di19026's forum messages

Michael Owen said:

Thanks Ed for you going to the trouble of a reply. Ive looked at the site, it looked great and interesting, but not for me---not at this moment at any rate. At this exact moment in time I just wanted a simple screen to keep the sun out--full stop. But who knows, in the future you could have started something. Thanks again Mike

John Houghton said:

The Manfrotto 755B is solid. It has a built-in levelling head (50mm ball - giving +/- 20 degrees of pitch adjustment). See tinyurl.com/6xp6b2 . It's very quick to set the level. Now replaced by a similar model: 755XB. Around $260 - is that "reasonable"? Or you could get the lighter 190XPROB for $160 if you are prepared to level by adjusting the legs or adding a levelling device.

John

Mr_Q8ty said:

"to: Oyvind Tryt
The rotator does not seem to have any detents, I really miss that feature in RRS."

Hans Nyberg said:

You have not been able to buy monitors with 1024x768 pixels native resolution for several years

Doug Aurand said:

I'll repeat what I said

If you want to convince me I'm wrong, show me a sample of the problems in a virtual image on the Web that are taken with a Sigma 8mm that similar images taken with a 10.5mm don't have. All other things being equal with the images

Put some virtual images where your mouth is

Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM

Doug Aurand said:

Once an image is coverted to a JPEG or another commonly used Internet compressed format, its no longer a photo taken with a lens, its an algorithmic interpretion that has lost detail and resolution.

Its just the nature of image compression as we know it today

If you want to cinvince me I'm wrong, show me a sample of the problems in a virtual image on the Web that are taken with a Sigma 8mm that similar images taken with a 10.5mm don't have. All other things being equal with the images

There's just too much processing after the image is shot like blending, interpolation, warping, CA correction, sharpening, etc, etc for any visible difference attributable to the 10.5mm vs the 8mm f/3.5 to survive.

Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM

Doug Aurand said:

That's one reason the Sigma lenses are so popular, they're made for more brand of cameras. Duhhh

And while the 10.5mm may produce better quality

Doug Aurand said:

its at the cost of needing more shots, 6+Z+N vs 4+Z+N and the Sigma 8mm can do 4Tilt + Nadir eliminating the Zenith

Doug Aurand said:

And on the Internet, I've yet to see any visible difference in final output.

The quality of Virtual Images diplayed on the Web, shot with similar quality cameras by similarly skilled photographers on the same quality panoramic heads, using the same stitching software are indistinguishable as to what lens was used.

mediavets said:

'Deep pockets' referred more to purchase of 360Precision heads, and secondarily to the tendency of Nikon users with deep pockets (like the corporate users/purchasers Matt cited) to stick to Nikkor branded lenses - in case of this particular lens - the Nikkor 10.5mm FE - it ain't so much about cost it's about the brand, for such customers sticking to the Nikon/Nikkor brand constitutes a 'safe buy' and a more easily defended purchase decision.

Anyway, it's just idle speculation on my part.

Andrew

Doug Aurand said:

Tim Hatch's Equipment breakdown for the World Wide Panorama project shows the Nikkor is more popular than the Sigma among contributers, but ony a little

timhatch.com/projects/wwp-equipment/

Unfornately he doesn't have separate numbers for the f/3.5 and the f/4 versions.

Doug Aurand
Albuquerque, NM

mediavets said:

Perhaps because 360Precision heads are 'top end' products, Nikon users with fancy cameras (and for me a D200/D300 would be a pretty 'fancy camera') and deep pockets tend to buy only Nikkor lenses and to be rather dismissive of third-party lenses like the Sigma range.
Andrew