Skridlov
Posts: 116
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: 12 Nov 2007
|
NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 16:46 GMT
|
|
Maybe Nick Fan would care to comment on this - or anyone else using this combination.
I have an NN3 sitting on a Manfrotto levelling plate mounted on a Manfrotto 190 tripod. If I set the NN3's level to read correctly through 360 deg (or at least very close) the camera, which carries a Hama hotshoe level, is always canted inward and backward (ie in the axes that the camera's torque would apply to the NN3). The pan axis is set as tight as I think it needs to be - any tighter would create problems with the rotation - and I can't detect any slop anywhere else. However it doesn't take a lot of pressure to deflect the NN3 sufficiently, for example, to level the hotshoe bubbles. In short, it doesn't seem nearly rigid enough for this camera even with a light 10.5 Nikkor mounted.
When I take a close look at the shots obtained with the NN3 spirit level "correct" it's clear that they are indeed canted - it's not that the hotshoe level is inaccurate. Attempting to level the camera solely on the hotshoe indication seems to be very a bad idea!
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Nick Fan
[NodalNinja]
Posts: 243
Location: Hong Kong
Registered: 26 May 2006
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 17:20 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: Maybe Nick Fan would care to comment on this - or anyone else using this combination.
I have an NN3 sitting on a Manfrotto levelling plate mounted on a Manfrotto 190 tripod. If I set the NN3's level to read correctly through 360 deg (or at least very close) the camera, which carries a Hama hotshoe level, is always canted inward and backward (ie in the axes that the camera's torque would apply to the NN3). The pan axis is set as tight as I think it needs to be - any tighter would create problems with the rotation - and I can't detect any slop anywhere else. However it doesn't take a lot of pressure to deflect the NN3 sufficiently, for example, to level the hotshoe bubbles. In short, it doesn't seem nearly rigid enough for this camera even with a light 10.5 Nikkor mounted.
When I take a close look at the shots obtained with the NN3 spirit level "correct" it's clear that they are indeed canted - it's not that the hotshoe level is inaccurate. Attempting to level the camera solely on the hotshoe indication seems to be very a bad idea!
hmm, our approach is to let the customer to decide whether it is suitable for his/her gear. Some people are more demanding or perfectionist, some are not, some are better at post editing. Facts are many D200/NN3 users get good panos. But it is also the fact that D200 is on the weight limit. after all NN3 was designed for compact DSLRs and prosumers.
We offer money back guarrantee for people who decide that our NN is not suitable for their gear. please contact your dealer. if you just missed the return period, I am happy to help and take up the cost at my end.
nick
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Devlin
Posts: 4
Location: Oakland,CA, United States
Registered: 4 Mar 2007
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 17:30 GMT
|
|
Nick,
Would you say that the D200 w/ 10.5mm lens (I also use the 18-70mm w/SB-800 flash) rigidity question is no longer an issue with the NN5? And how long is the waiting period?
Thanks, Devlin
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
badders
Posts: 31
Location: East Kilbride, United Kingdom
Registered: 5 Dec 2007
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 17:43 GMT
updated: 1 Mar 2008 at 17:44 GMT
|
|
Hi Delvin,
Here's a shot I took using a NN3 rotator with a D200 and a Sigma 8mm f/3.5 which I think is a little heavier than a Nikon 10.5mm:
www.360tacticalvr.co.uk/showcase/d200/glasgow/exc...
I think you're probably at the upper limit of the tolerance on a NN3 using a D200 but as you can see, even though I know it's a forgiving dark image, the results are fine. At the end of the day, I would say it's the stitched images you get from using the kit that define how compatible your equipment is.
Andrew Baddeley
www.360tacticalvr.co.uk
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 713
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 18:32 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: Maybe Nick Fan would care to comment on this - or anyone else using this combination.
I have an NN3 sitting on a Manfrotto levelling plate mounted on a Manfrotto 190 tripod. If I set the NN3's level to read correctly through 360 deg (or at least very close) the camera, which carries a Hama hotshoe level, is always canted inward and backward (ie in the axes that the camera's torque would apply to the NN3).
A hotshoe level is probably the worst leveller you can use, It is of absolutelly no use at all for levelling the panorama.
You should use the leveller on the rotator to level.
The mount on the hotshoe is very unprecise and there is no chance that you can get the same info from it as the leveller on the rotator.
As long as you do not change the levelling during the shoot it does not matter if the rotator is not in perfect level.
It takes 10 seconds to level the panorama in PTGui so as long as you do not want to do hundreds of panoramas as a batch it is not very important if you have the panoramahead in level.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Skridlov
Posts: 116
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: 12 Nov 2007
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 18:33 GMT
|
|
Nick, forgive me but this is a slightly disingenuous response, albeit one which, as a former manufacturer myself, I sympathise with. About the first question I asked was whether this was a viable combination - both to yourselves and Red Door - and in fact I probably specified bigger lenses at the time as I hadn't even considered sphericals and didn't own this lens. Had the response been too ambiguous I wouldn't have bought an NN3! I can probably, make that certainly, dig out the emails in question.
"On the limit" implies that it's not OVER the limit! The torque it exhibits - which I take your response to acknowledge - clearly indicates that it's over the limit. If you like I can measure the deflection in PS and let you know roughly how far out it is at least in one axis.
I am certainly managing to make acceptable panos. At the stage where I'm also trying to learn more about the fundamentals too it's sometimes hard to understand the impact of the different variables. Until last week I didn't have a hotshoe level so that I couldn't confirm the error (although the camera always looked out of whack even by eye).
I appreciate your offer, and I may take you up on it. I have already spent more than I can strictly afford to spend on hardware so I am quailing at the thought of spending even more on replacing it - probably with an NN5 as I think the basic design is good. I just wish I had been advised to wait for the NN5 even though I would have been unhappy about the increased cost...
I'd like to hear what any other users have to say about the issue and whether this deflection has a significant impact on the results achievable..
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Skridlov
Posts: 116
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: 12 Nov 2007
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 18:43 GMT
|
|
Hans, if you re-read my post, you will see that you have misinterpreted me. I am not levelling using the hs level, which I put on the camera primarily to help me to level hh nadir shots. The fact is that the NN3 is significantly and visibly deflected by the weight of the camera, as I think Nick implicitly accepts.
I have succesfully levelled numerous panoramas. I know it can be easily achieved. But is the creation of a template not seriously impacted by an measurable roll (and tilt) error when the equivalent values are nominally entered as zero?
In a word, does this bother other users?
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
michael medina
Posts: 233
Location: United States
Registered: 27 Jan 2008
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 19:48 GMT
|
|
well 'on the limit' or 'over' the limit is up for interpretation. i think everything i shoot panos with is on the limit, but they come out just fine afaic. pdxvr.com
if i wanted to go up a notch and carry abotu 2x the weight and 2x the cost of equipment it's really just a decision on how 'perfect' i feel these things need to be. right now they are 'good enough' for me.
i think nick will let you shoot the thing for some more time so you can make a really good decision on the matter.
i bought a nn3 and with a d70 / 10.5 combo, it see the thing shake with mirror slap/shutter bounce and i just wait for it to settle. do i need another head, maybe, and maybe soon, but i need the money first and until then it's good enough and will definitely be part of my lightweight kit as long as i own it
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
John Houghton
Posts: 2130
Location: Hitchin, United Kingdom
Registered: 17 Jan 2005
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 1 Mar 2008 at 19:59 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: But is the creation of a template not seriously impacted by an measurable roll (and tilt) error when the equivalent values are nominally entered as zero?
Not really. The values would not be entered as zero in the template. You enter the actual pitch and tilt values. The point is that the pitch and roll error will be similar for all the shots. You can make use of this simple fact when performing the initial optimization. Above the pitch and roll columns of check boxes there are two "link" boxes. If these are checked, along with p & r on all the horizontal shots, then the optimizer will find identical values for pitch and roll for all those images, corresponding to the actual pitch and roll at which each shot was taken. The panorama will be thereby levelled, or rather straightened. It will be levelled only in relation to the pano head axis of rotation. Having straightened the panorama in this way, you normally unlink pitch and roll, and then anchor one of the images by unchecking its y,p,r before optimizing again. This is because pitch and roll probably won't be absolutely precisely the same for each shot.
John
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Nick Fan
[NodalNinja]
Posts: 243
Location: Hong Kong
Registered: 26 May 2006
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 3:20 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: Nick, forgive me but this is a slightly disingenuous response, albeit one which, as a former manufacturer myself, I sympathise with. About the first question I asked was whether this was a viable combination - both to yourselves and Red Door - and in fact I probably specified bigger lenses at the time as I hadn't even considered sphericals and didn't own this lens. Had the response been too ambiguous I wouldn't have bought an NN3! I can probably, make that certainly, dig out the emails in question.
The problem is different people have different opinions. I can't say it doesn't work because some people are happily using it.There are even people using Canon 5D on NN3. Part of this reason is it took me too long to release NN5. 
Also considering the rigidity of any pole aerial "pano head", I believe NN3 exels in rigidity and should be adaquate.
I must say I am not a good salesman. But I have proved my honesty and faithfulness to my customers for years. 
You can test your NN3 for more time and I am happy to reimburse your cost at my end if you decide to return or upgrade. Do let me know before hand so that I can arrange with Red Door.
nick
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Nick Fan
[NodalNinja]
Posts: 243
Location: Hong Kong
Registered: 26 May 2006
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 3:34 GMT
|
|
Devlin said: Nick,
Would you say that the D200 w/ 10.5mm lens (I also use the 18-70mm w/SB-800 flash) rigidity question is no longer an issue with the NN5? And how long is the waiting period?
Thanks, Devlin
Hi Delvin,
NN5 will easily support your setup. Bill will get some stock this week. We are catching up after having more than 2 weeks of holiday during Chinese New Year in Feb.
nick
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Bill Bailey
[NodalNinja]
Posts: 389
Location: Phoenix in the Arizona Desert, United States
Registered: 27 Jan 2005
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 9:02 GMT
|
|
Hey Skridlov,
Just wanted to jump in and offer my two cents worth.
Firstly let me say NN3 does work just fine with the D200/10.5.
In fact I use the same gear myself.
Using multiple levels is not a good idea - you need one level - the one on NN's lower rail. Using multiple levels is like trying to stack marbles - it can be done but very challenging.
While in the Air Force (Bomb Squad) we actually had to learn to stack marbles (during the off times) - it tested nerves and patience - something needed when trying to disarm IED's.
But we don't need to do that here. The level on the NN is extremely sensitive so some drift is normal. As long as it stays inside the inner circle you'll be able to shot panos fine.
What some people over look quite ofter are many other factors that can cause a skewed level.
1) Surface the tripod legs are on.
Indoor carpet with foam backing causes sag, especially if your foot is setting down at the base of each tripod legs.
Sand, or loose gravel will cause sinking.
Some hardwood floors even sag ever so slightly if someone is walking close by.
2) Tripod construction.
Some tripods do not tighten well at the neck. I believe your 190 is sturdy. After setting up your tripod (without gear) and securing it - try to wobble the neck and note any play. Also make sure the legs are tightened and do not slip or slide apart.
3) Leveling Head.
These are good but not a lot of folks use them. The amount of adjustment is limited and the surface the tripod is mounted on need to be very level itself. To much extra work that really isn't needed (for my anyway).
4) Use a ball head.
This allows for faster setups. I like the Manfrotto 3265 Vertical hand grip myself.
5)Mounting the camera correctly making sure it is not canted.
So once you know you have everything under the tripod setup and ready next if the NN and your camera.
Level using only the NN3 spirit level, rotate and re-level until you feel you have the happy medium of any bubble drift. The bubble should stay with the black circle.
If it does not changes are the lower rotator in not correctly tighten. We give advise on proper way to do this in the manual and on our FAQ page (see#9,10&11) :nodalninja.com/faq_s.html
Do not over tighten!
If you feel the unit is still out of level touch bases with your reseller on obtaining a replacement.
Please let us know what you decide.
Cheers
Bill
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Terrywoodenpic
Posts: 73
Location: Saddleworth, United Kingdom
Registered: 5 Jul 2006
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 11:02 GMT
|
|
All camera mounts sag to some degree.
It can be an infinitesimal amount to quite visible.
The important thing is that it is consistent
You will have no problem stitching even quite severely sagged shots... if they sag identically.
The more troublesome factor, if you are near the limit of any particular mount is vibration. but there are even ways round this...Mirror lock...self timer etc.
Could the NN3 be strengthened so that these attributes are improved, as to hold virtually any lens camera combination...?
Of course they could But it would no longer have all its in built advantages of size, weight,ease of use and price... It would no longer be a NN3 It would be some thing new.. Perhaps a NN5.
The fact remains the the NN3 can make perfect Pans with cameras ranging from compacts to most middleweight DSLR's.
The fact that on the heaviest cameras it must, for scientific reasons, display a slight sag is of no consequence at all in practical terms.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 713
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 11:36 GMT
updated: 2 Mar 2008 at 11:50 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: Hans, if you re-read my post, you will see that you have misinterpreted me. I am not levelling using the hs level, which I put on the camera primarily to help me to level hh nadir shots. The fact is that the NN3 is significantly and visibly deflected by the weight of the camera, as I think Nick implicitly accepts.
I have succesfully levelled numerous panoramas. I know it can be easily achieved. But is the creation of a template not seriously impacted by an measurable roll (and tilt) error when the equivalent values are nominally entered as zero?
In a word, does this bother other users?
I have used the NN3 for my 5D with at least 5 different lenses including the 10.5mm. I also used the 20D with the 10,5.
There is no problem at all like you describe. Of course it is not a Batch template panohead like the 360precission.
Remember there are to types of templates,
1. the real batch stitching template which requires no optimizing but just uses images in sets to stitch. You can only do that perfect (without special renumbering of the images) on Mac with PTBatch and using a panohead like the 360absolute. which has less than 0.1 degree tolerances.
That template has to be "averaged" for the head and your setup which is a special process.
2. Using templates to do a basic align of the images on the right place and setting the lens correction and eventually cropcircle. When the basic yaws pitch and roll is set by the template and you have a lens correction for the lens you only need to ad 2 controlpoints per image pair and optimize,
Of course you can just use auto controlpoints but many of them will report larger errors so you may need to delite them.
When you use a perfect template like this for several panoramas you will see that you will not gain anything at all by reoptimizing the FOV and a b c d parameters after you optimized the yaw-pitch and roll.
The only thing you should do to avoid the need for aligning the horizont is to level the head at the first image you take, When that image is levelled and used as an anchor PTGui will take care of the rest.
Yesterday I had to do a test on a 14mm Sigma rectilinear which I had borrowed from a friend. It is a heavy lens weighs 700 gram.
I put it on my 5D and on the NN3, adjusted the nodalpoint which took me about 20 sec with my method just looking through the viewer.
See www.panoramas.dk/panorama/Fisheye-NPP/parallax.ht...
I estimated the overlap also looking through the viewer which told me that I needed 6 around at -15 and a second row at +45
That took about 2 minutes to take,
The images stitched perfectly using PTGui automatic align after manually editing the worst controlpoints and updating the optimizer with shift.
I got down to average 0.8 and max 2.5 in a couple of minutes. And the panorama was perfectly leveled as I did that on the first image. (roll 0 )
The roll on the other images was optimized to values from -0.8 to + 0.35
Pitch tolerances was from 16,56 to 17,3 which I consider very good for a cheap panohead like the NN3.
Remember that I never seen or used this lens before.
The 10.5mm is just as easy to use. You can not and do not need to be on mm perfect nodalpoint as it floats with about 6 mm depending if you look at the horizontal area or the area at +- 50 degree. See the page above.
Here is the test pano just to show you that the pano is from a room which needs a perfect setup and stitch.
www.panoramas.dk/panorama/Sigma14mm/Sigma14mm-tes...
Note that this is 1600 asa so you get a very beautiful grain.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
klausesser
Posts: 38
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Registered: 18 Feb 2008
|
Re: NN3 / D200 - questionable rigidity
Posted: 2 Mar 2008 at 14:16 GMT
updated: 2 Mar 2008 at 14:18 GMT
|
|
Hi!
I suppose you didn´t use the D200 with the battery-grip mounted on the NN3?
Some friend of mine use the NN3 with D200 and 10,5mm and with Canon 5D and 10,5mm.
Without problems! At least when using APP . . . 
Forget about templates.
Only when it comes to heavier lenses - like a 1,4/85mm for example - problems occured.
best, Klaus
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
back to threads list |
this thread is closed
Prev
