Skridlov
Posts: 215
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: 12 Nov 2007
|
Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 21 Dec 2008 at 22:18 GMT
|
|
I'm thinking of getting an FF body (D700) whilst I can still afford it, assuming that the economy's going to continue spiralling downward.
If I do, I'll keep my existing D200 body but it would be very useful to make the FE lens available for use on the D700 too. Does anyone know a reliable source for this work in London or southern England? In the absence of the tiny lens hood is there any downside, other than increased susceptibility to flare, associated with this drastic step?
If I do this, could someone suggest what would be the optimum number of shots required - assuming that I'm going to patch the nadir using a viewpoint correction shot.
Roy
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Smooth
Posts: 2688
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Registered: 21 Jul 2004
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 5:05 GMT
|
|
Skridlov said: If I do this, could someone suggest what would be the optimum number of shots required - assuming that I'm going to patch the nadir using a viewpoint correction shot.
Roy
3 shots in rotation with 5 degree tilt up + handheld or tilted tripod Nadir shot for viewpoint correction.
Regards, Smooth 
www.smooth360.info
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 2059
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 8:32 GMT
|
|
4 shots around is better if you want automatic controlpoint generation. There is a very large difference in how many and how good controlpoints you get.
The overlap is to small with 3 and you often just get controlpoints at the centre.
Your final image will be 6800x3400 pixel
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Smooth
Posts: 2688
Location: Mount Panorama, Australia
Registered: 21 Jul 2004
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 9:14 GMT
|
|
If you are going to shoot 4+N and get a small final result it borders on a waste of time because of the reduction in benefit achieved. You might as well stay with a DX/APS-C sensor.
Really you would be far better off with a (Shaved) Tokina 10-17mm Zoom Fisheye because of the versatility. If it is a reduction in shots you require/desire you still can't go passed the tried and tested Sigma 8mm Fisheye on the full sized sensor cameras like the D700, 5D etc.
Going to the full size sensor camera and producing smaller final equirectangular images is a backward step in resolution. To get the most from a full size sensor camera and fisheye lens you require a 15/16mm full frame fisheye and then your back to 6+ZN.
It is a trade off between minimum and maximum required shots wanted/needed vs final equirectangular image size.
Shooting 3 or 4 in rotation will not effect the final equirectangular image size, it will only aid with more overlap giving you extra control point placement area. Based on a decent stitching "template" with known lens parameters 3+N shots is plenty.
Regards, Smooth
www.smooth360.info
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
nick hardcastle
Posts: 3
Location: Saudi Arabia
Registered: 22 Nov 2008
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 14:27 GMT
|
|
Fixation in London sold me my lens earlier this year. They sell the lens @ £375 + vat, and can remove the hood for £55 + vat. They did a beautiful job, but ask them to check that the focusing ring still turns smoothly when they have finished. Mine was a little tight and had to be adjusted - no problem, just wasted a day or two! The lens is fabulous, I love it. The lens cap still fits, which is convenient for putting the lens in the bag.
I shoot 4 around and then one nadir. It is great as it has meant that I don't need my more complicated pano rig - a simple bar and rotating head is fine.
My contact at Fixation (official Nikon repair agents I think) was Peter. Helpful guy. sales@fixationuk.com
regards
Nick Hardcastle
www.hobnail.com
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
|
Guest
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 16:09 GMT
updated: 7 Mar 2009 at 22:25 GMT
|
|
Try www.1staidrepairs.co.uk at Tunbridge Wells - Adrian or Kevin. Very convenient, just off the A21. Alternatively MXV Photographic at Uckfield have a repairman who can do the job.
If anyone is desperate for a shaved lens I'm thinking of getting rid of mine, which would come with a BoBracket and a Fotodiox adaptor if you have a Canon. I won't split but pm me if that's what you are after.
Bruce
|
|
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 2059
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 16:46 GMT
updated: 22 Dec 2008 at 16:46 GMT
|
|
How come the Nikon prices are so low in UK compared to Canon.
They sell the D700 at £1403 (£1614 inc. VAT)
The Canon 5D mark II is £2250 incl Vat
That is just ridiculous, They are same price here in Denmark and as far as I can see also in US.
1403, thats just 11.200 DKR, the cheapest here is 13.900
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Matthew Rogers
[360 Precision]
Posts: 299
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Registered: 16 Jun 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 16:57 GMT
|
|
Yeah, it's really strange. It's not Canon, it's the resellers. The mark-up on the 5DMK2 is almost 300% more than the percentage mark-up on the D700. I guess the short supply of the 5Dmk2 in the UK allows the resellers to set such high prices.
Matt
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
DennisS
Posts: 660
Location: Los Anglels, United States
Registered: 1 Sep 2007
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 21:35 GMT
|
|
|
As I recall, a D700 is a D3 stuffed into a D300 body. The D3 will automatically sense a DX lens and will use only the center portion of the sensor. The D700 probably behaves the same way. I have not read the owner's manual yet. There might be a manual overide setting or something. You might want to verify that you can get your D700 to use a 10.5 lens the way you want it to. Otherwise the question about shaving the lens hood off might have answered itself.
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 2059
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 22 Dec 2008 at 22:17 GMT
|
|
No problem. There are several VR Photographers using the 10,5 shaved on both the D700 and the D3.
Peter Murphy for example.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Aaron Spence
Posts: 109
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Registered: 29 Sep 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 23 Dec 2008 at 4:28 GMT
|
|
G'day,
There's been heaps of great comments already. I'll just state for the record owning a D200 & D700 what I do.
D700 + Nikon 16mm Fullframe Fisheye = heaven  Same FOV as D200 + 10.5mm requires 6 + 1 etc.
I have shaved my 10.5 and also use it on the D700 for pole shots shooting 3 around at 0 degrees on a 360precision Atome. The Atome has a ring which attaches to the lens, and acts as a quick release, so I leave it on the 10.5mm at all times. Works beautifully.
I'll give Han's recommendation a go and try 4 shots around as well... I did find with 3 shots auto CP generation wasn't brilliant. Here's 18 pole shot examples I did at a motor race in October: with D700 + shaved 10.5mm + 360P Atome + pole/rotator etc.
panedia.com/indy-pole.htm
D700 has 'auto' DX mode when a DX lens is attached. Like the D3, that can be turned off in the menu.
There is no problems having the hood off the 10.5mm. Just need to be a bit careful not to bang it on anything as there is no protection for the lens. Also, as with any lens you're shooting panos with, the focus should be taped down so it doesn't ever move.
Thanks, Aaron Spence
panedia.com
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Skridlov
Posts: 215
Location: United Kingdom
Registered: 12 Nov 2007
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 23 Dec 2008 at 15:03 GMT
|
|
Thanks for the extremely valuable comments everyone. I've been cultivating a possible source of earning for my VR activities and without the consistent help of everyone here this wouldn't have been possible. A special thanks to John Houghton, without whose help I might have caved in.
With a little bit of luck I may be able to get some of my investment back quite soon so I'm looking at the possibility of adding the Nikon 14-24mm 2.8G ED. There's a requirement for lots of static interior shots, some of them in fairly confined spaces so this lens looks like an ideal solution: at the price it would have to be, however every review I have ever read about it (and I've read a lot) has said that it's a superlative lens.
Once I get a firm commitment I'll probably buy one. I've handled a sample and it's massive so I'd probably have to upgrade my NN3. I can't think of any reason that this low distortion lens wouldn't be useable for sphericals. I know it's OTT for this purpose however there might be the occasion where the additional quality pays off. The lens has a pretty huge fixed lens hood, so clearance on the tripod shot nadir might be an issue unless the panhead's sizeable.
So, what's the panel's opinion on this lens, and if suitable, what's the minimal serviceable (ie priced!) panhead that will handle it on a D700?
Whilst I'm about it, my best wishes for an enjoyable Xmas and New Year to all contributors on these forums, particularly those who have offered me their valuable advice for the last year or so.
Roy
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
raymo
Posts: 16
Location: Australia
Registered: 1 Jun 2008
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 12 Jan 2009 at 11:35 GMT
|
|
Aaron Spence said: D700 + Nikon 16mm Fullframe Fisheye = heaven Same FOV as D200 + 10.5mm requires 6 + 1 etc.
Why heaven?
I am looking to get a D300 + 10.5mm. How do you think the results would compare with your D700 + 16mm? I imagine the high ISO performance would be markedly better, but apart from that, would it be much/any better?
Was just thinking you mean 6 + N, tilting the main row up slightly to cover Z, but looking at your site, it seems you do 6 + Z and don't worry about N - correct?
Nice work with the Indy set mate. Are you a webdesigner? Whoever was responsible for the integration with the Google Maps API has done a great job (dunno if it was in your organisation or not).
I have had a bit of a geeze at your site, and it interests me a lot. I have a project I'm currently working on that needs a solution like this, and another upcoming job too.
Regards
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Hans Nyberg
Posts: 2059
Location: Denmark
Registered: 28 Aug 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 12 Jan 2009 at 12:33 GMT
|
|
Tilting up a fullframe fisheye can not give you enough for zenith also.
It is much better to tilt down 10 degrees and take 6 around + zenith.
Tilting down 10 degrees give you all you can see to the edge of your rotator.
Regarding difference between a D700+16mm and a D300+10.5mm I doubt that you get much difference. Resolution is the same.
The 10,5mm will give you much more depth of field which in many cases can be a feature. It means you can take the images at 2 stops larger and that actually compensates for the slightly better ISO performance of the D700.
Hans
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
Aaron Spence
Posts: 109
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Registered: 29 Sep 2005
|
Re: Shaving the 10.5 FE for FF bodies
Posted: 12 Jan 2009 at 20:47 GMT
|
|
I'd need to do some side by side testing to show the exact differences between the 10.5mm on a 1.5x sensor and the 16mm on a fullframe, although my D300 is in London at the moment so I won't be doing that any time soon. I do like the look of the D700+16mm more.
panedia.com/floriade.htm
Probably the main difference is flare. The 10.5mm shows quite dramatic ghosting which gets worse as you stop down. The 16mm shows a slight discoloration in an area under similar conditions.
The resolution of both kits is basically the same. Ptgui actually says the D300+10.5mm should output a 11,700px wide equirect vs 11,300px on the D700+16mm. I output them both a 11,700 and they look great.
I shoot both rigs at 10 - 15 degrees down in the horizontal position and don't shoot a nadir. As Hans mentioned pointing the rig down means you're seeing the edge of the pano head anyway, so there's no point shooting a down shot on the tripod. So that's 6 horizontal + 1 zenith for each pano.
Hans also pointed out greater depth of field on the D300 at a given aperture which is true, but we shoot fixed aperture all the time, F8 on the D700. I have the 16mm focus taped down a using hyperfocal positioning so I'm getting from under a metre to infinity in focus which works well.
So all in all... your budget will probably be the determining factor. I'd buy the D700 rig over the D300 again, but it is a lot more expensive for a small improvement in quality and no increase in resolution. More important than either of those cameras is what head & workflow you choose. The D300 + 360precision head will be better than the D700 + any other head. Whatever you do... get a batchable head.
Regarding Panedia, I am a web & cd-rom designer from way back, but not a 'modern' coder so I don't really do web these days. I have someone else who does my map/web development. Shoot me an email about your projects I'll see if we can work something out for you 
Thanks, Aaron.
panedia.com
|
|
alert moderator
|
|
