- Can anyone make available a set of original images shot with Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 and Panasonic Lumix G 8mm/F3.5 Or alternative? Jan ... [Non-text portionsMessage 1 of 43 , Jun 2, 2011View SourceCan anyone make available a set of original images shot with
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 and
Panasonic Lumix G 8mm/F3.5
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Roger D Williams <roger@...>wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2011, at 2:41 PM, web@... wrote:
> > I've been using a D300 and D700 for my panoramas, but am looking for
> something smaller and lighter for 360s, preferably with raw file storage and
> video, for remote trips where weight (and saving my back) are a priority.
> Something like a high-end point and shoot with a fisheye adapter is what I'm
> thinking of. I've only done a quick search thus far and came across the
> Lumix fisheye and the GF2 body is the sort of size I'm looking for, but I
> know nothing about them or how well 360s turn out with it. Any suggestions
> or links to prior discussions would be appreciated; feel free to contact me
> directly as well.
> I can only repeat my satisfaction with the Pentax K-x, which may not be
> quite as small and light as the Lumix you are considering, but works very
> well for me even with the FSU Peleng 8mm fisheye lens and would probably do
> even better with the modern Samyang. Four around on a monopod works well,
> and the low noise levels make it easy to expose for unsaturated highlights
> and bring out shadow detail, so much so that I seldom feel the need to use
> HDR techniques (except for indoor shots with day-lit windows). This is a
> low-cost option but it gives me results virtually indistinguishable from
> those I get with Nikon D300 and Fujifilm S5 Pro. These days the latter get
> left at home while the Pentax goes almost everywhere with me.
> Hope this helps...
> Roger W.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- The problem with adapters is that they need to match the optics of the host camera or there will be various kinds of distortions from vignetting to severeMessage 43 of 43 , Jul 22, 2011View SourceThe problem with adapters is that they need to match the optics
of the host camera or there will be various kinds of distortions
from vignetting to severe chromatic aberration to soft corners.
If you are going for a compact plus wide or fisheye adapter,
you will get the best results with adapters purpose built
for that particular camera. The early Nikons like the 5400
and 8400 worked well (for their day) with the Nikon fisheye adapters.
So if you are getting a P7000, go to the Nikon web site
and be sure it is compatible with the fisheye or wide
angle adapter you use.
Just selecting adapters because they are available is not
necessarily going to give you good results.
> Does any one have experience with Nikon P7000 and FC-E9 fisheye adapter? Apparently they can be attached together using a UR-E22 tube with 46-52mm adapter ring. This is kind of the size I was looking for -- a compact camera with full manual controls and raw files that I can keep in a pant pocket, then pull out an adapter from a backpack when needed for sphericals. I found an example of this on Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/raneko/5157116441/
> I'm not familiar with these sorts of attachments, but if I understand correctly the image circle is smaller than the sensor? This seems to waste a lot of pixels; it does also look like a big, fragile thing and I saw some comments about the intermediate adapters not quite fitting right. The only other wide angle attachment I could find for the P7000 was the WC-E75A, but it doesnt seem quite wide enough to be really useful for sphericals. Is there something in between these two of high quality?