                                            >
                                            > I know I would miss the "real" (= optical) viewfinder, but come to think
                                            > of it I never even glance through the viewfinder these days. just choose
                                            > the point to take the panorama from. So I probably wouldn't miss it
                                            > for long. And it makes for mechanical simplicity and so hopefully a more
                                            > robust and reliable camera.
                                            >
                                            > Roger W.
                                            >
                                          • Roger D. Williams
                                            On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:37:03 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen ... Yes, just about a full circle. But two-shot panos are of no interest to me, so yes,
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Aug 7, 2009
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:37:03 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                                              wrote:

                                              > On 7 Aug 2009 at 15:35, Roger D. Williams wrote:
                                              >
                                              >>
                                              >> The 4.5mm circular fisheye is f/2.8, has a 12.3mm image circle, and
                                              >> costs WELL OVER USD1,000!
                                              >
                                              > If it has a 12.3mm image circle I guess it should be full circular also
                                              > on the 4/3s
                                              > 18x13.5mm sensor?
                                              > Guess a Sunex would be a better choice then, with its 14.5mm image
                                              > circle - unless you
                                              > really want a full-circle fisheye for 2-shot panos?
                                              > The Sunex is cheaper too :)

                                              Yes, just about a full circle. But two-shot panos are of no interest
                                              to me, so yes, I like the look of the Sunex! If I could accurately
                                              position shots 120 degrees apart, three-shot panos wouold interest
                                              me, but currently I find it easier to shoot four-shot.

                                              A Sunex (given the right adaptor) would make a really light and compact
                                              panorama setup.

                                              Roger W.



                                              --
                                              Work: www.adex-japan.com
                                            • Roger D. Williams
                                              On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:06:40 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen ... Following another suggestion it looks as if the Sunex might be a good option for
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Aug 7, 2009
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:06:40 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                                                wrote:

                                                > Here in Norway the Sigma 4.5mm costs about the same as the Olympus 8mm
                                                > fisheye, which is
                                                > around $1100. The Sigma 8mm costs a lot more here - about $1400..
                                                > Still a lot cheaper than the Zuiko 7-14mm, which costs $2000+ here, but
                                                > works fine for
                                                > 6x2row panos (not bad for a rectilinear lens!)..
                                                > But you're probably spoilt over there, pricewise
                                                > Adapters should be readily available already from Nikon to micro 4/3
                                                > too, although they
                                                > seems to cost a lot more than from Nikon to 4/3. Around $80 on eBay at
                                                > the moment.
                                                > Another advantage of the 4/3 sensor is that it is closer to a square
                                                > with its 4:3 ratio
                                                > instead of 3:2, which means less pixels lost.

                                                Following another suggestion it looks as if the Sunex might be a good
                                                option for this camera body.

                                                But I will keep my eyes open for a S/H fisheye. People buy them and then
                                                find how difficult they are to use effectively once the initial delight
                                                with the more gimmicky effects wears off, so they tend to come onto the
                                                S/H market quite soon. <grin>

                                                You are right about Nikon adaptors, as I have mentioned in another post.
                                                However, they are even more expensive here than the ones you have found
                                                on eBay. Over USD220 before discounts, going price probably USD180.

                                                Roger W.


                                                --
                                                Work: www.adex-japan.com
                                              • Bjørn K Nilssen
                                                ... What worries me a bit is if the lack of a focus setting might cause problems when used with an adapter on a non-Nikon body, like the m4/3s? Will it still
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Aug 8, 2009
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  On 8 Aug 2009 at 10:14, Roger D. Williams wrote:

                                                  > On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 19:37:03 +0900, Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@...>
                                                  > wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > > On 7 Aug 2009 at 15:35, Roger D. Williams wrote:
                                                  > >
                                                  > >>
                                                  > >> The 4.5mm circular fisheye is f/2.8, has a 12.3mm image circle, and
                                                  > >> costs WELL OVER USD1,000!
                                                  > >
                                                  > > If it has a 12.3mm image circle I guess it should be full circular also
                                                  > > on the 4/3s
                                                  > > 18x13.5mm sensor?
                                                  > > Guess a Sunex would be a better choice then, with its 14.5mm image
                                                  > > circle - unless you
                                                  > > really want a full-circle fisheye for 2-shot panos?
                                                  > > The Sunex is cheaper too :)
                                                  >
                                                  > Yes, just about a full circle. But two-shot panos are of no interest
                                                  > to me, so yes, I like the look of the Sunex! If I could accurately
                                                  > position shots 120 degrees apart, three-shot panos wouold interest
                                                  > me, but currently I find it easier to shoot four-shot.
                                                  >
                                                  > A Sunex (given the right adaptor) would make a really light and compact
                                                  > panorama setup.

                                                  What worries me a bit is if the lack of a focus setting might cause problems when used
                                                  with an adapter on a non-Nikon body, like the m4/3s?
                                                  Will it still be in focus?
                                                  The FAQ mentions focus adjustment, but only refers to section 5 in the lens manual, which
                                                  unfortunately doesn't seem to be available for download. Neither do they have any email
                                                  for questions/support :-(

                                                  --
                                                  Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.