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

Re: [PanoToolsNG] D800 with 10.5mm

Expand Messages
  • Steve Morton
    ... I own both a 5d mkII (and 7D) and a Nikon D3s. My D3s is only 12 mp but I would pick it EVERY time over the 5D mk2 in low light imaging I have my D800E on
    Message 1 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Hans wrote:
      > 21 mp up to 36 is in reality not much.

      I own both a 5d mkII (and 7D) and a Nikon D3s. My D3s is only 12 mp but
      I would pick it EVERY time over the 5D mk2 in low light imaging

      I have my D800E on order and I'm REALLY looking forward to getting it
      and then retire the 5D mkII

      All the best
      Steve
    • Hans
      ... Sorry this was wrong. The correct is 11360x5680 pixels. It may be some variation depending on your optimizing but it is far from the 13200 Luca claims.
      Message 2 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@...> wrote:

        > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, luca vascon <luca.vascon@> wrote:
        > >
        > > On saturday I could test the camera for around 20minutes.
        > > WOW!
        > > 36 megapixels, and all of them are there!!!
        > > :-)
        > > I tested it with my shaved 10.5mm, results were amazing, I was oddly off of
        > > npp, I think. I had to retouch the whole thing a lot.
        > > Does PTGUI take in account 10.5 odd projection issues!?
        > > But, well... 13200x6600 pixel in THREE shots means something uh?!
        > > At 800 iso it keeps a very good shape, dynamic and just a subtle noise that
        > > we could call grain, and that can be changed for "detail".
        > > AMAZING camera. LV controls are now on the back, continuous shootings etc
        > > are on the top left dial and not blinded any more, there is a top button
        > > dedicated to bracketing, even if bkt interval is still limited to 1stop
        > > steps.Camera is smaller and 100g less than D700, and you can feel it.
        > > Control dials and buttons feel even more tough than usual.
        > > Part of the foolish price is due to the clean hdmi out... that categorize
        > > it under broadcast professional video equipment, and looks like they have
        > > to pay taxes for it.
        > >
        > > images here asap!!!
        >
        > Sorry but this is not correct.
        >
        > The max panorama size for shaved Nikkor 10.5 with 3 4912x7306 pixels images from D800 is 10236x5118

        Sorry this was wrong.
        The correct is 11360x5680 pixels.

        It may be some variation depending on your optimizing but it is far from the 13200 Luca claims.

        Hans


        >
        > Not much larger than from my old 5D which gives me 6728x3364
        > And my 5D mark II gives me 8640x4320.
        >
        > I doubt very much that the extra resolution of 10236 kontra 8640 is worth upgrading.
        >
        > 21 mp up to 36 is in reality not much.
        >
        > Hans
        >
        >
        >
        > >
        > > --
        > > Luca Vascon.
        > >
        > > www.nuovostudio.it
        > > www.officinepanottiche.com
        > >
        >
      • Michel Thoby
        ... With the adapted and shaved Nikkor 10.5 mm and without extraneous extrapolation, the maximum natural resolution of the panorama currently outputted with
        Message 3 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
        • 0 Attachment

          Le 4 avr. 2012 à 11:38, Hans a écrit :

          --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, luca vascon <luca.vascon@...> wrote:
          >
          ....
          > But, well... 13200x6600 pixel in THREE shots means something uh?!
          > At 800 iso it keeps a very good shape, dynamic and just a subtle noise that
          > we could call grain, and that can be changed for "detail".
          >.......
          >


          Sorry but this is not correct.

          The max panorama size for shaved Nikkor 10.5 with 3 4912x7306 pixels images from D800 is 10236x5118

          Not much larger than from my old 5D which gives me 6728x3364
          And my 5D mark II gives me 8640x4320.

          I doubt very much that the extra resolution of 10236 kontra 8640 is worth upgrading.

          21 mp up to 36 is in reality not much.

          Hans

          With the adapted and shaved Nikkor 10.5 mm and without extraneous extrapolation, the maximum "natural" resolution of the panorama currently outputted with images from any current Canon FF CMOS (e.g., EOS 5D Mk II) sensor is less than 9000 x 4500 pixels when using PTGui. 
          Strangely, AutoPanoPro from Kolor will suggest (by default) about 10100 x 5050 pixels under the same conditions and IMO this is exaggerated.
          When applying a multiplication factor of 1.30 (i.e. SQR 36/21.2) this yields <11700 x 5850 pixels (PTGui) and <13200 x 3600 pixels (APP) respectively when a D800 is involved to replace the EOS 5D Mk II.

          For the sake of comparison, if one uses the EOS 5D mark II fitted with a EF 8-15 mm @~14 mm with the sensor diagonal set on the vertical and shooting one single row of FOUR images, then PTGui outputs ~13300 x 6500 pixels panorama (that's what I get with this combo).

          BTW: AFAIK There is currently no similar alternative to the Canon's 8-15 mm @14 mm zoom lens allowing to optimally shoot "diagonally" a complete one-row panorama e.g. with a Nikon FX DSLR. The Tokina (Pentax designed) 10-17 mm @14 mm is much too soft near the corner of the image to be reliably used in such a "diagonal shooting mode" at 14 mm.
          I just do not understand why Nikon has not yet introduced such a fisheye zoom after having applied for a patent in 2004 (US 2004/0156119) and were granted with the patent in 2006 (US 6,987,623). This was five or six years before Canon first applied for such a similar patent (US 2011/10164324 then US 2012/0013996). Canon are AFAIK still waiting for the US patent to be granted but they anyhow introduced the corresponding fisheye zoom in August 2010 and finally world-wide started to deliver nine months ago!

          Michel
        • Hans
          ... But of course this is just about what resolution PTGui suggests you as maximum. In reality calculating a final resolution for a panorama especially from
          Message 4 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@...> wrote:

            > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, "Hans" <hans@> wrote:
            >
            > > --- In PanoToolsNG@yahoogroups.com, luca vascon <luca.vascon@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > On saturday I could test the camera for around 20minutes.
            > > > WOW!
            > > > 36 megapixels, and all of them are there!!!
            > > > :-)
            > > > I tested it with my shaved 10.5mm, results were amazing, I was oddly off of
            > > > npp, I think. I had to retouch the whole thing a lot.
            > > > Does PTGUI take in account 10.5 odd projection issues!?
            > > > But, well... 13200x6600 pixel in THREE shots means something uh?!
            > > > At 800 iso it keeps a very good shape, dynamic and just a subtle noise that
            > > > we could call grain, and that can be changed for "detail".
            > > > AMAZING camera. LV controls are now on the back, continuous shootings etc
            > > > are on the top left dial and not blinded any more, there is a top button
            > > > dedicated to bracketing, even if bkt interval is still limited to 1stop
            > > > steps.Camera is smaller and 100g less than D700, and you can feel it.
            > > > Control dials and buttons feel even more tough than usual.
            > > > Part of the foolish price is due to the clean hdmi out... that categorize
            > > > it under broadcast professional video equipment, and looks like they have
            > > > to pay taxes for it.
            > > >
            > > > images here asap!!!
            > >
            > > Sorry but this is not correct.
            > >
            > > The max panorama size for shaved Nikkor 10.5 with 3 4912x7306 pixels images from D800 is 10236x5118
            >
            > Sorry this was wrong.
            > The correct is 11360x5680 pixels.
            >
            > It may be some variation depending on your optimizing but it is far from the 13200 Luca claims.

            But of course this is just about what resolution PTGui suggests you as maximum.

            In reality calculating a final resolution for a panorama especially from fisheyes can only be an average resolution for the whole image as a fisheye may loose as much as 25% resolution at the corners.

            Actually if you take your originals and compare to the final stitched one you will see that the center is much smaller in your panorama.

            If you calculate the resolution from that area you will get 13900 from the D800, Of course this means the areas at the blending point and at the floor and ceiling will be interpolated up to 123%.

            Hans


            >
            > Hans
            >
            >
            > >
            > > Not much larger than from my old 5D which gives me 6728x3364
            > > And my 5D mark II gives me 8640x4320.
            > >
            > > I doubt very much that the extra resolution of 10236 kontra 8640 is worth upgrading.
            > >
            > > 21 mp up to 36 is in reality not much.
            > >
            > > Hans
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > >
            > > > --
            > > > Luca Vascon.
            > > >
            > > > www.nuovostudio.it
            > > > www.officinepanottiche.com
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • luca vascon
            I d buy a 2nd hand 5Dmk2, and not an mk3 if I d had money for that. As personal camera. I d hack the mirror as first move. Then all my Contax lenses will be
            Message 5 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              I'd buy a 2nd hand 5Dmk2, and not an mk3 if I'd had money for that. As personal camera. I'd hack the mirror as first move. Then all my Contax lenses will be on.

              And a D800E is on order for work.
              Hans is right as for resolution, but I add here a trick.
              Using ACR you can correct lens geometry. On 10.5-nikon it allows to correct the fisheye projection in a more even way, extending the circle to the very border.
              Since it is done within bayer interpolation I use it, it gives better results and a fair bigger panorama.
              You can do it with Canon FF sensors too. Gives small improvement, and it is the explanation why I get more pixels than Hans that is using it "nature".

              No way I would start a Canon vs Nikon fight!
              Even if both are starting to understand how to make lenses again!
              :-D Contax and Rolleiflex are always the best, Silvestri, Linhof, Horseman and Arca are even better!!!!

              I'd prefer Canon semplicity and clearness in interface, and get rid of D700, hard feeling with the software and controls.


              Hans is right when he says 

              Il giorno 04 aprile 2012 12:03, Steve Morton <steven.morton@...> ha scritto:
              Hans wrote:
              > 21 mp up to 36 is in reality not much.

              I own both a 5d mkII (and 7D) and a Nikon D3s. My D3s is only 12 mp but
              I would pick it EVERY time over the 5D mk2 in low light imaging

              I have my D800E on order and I'm REALLY looking forward to getting it
              and then retire the 5D mkII

              All the best
              Steve


              ------------------------------------

              --
              <*> Wiki: http://wiki.panotools.org
              <*> User Guidelines: http://wiki.panotools.org/User_Guidelines
              <*> Nabble (Web) http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/
              <*> NG Member Map http://www.panomaps.com/ng
              <*> Moderators/List Admins: PanoToolsNG-owner@yahoogroups.com
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/

              <*> Your email settings:
                 Individual Email | Traditional

              <*> To change settings online go to:
                 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PanoToolsNG/join
                 (Yahoo! ID required)

              <*> To change settings via email:
                 PanoToolsNG-digest@yahoogroups.com
                 PanoToolsNG-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

              <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                 PanoToolsNG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




              --
              Luca Vascon.

              www.nuovostudio.it
              www.officinepanottiche.com

            • luca vascon
              ... You got it. Basically mine is a 2 step interpolation. 1st in ACR, 2nd giving ptgui a crop of about 185 degrees... PTGUI gives a smart value, trying to
              Message 6 of 11 , Apr 4, 2012
              • 0 Attachment


                If you calculate the  resolution from that area you will get 13900 from the D800, Of course this means the areas at the blending point and at the floor and ceiling will be interpolated up to 123%.

                Hans

                You got it.
                Basically mine is a 2 step interpolation. 1st in ACR,  2nd giving ptgui a crop of about 185 degrees...
                PTGUI gives a smart value, trying to even things out and avoid loss of image thoughness.
                EFFECTIVE resolution in these case is vapour.
                substantially things do not change too much.
                :-P
                --
                Luca Vascon.

                www.nuovostudio.it
                www.officinepanottiche.com

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.