A stitch in time saves nine it is said.
Here are two views of a tomb in the Valley of Kings, one of the many Ramses’s
#1 - single shot, at the widest of the zoom range
and a pano with the same lens at the same FL
I’m unsure I’d have fared better with the 10 (read 15) mm UWA I had in the bag
and that I was too lazy to take out.
I might sell it after the Covid19 crisis btw. And yet, it’s nearly as good as
the Oly 7-14 I used to have.
> Le 25 mars 2020 à 06:38, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
> Oops, second great reason to choose this lens, it does EXIF!
> On 3/24/2020 7:10 PM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
>> At 3/24/2020 02:05 PM, Moose wrote:
>>> Extra, Super, Ultra, Hyper. Sounds like descriptions of star ship drives.
>>> But also wide angle lenses. :-)
>> I was going to say gasoline. But then we would need Nitro lenses.
>> Even with the 20mm, I started to try to get wider with stitching. The result
>> from PS using the 20mm was pretty bad. Perhaps I didn't use the correct
> My rule for stitching is to use narrower AoV FLs. With the Tamron 17-35 on my
> 5D, if 17 mm wasn't wide enough, I'd go to 35 mm, vertical and take a bunch
> of shots for the later stitch.
> Here's one done that way at Ship Harbor in Acadia. Nine vertical, 35 mm
> shots. Awesome printed across two pages in a lay flat book!
> As I think about it, I remember the same basic technique worked well with the
> µ4/3 Oly 9-18 zoom. Shots @ 9 mm didn't work at all well. I've got great
> panas with that lens done that way. Later, I went to making pana stitch shots
> with the 12-60 PLeica. This was done @ 24 mm eq.
> And stitched in Hugin, to put this one in context.
> I think that, even though we don't notice them, there are distortions in the
> wider lenses, or zoom settings, that disturb the Adobe panorama engine(s).
> The other advantage of this technique is greater vertical AoV. It's easy to
> forget that in panorama stitching, then find it wasn't enough.
> Hugin is generally the better stitcher. Free, more powerful, more controls,
> quirky (to be kind) interface. On a lot of landscapes, much better than PS.
> But just recently, it simply choked on one that PS did fine. Very powerful
> tools, such as the ability to choose control points.
>> This scene doesn't look bad. Just because you see it every day. Was this a
>> film shot?
> Oh my, no, it's my second shot with 10/5.6 Heliar on A7, taken last Saturday.
>> I will have to get out my CV 12mm and do some comparisons. As always,
>> interesting information. The 10mm does stretch the tree branches in the
>> corners quite a bit.
> Indeed it does. An argument in favor of gong to a wider format crop.
> And it will make heads at the sides wide. I was just wondering what to do
> about that effect in a shot of our little group in a church in Dublin, and
> that's only a 14 mm eq.
>> One WA landscape trick I heard, with something in the distance being tiny,
>> is to put it toward the top of the frame to enlarge it.
> I don't get it.
>> I'm wondering if a curved monitor might render WA shots better for our
> No idea.
> All Sewn Up Moose
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/