klaus mayer
Posts: 37
Location: Australia
Registered: 15 Jan 2008
|
fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 15 Feb 2008 at 1:34 GMT
|
reply
|
Are there any other advantages of a fish eye over a wide angle other than that it is time saving, requires less effort to stitch, and results in smaller file sizes?
I recall to have come across a side where panos with high resolution are streamed as required, i.e. despite the good resolution the waiting periods for viewers were reasonably short which I considered as a great approach because it allowed to zoom into details.
What are the typical pixel dimensions of a pano taken with a fish eye?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
DorinDXN
Posts: 1573
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Registered: 14 Nov 2006
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 15 Feb 2008 at 7:43 GMT
updated: 15 Feb 2008 at 7:46 GMT
|
reply
|
Hi Klaus, I own now three lenses with canon mount and some extra on m42 which ca be fitted on my canon 350D using an adapter.
Only one lens is a fish eye, a Sigma 8mm 3.5, It is a great lens but is the last one in my choosing list for making a pano.
Still there are many situations when a FE is a must and I use it for first layer or for completion in panos made with two lenses and with high details downloaded at zoom using 9 high resolution tiles (one centered and other 8 around the area of interest, only very promising tests so far)
You may find around the idea that is much fun using FE.
The size of a pano taken with FE deppends on sensor resolution and crop factor, an average is 7000 to 10000 equirectangular wide.
Dorin
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 611
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 15 Feb 2008 at 13:01 GMT
|
reply
|
Time saving when shooting the images is absolutelly a large advantage especially if you shoot bracketed for increasing dynamic range. (some people call that HDR which it is not)
Light changes very fast and taking a multirow with 3 rows can easy result in very large differences in exposure on some images (or wait time when taking them). I guess you still have clouds in Australia.
Large panoramas will require much memory from the computer and if you publish larger than 2000x2000 cubefaces you should expect that there are many people who can not see it.
A 2500x2500 uses 270 mb ram for the browser alone. To that comes your system and other tasks you have active,
There are still al lot of viewers with 256mb Ram, after all that was the standard delivery only a couple of years ago.
The quality and resolution from a fisheye lens can differ from 4000 pixels equirectangular to 17000 depending on the lens and the camera,
I can produce a 7 image panorama with my Tokina 10-17mm if I use it at 17mm on my 12 mp Canon 5D.
If I use 3 images at 10mm I get a 6800x3400 which is enough for most purposes.
Hans
www.panoramas.dk
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
klaus mayer
Posts: 37
Location: Australia
Registered: 15 Jan 2008
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 17 Feb 2008 at 20:46 GMT
|
reply
|
Thanks, yes we still do have clouds occassionally although hardly any rain in the south.
I keep the high resolution results just for viewing on my machine or for the future. Everything shared is downsized.
May I assume that a 7 image panorama with 17mm is only a 1 row pano and not 360x180? I guess with a pano head there is not much overlap required.
BTW, great website. If I ever get a year off work I will check it all out.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 611
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 17 Feb 2008 at 22:44 GMT
|
reply
|
Thanks
You are welcome,
At 17mm 6 around is enough to cover all 360 and you just need 1 at 90 degrees for the zenith.
You can even tilt the 6 around down at -4
Of course you need 1 for the nadir also.
Final resolution is 12.500x6325
I usually shoot at 15mm, difference is just 1000 pixels.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
klaus mayer
Posts: 37
Location: Australia
Registered: 15 Jan 2008
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 27 Mar 2008 at 0:15 GMT
|
reply
|
Hans
sorry but I have another question regarding your reply.
Was this just a theoretical calculation of shots required or are you actually able to stitch a pano from 6 shots with a 17mm lens?
17mm gives me only about 50deg HFOV which would require more shots to get 360degree and some overlap for control points.
I finally got a pano head and a better tripod and tried a pano with less shots but had already alignment problems when stitching 30 shots.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 611
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: fish eye vs wide angle
Posted: 27 Mar 2008 at 0:23 GMT
|
reply
|
It is on my Canon 5D with full sensor. You can use the Tokina 10-17mm at 10 -11 mm with 6 shots on a 1.5 or 1,6 sensor.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
