Advice needed on MF body and lens to rent [Archive]

Nicolas Claris

June 28th, 2007, 03:42 PM

Hi all
I have a new assignement that is planned for mid July to shoot exteriors and interiors of a big motor-yacht (about 60 meters long, moreless 180 feet).
As usual I'll bring some light (just a few) and an assistant. I'll use my old 1DSMKII, and, for the interiors the Sigma 12-24 and the Canon L 24_70 2.8 with a tripod.

NOW

I want to use this oportunity to test and try in real world an MF camera with digital back. For interior work only.
I'm looking for more pixels, but most of all to catch more details (i.e. wood veneer)
My aim is to check if, even very expensive for me, this kind of gear is worth it.

I have NEVER used such a camera, film or digital.

What would be your advise for choose to rent:
Body/brand/model

Back/brand

Lens: equivalent to 17mm in 24x36 or at leats 21 mm…

Thanks very much

leonardobarreto.com

June 28th, 2007, 04:15 PM

Nicolas

If I was you and had a 1DsMk2 I would probably use a PC shift and take two shots with the Canon for stitching 16mp+16mp=32mp

If you want to do interior with a digital back there are two and a half alternatives, Mamiya and Hasselblad have nice 35mm lenses and both are just coming out with 28mm. You may be able to get the one from H3 and the Mamiya is not out yet.

So that was one and a half solutions -- Mamiya is the half -- the other is to use a Combo/Horseman/Alpa alternative with a view camera type lens, like a Digitar that go beyond 28mm.

The learning curve o all of this equipment will probably be hard to assimilate in one day of shooting on top of the exterior shots done with the Canon, but could be done. For example, if you are familiar with C1 then a Phase One would be kids play, and probably a Mamiya (with the 35mm AF) would be the less complicated camera to work with.(if you do use one remember to turn it off so that the camera batteries are not drained, that way they last a long time)

So, very predictably, my advice is Phase/Mamiya, except for H3+28mm , 35mm. The back has to be P 45 or P 25 because they are the ones with the larger sensor size.

Where are you shooting?

leonardobarreto.com

June 28th, 2007, 04:40 PM

I forgot to mention, 35mm is equivalent to a 22mm on a 35mm and the full frame backs have a 1.1 "crop factor"... (the angle of view is 90 degrees) Schneider makes a 24mm ! and Rodenstock 28mm for digital use.

Look at the text that comes with the promotion of the Cambo Digital Wide DS camera

"Digital based lenses from Schneider and Rodenstock offer superior quality and
sharpness because there is no compromise for DSLR or medium format system
convenience. Retro focus designs used for wide-angle lenses in 35mm digital and
medium format, allow the back element of the lens to be further from the capture
plane. This is important to allow space for the mirror systems and more even
exposure for digital capture but compromises sharpness because the cone of light is
being optically extended. The differences here are so great that you really need to
make your own comparisons. An example of how wide angle designs were handled
before retro focus design lenses is the Hasselblad SWC camera, which has a
rangefinder or uses a ground glass for image framing because the body is so close to
the lens. "

Klaus Esser

June 28th, 2007, 05:49 PM

rent a Hasselblad H3 with a 28mm and either 22 or 39MPx. Super lens! (ONLY for H3 - not a H1/H2)
you won´t need shift or tilt with that.

Very interesting would be to rent (from Seitz) a Seitz HighRes Digital Roundshot. It´s about 160MPx.
http://german.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d877/f886.cfm
or the digital 6x17 with a superwide lens:
http://german.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/application/d438/d877/f885.cfm
it also has 160MPx.

That´s really highres . . . :-) and HDR!

best, Klaus

Asher Kelman

June 28th, 2007, 06:02 PM

On the other hand, Leonardo, when the lens is close to the digital sensor, light going laterally to the sides of the sensor, skim the surface at an oblique angle and there can be all sorts of problems with color shifts and metamorism.

What counts is the system as a whole.

It also depends on the surface one is shooting. For example, from Rainer Viertblock, digital photography for open sky or aluminum or other almost monochromatic materials can easily show noise and various backs handle this differently. This is an area where I'd actually get Rainer to reply. If I were getting a back for a project, I'd look to the one with a dealer available to spend time with me.

However, after that, all things being equal, I'd go with Sinar at the moment, since that is what Rainer chose for his highest end architectural work. He uses the back with a Gottschalt camera body, but he uses other bodies too.

From the images I have seen, the files are magnificent. I cannot say the best, since I have not sufficent experience.

We need an update on the Sinar options anyway!

Asher

Nicolas Claris

June 28th, 2007, 11:01 PM

Thanks Leonardo, Klaus and Asher!
Already a lot to dig there!

Yes I know and use daily C1 for years now (though the new ACR 4.1 and LR 1.1 are very interesting now).

The surface of interior is made of large windows, bamboo wood and sylk panelling, wood floor + large carpets, Stainless steel, white laquer.
All light colors, yellow, beige and white + glass and some metal.

Anyway I'll cover all of the job with the 1Ds, I just want to start my MF initiation here as already stated there's certainly a learning curve, and this is not my clients to pay for this!

But no doubt I know I could bring back some interesting frames. (may be with a can of coke;-)

The shoot is planned to be on the Côte d'Azur, maybe Toulon, the other problem will be to find a place to rent that kind of gear, may be in Marseille…

If anyone has more/different suggestions, as I'll dig... (and maybe has to have alternatives if the rental house has not the right thing at the right moment…)

Klaus Esser

June 29th, 2007, 03:41 AM

Hey Nicolas!

"The surface of interior is made of large windows, bamboo wood and sylk panelling, wood floor + large carpets, Stainless steel, white laquer.
All light colors, yellow, beige and white + glass and some metal."

This works with HDR only! I had such sujets before. Listen to me: use HDR.

"Anyway I'll cover all of the job with the 1Ds"

I don´t know how familiar you are with stitching - that would be the best way to make a wideangle-shot.
Get a nodal-head, mount the camera in portrait-mode and shoot one row or multirow with an angle up to 120dgree. That´s about the upper number to make a planar-projection from. The longer the lens, the more single shots you´ll have to make. In the stitcher you make a planar-projection and render it highres in 16bit TIFFs.
Because of the overlapping of the severals shots, you use the center-area of your lens and you have no diagonal lightrays hitting the chip.

A Sinar-back wouldn´t do better - and can´t do such a wide angle.

best,, Klaus

P.S.: here´s an example - 100degree-angle horizontal, shot at available-light - no extra lights.
Canon 20D with 20mm Nikon-lens. Two rows of 6 shots each. Was about 2m deep too the opposite shelf.
http://www.klausesser.de/Pano_B.jpg

Nicolas Claris

June 29th, 2007, 08:57 AM

Hi Klaus

Now, I'm completely confused!

Yes I do know (though I'm not a specialist) about stitching:

http://mnclaris.free.fr/forum/DSC_0907_postersansbranches.jpg

Gustavia bay in St-Barthelemy, a very rare shot as the bay is almost empty, usually there are hundreds yachts anchored. Made in 2002 with a Nikon D1, 8 vertical shots (handheld!), about 180° (30 Mpix).

Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?

30 mm? 35 mm? 50 mm?

Klaus Esser

June 29th, 2007, 11:13 AM

"Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?"

I would use 35mm or - if you want highres - 50mm on an 1DsMk2 or 20mm/35mm on a 20D/10D. And HDR (Bracketing -2/0/+2) - you´ll get optimal highlights and shadows with very high information and brilliant metals, marble and delicately wood.

best, Klaus

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 29th, 2007, 11:21 AM

Say I follow that route, in your experience, what would be the best focal lens?

Depends on the required field-of-view and the required output file size. In a confined space like a ship's interior there is a limit to your shooting distance. That distance, combined with the total field-of-view angle needed, divided by the number of shots (with some overlap) you want, should give the focal length to use.

I'd expect a 50mm or thereabouts will give super-resolution capability, yet limit the number of shots to a managable quantity for postprocessing. You could consider a TS-E 45mm which will allow to tweak the plane of focus (for each image tile if you want), which may come in handy at such short distances. It is a very sharp lens (much better than the 24mm), but it does exhibit some Chromatic Aberration especially visible towards the corners (which will get partially cut-off due to the overlap between tiles). The TS-E 90mm is optically superior, but you'd need a huge number of images to cover the field-of-view (although with huge magnification potential).

When you set a goal of 2x the required output dimensions in pixels, then you can downsample the result to superior RGB resolution (without aliasing) and very good 16-bit/channel tonal separation.

If you want to avoid postprocessing trouble, you obviously need to invest in a Pano-head assembly as well. I use the RRS Ultimate Omni-Pro package, mounted on the BH-55 ball head, which allows to make accurate multi-row stitches that require little postprocessing to make things fit seamlessly.

The stitching approach obviously can be used with a variety of camera systems, so it is future proof. Personally I would be interested in the 1D Mark III performance (14-bit ADC) and the 1Ds Mark III performance (presumed 16-bit ADC) combined with the stitching enabled FOV and resolution. Since interiors are usually stationary subjects, they lend themselves to stitching quite well, and one can also combine that with HDR bracketing.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 29th, 2007, 11:36 AM

Hi Bart
1Ds Mark III?

Nicolas Claris

June 29th, 2007, 11:47 AM

To both Bart and Klaus
You don't imagine the size of such yacht, there's a lot of room:

This is the owner's state room, shot for advertising (during construction):

http://www.claris.fr/diaporama/CMN_58M_PUB2006/images/_G8A7533.jpg

The same while preparing the above shoot:

http://www.claris.fr/diaporama/CMN_chantier_mars2006/images/_G8A7396.jpg

Still during construction, the "passerelle":

http://www.claris.fr/diaporama/CMN_chantier_mars2006/images/_G8A7430.jpg

and this is the main salon during construction:

http://www.claris.fr/diaporama/CMN_chantier_mars2006/images/_G8A7407.jpg

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 29th, 2007, 01:14 PM

You don't imagine the size of such yacht, there's a lot of room:

Okay, they are not all going to be that size, but what was the focal length for those?

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

And the 1Ds Mk II's successor (2008 Q1, or Photokina Q3?) is supposedly going to be 16-bit, according to a little birdy whispering in Asher's ear. Don't know how the smaller sensels will affect the image quality in the end though (maybe same noise as the Mark II, litlle less DR, but with smoother tonality).

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 29th, 2007, 01:30 PM

Okay, they are not all going to be that size, but what was the focal length for those?

Sigma 12-24, most about 15 mm if I remember well (versions with Exif are in the office, and I'm home now…) The ad shot was @15

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

And the 1Ds Mk II's successor (2008 Q1, or Photokina Q3?) is supposedly going to be 16-bit, according to a little birdy whispering in Asher's ear. Don't know how the smaller sensels will affect the image quality in the end though (maybe same noise as the Mark II, litlle less DR, but with smoother tonality).

My own little bird talked to my ear about a coming soon… MF Pentax...

But let's birds for now, they don't fill my pocket!

Imagine almost doubling the resolution with a lens having a little less than half the field of view (4-6 images), and in addition having an output size twice the current one if you instead use a quarter FOV lens (16-24 images). The exact number of images needed depends on the final aspect ratio, which is of course flexible depending only on the number of rows and columns in the stitched output.

I guess the feel and try will direct me for the final field of view.
Number of shots will of course depends of focal lens. I'm affraid that the Canon L 24_70 ƒ2.8 has too much barrel, if so I'll have to find a good 35 or 50.
Or the TS-E 45mm ?

Klaus Esser

June 29th, 2007, 01:30 PM

Nicolas - as i mentioned (and Bart too) you can get a bigger angle by stitiching than with the widest ww in another combination! I like to use a 6x17cm-analogue camera with a 90mm and 75mm SuperAngulon.
They´re extremly fine for working from handheld.
But better results i can get by stitching with my 20D.

A word to postpro: using APP (AutoPanoPro) stitching/postpro is done in very short time with exellent quality. Using HDR, you have far more quality at hand than ever possible before . . doing that analogue would take 10 times of work.

Nicolas Claris

June 29th, 2007, 01:40 PM

Klaus
my post just above yours is within the stiching option! With a tripod of course, with Sebastien one of the guys working with me we have built our own nodal plate as we quite oftenly stich VR views from shots made with the 1DsII and a Sigma 8mm F3.5 EX DG Fisheye

Here is an example (47 feet "little" boat) (http://www.wauquiez.com/view_pan_qtvr.php?nom=Pilot%20Saloon%2047%20-%20Le%20carr%E9&fichier=ps47.mov)

Burnt sky is done because of horrible marina background…

For many reasons -OT- I won't go to the analogue route. Thanks anyway for suggesting.

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 29th, 2007, 02:51 PM

Sigma 12-24, most about 15 mm if I remember well (versions with Exif are in the office, and I'm home now…) The ad shot was @15

It seems a 45mm would provide the needed gains in resolution. 'Full frame' at 15mm would give a FOV of about 77x100 degrees, the TS-E 45mm is 33x44 degrees, so with overlap for blending say 9 images for an approx. identical FOV but much better resolution and larger output size.

The TS-E 90mm covers a little more than 15x22 degrees, so you'd need a large number of images, in the order of 49+ or so. If you also want to bracket for HDR that might become a bit much to handle, but it is doable and will deliver almost unsurpassable quality if all goes well.

I'm affraid that the Canon L 24_70 ƒ2.8 has too much barrel, if so I'll have to find a good 35 or 50. Or the TS-E 45mm ?

Distortion will be corrected as part of the stitching procedure, but it is best to use fixed focus lenses because you only have to figure out its optimal positioning for pivot point (entry pupil of the lens) once, instead of guessing for multiple semi-repeatable focal length settings in a zoom.

Any good (sharp to the corners, good AR coating) fixed focal length lens will do, but a TS-E will allow to change the focal plane for added DOF.

Bart

Michael Fontana

June 29th, 2007, 05:52 PM

Someone says stitching?

Doing that night and days since a week, kinda shooting at day, stitching at night, for a urbanistic architecture job, I'd go the stitching way. Klaus is right, you can't beat that quality:

- using the sweet spot of a lens, only. Thus avoiding the physical downside of every wide lens, it's border weakness in contrast, distortion, etc.

- accumulating object informations, as by no other mean you could do. When stitching this week, with bad wheater conditions - you might ask a architecture photographer to shoot at full moon's light only - no problem - but around the longuest days of the year, light is just crap - the only way to get the shots done within that week - was to stich; I have a 13x 18 sinar, but ...... the stitches with the 100 mm macro (one of the best lenses canon made) would win, hands down. I guess the 50 mm macro-stitches would still be ahead of 13/18.

Bref: very often I was amazed about the result. I might upload tomorrow some screenies, saying more than I wrote here.

When I made the decision MFback vs stitching, I asked myself, like you, how much time I'll really need a MFback. For these magazines, basically a 1 Ds-2 with a good lens is often a overkill. But sometimes, better image quality is required.

Personally, I found the stitching route to be the best; giving me the all possibilities, as using well known equipement, the best results, and - just a example, more freedom when shooting:
When stitching, If you need a bigger angle; no problem: let's just add a additional shot at the left or right side, and you might get another image.

Michael Fontana

June 30th, 2007, 04:06 AM

ok, here's one of these stitches:

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/100mm_FFstich.jpg

The pano is 200/50 cm/300 dpi, the bottom left is 100%, straight out of the stitcher and unsharpend.

BTW: when stitching with shiftlenses, you'll never get the distortion away, unless you calculate the sensor's offsett for each frame. That's a hell of a work.

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 04:07 AM

Thanks Michael
another one to drive me to the stiching route…

I just come bck from my local Canon dealer and got him lend me a 50mm ƒI.8 II (the one in "plastic"), just to try a validation of the technic for me…

Thanks all for your good advices, continue posting if you have other ideas, that may help more people than me alone ;-)

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 04:10 AM

Your pano posted just before my answer to your previous post…

amazing the amonut of details, this is what I'm looking for. What camera/lens combo did you use?

Klaus Esser

June 30th, 2007, 04:40 AM

Klaus Esser

June 30th, 2007, 04:42 AM

Hey Michael!

Last night i downloaded APP 1.4.0 Alpha Mac - works well! Some minor issues.

best, Klaus

Michael Fontana

June 30th, 2007, 04:53 AM

Your pano posted just before my answer to your previous post…

amazing the amonut of details, this is what I'm looking for. What camera/lens combo did you use?

That was with 1 Ds-2 and the Canon 100 macro. For going wider, I use the 50 mm macro, and further, the 28 mm distagon.

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 04:54 AM

Hi Nicolas!

Fine shot and - of course - fine boat . . . :-)

Using HDR you´d have had full sky-information while keeping the shown interior impression.

Yes Klaus, I know that HDR would have brung much more details in the sky but I didn't want (cranes in the background…). I also think that sometime, having a pure white sky may bring the feeling of high light, sun, summer, heat…

Michael Fontana

June 30th, 2007, 04:54 AM

Hey Michael!

Last night i downloaded APP 1.4.0 Alpha Mac - works well! Some minor issues.

best, Klaus

Yep, I gave it a try, last night too: works much better with the 15 mm fish than the old way, aka, defishing and stitching with APP 1.3. Zenith/Nadir is much easier as well!

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 06:28 AM

Yep, I gave it a try, last night too: works much better with the 15 mm fish than the old way, aka, defishing and stitching with APP 1.3. Zenith/Nadir is much easier as well!

Any link for the download ?-)

Dan Walsh

June 30th, 2007, 07:11 AM

Have you considered the Zork adapter with the Pentax 35FA. All reports from those who've used this combo rave about the resolution and lack of distortion plus with the ability to shift, you can obtain the
equivalent view of a 17mm lens. I think the medium format route for this job would be frustrating unless you had lot's of time to test and several brands to compare.

Klaus Esser

June 30th, 2007, 07:24 AM

Hi Nicolas!

"but I didn't want (cranes in the background…). I also think that sometime, having a pure white sky may bring the feeling of high light, sun, summer, heat…"

Right! Understand.

best, Klaus

Klaus Esser

June 30th, 2007, 07:25 AM

Any link for the download ?-)

http://en.wiki.autopano.net/Latest_Beta

bst, Klaus

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 07:34 AM

Thanks Dan

at first glance this looks promising too… will dig also that solutions during the week-end...
(including trying to find if I can afford it!)

Do others have any opinions about this combo?

Klaus? Michael? Bart? Leonardo? Asher? others?

Klaus Esser

June 30th, 2007, 08:49 AM

Thanks Dan

at first glance this looks promising too… will dig also that solutions during the week-end...
(including trying to find if I can afford it!)

Do you mean that the Pentax 35 will be a 17 on FF 1DSII or we can get 17 mm while stitching?
Do others have any opinions about this combo?

Klaus? Michael? Bart? Leonardo? Asher? others?

Hi Nic!

For stitching inside rooms i found a 20mm or a 35mm ideal. Best is one which doesn´t produce CAs, you´ll have to correct in the RAW-converter.
As i mentioned before: i use manual Nikon lenses, shoot RAWs and put them straight into Photomatix, make a tonemapping or a simple compressing and put the outcomes into APP.
That´s all done in comfortably short time.
You also can bypass Photomatix by putting the RAW-Files straight into APP and make a tonemapping in it´s editor . . i prefer the other way, but that´s more a matter of personal preferences.

best, Klaus

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 11:02 AM

http://en.wiki.autopano.net/Latest_Beta

bst, Klaus

Vielen Dank! Klaus

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 30th, 2007, 01:12 PM

Do others have any opinions about this combo?

I have no personal experience with the Zoerk adapters, so I can't really comment on those. However, you do not really need the shift capability for your particular use. The tilt capability can come in handy, but is not mandatory.

The better the lens is, the smoother the postprocessing will be. The TS-E 45mm is a bit disappointing with respect to the Chromatic aberration, it'll add an additional post processing step to remove that first, especially important if you want to do HDR bracketing. Other than that, it is a sharp solidly built lens which does allow tilt (focus plane) when you need it.

Keeping your requirements in mind, high quality detail (woodgrain, silk, carpets, chrome), you basically need a lens that is capable of giving you that. Obviously you'll want good bokeh (in the unlikely case you are going to use it), and the lens should be flare free for high light-contrast (windows, chrome/gold/silver, room lights) when you use natural light. Tilt capability is just a bonus.

You need a lens in the 50mm range (relatively good correction of residual lens aberrations for a reasonable price, 50mm f/1.8 is dirt cheap, the f/1.4 has better flare resistance). That focal length allows to capture excellent resolution (esp. after some downsampling), while keeping the number of shots needed for the angle of view to an acceptable volume and thus it opens bracketing as a viable HDR option.

Of paramount importance is your camera+lens mounting platform for 3D rotation around a single 'entry-pupil' spot in space. When it is difficult to reliably setup/use, you'll get frustrated with stitching pretty soon because it is too much work making the exposures and also because of the resulting postprocessing issues.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

June 30th, 2007, 01:39 PM

Bonsoir Bart
thanks for your new input.

I have just shot a serie of tests at home (comparable volume of a standard salon in an average sized motor yacht)
Series are made with 1Ds2 with lenses: 50 and 24 plus a shoot at 12.

Processing the stiched ones with autopano, but with a Powerbook G4, it's damned long!

Of course I'll post the results.

I have read a l ot since this afternoon to understand the Zork adapter with the Pentax 35FA combo and came to the same conclusion as what you've posted.

The level of camera when shooting is high enough in the room so I don't need the shift capability… but what a tool for Architecture!

I too don't like the idea of the amount of work with stitching but I think this is the right answer to my question.

At first glance, I noticed that, when shooting the tests, the 50mm doesn't provide enough height, hence the test @24mm maybe 35 mm would be enough, we'll see when panos will be processed…

Thanks again to all

Bart_van_der_Wolf

June 30th, 2007, 03:50 PM

I have read a l ot since this afternoon to understand the Zork adapter with the Pentax 35FA combo and came to the same conclusion as what you've posted.

The level of camera when shooting is high enough in the room so I don't need the shift capability… but what a tool for Architecture!

Yep, but e.g. product photography can also benefit from the shift. It allows to make products look larger than life, by using a lower shooting position, but with a different projection 'distortion'.

I too don't like the idea of the amount of work with stitching but I think this is the right answer to my question.

If anything, its a whole lot cheaper than a medium format solution (which is nice if you have a huge volume of paying assignments). A good workflow and quality lenses and camera platform setup will reduce the postprocessing issues and thus save time/money. It then also becomes easier for automatic stitchers to get a good solution without human intervention.

At first glance, I noticed that, when shooting the tests, the 50mm doesn't provide enough height, hence the test @24mm maybe 35 mm would be enough, we'll see when panos will be processed…

You could try shooting in portrait orientation, but even then you probably need to add another row of tiles. As long as there are a few items with a perfectly vertical/horizontal orientation in some of the images, there is no need to shoot perfectly level (the stitching software will adjust when stitching). You can shoot one row below horizontal, and one above horizontal, with some overlap. However, that requires setting the Nodal/entry pupil point for 3D camera movement if you want to avoid foreground parallax issues.

The amount of image overlap needed depends on the situation. For (HDR) blending, or when there are moving objects, it can be advantageous to use up to 50% overlap, for less demanding subjects 10-30% can be sufficient. Smaller overlaps are generally sufficient with perfect entry-pupil settings.

Bart

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 11:21 AM

There we are, after a trial shoot inhouse, hours of learning autopano (still a lot to understand! the options hereafter are 12_24 FF landscape orientation or stiched portrait 35mm (24-70 set at 35 for the trial).
The test with the 50 mm as shown that it would need a second row.
One row is for now a lot of work, I'm not sure I'll undertake the 2 rows route. Or even the stitched route, really to much time to spend…

So, 12-24 @ 12 ƒ11 a few seconds post process (sharpness, lightness and vignette):

http://mnclaris.free.fr/forum/Pano_G8A7610_12mm.jpg

And now the 35 mm @ ƒ11 stitched hell of time for stitching… of course the big plus is resolution (even if for tests I shot small JPG only):

http://mnclaris.free.fr/forum/Pano_35mm.jpg
Comments welcome!

Klaus Esser

July 1st, 2007, 11:43 AM

Hi Nic!

Well done! Try 3 rows with 35mm and it´s very wide-angled. Next step would be HDR . . :-)

best, Klaus

Ray West

July 1st, 2007, 12:02 PM

Hi Nicolas,

wide angle lens makes unnatural distortions in interiors - in many cases 'flat bottles'. If you are stitching, try 50mm lens, portrait, see if you think it is better. You will obviously need more shots per same width, but I think it will be a far better result. I guess the cheap 50mm 1.8 could be fine. I think, if you have plenty of overlap, the stitching will be much faster. I have not used the software you mentioned, but when I played around, I overlapped the images by about a third.

Best wishes,

Ray

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 12:29 PM

Hi Ray
I agree with you, but either my English is too bad, or you did not read me completely.
I made a test (not posted) with a 50mm in portrait mode and a second row of images is absolutely needed.

I believe that it will be too much work (price paid/service returned).
In fact I have to admit that I like to spend least possible time in PP … Hence my first intent with MF.

Asher Kelman

July 1st, 2007, 01:43 PM

Different projections or different pictures in your composites, Nicolas?

I have the Zork with the Pentax 6x7 45mm lens and it's simply wonderful. I have it mounted in a RRS setup for easy rotation of the setup without crashing against the edge of the camera by the shutter button where 1D series cameras project a little more.

Asher

Michael Fontana

July 1st, 2007, 01:57 PM

Bonsoir Nicolas

I've the Zörk too, with two hassi lenses; but I don't use it very much. Parth of it is that I had the same issues as Asher "crashing against the edge of the camera" and then, the hassi wides do have distortions, which make iit complex for architecture and its request for straight lines. It's rather difficult to correct that, when flatstitching.

I find the stitching approach to be more flexible.

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 01:59 PM

I'm so jealous!

12-24 is FF uncropped
35mm is stitched, pics shot on a tripod, just rotating, no nodal plate… 5 images in one row

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 02:05 PM

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 02:11 PM

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 02:17 PM

Sorry, I need some more help, can't do the maths!

The Pentax 35FA used with a FF 24x36 camera will give what equivalent focal?

Asher Kelman

July 1st, 2007, 02:28 PM

Nicolas, I dont think there is any change in the focal length as the lens, to be best of my knowledge is mounted at the same distance from the CMOS sensor ast the MF lens is from the film plane when used as designed.

That's what I understand.

The word "crashing is too harsh! Better I should say might slighly scrape against and mark the Eos camera when the Zork is rotated. However, one can do it carefully.

My new setup I'll photograph works perfectly and there's no issue.

Asher

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 02:38 PM

Nicolas, I dont think there is any change in the focal length as the lens, to be best of my knowledge is mounted at the same distance from the CMOS sensor ast the MF lens is from the film plane when used as designed.

I'm not sure as one of the main interest of this combo is that it is using the center of the lens only, this is also why the Zörk can shift the lens… IMVHO

Nicolas Claris

July 1st, 2007, 02:41 PM

And by the way, returning to first object of this thread, MF camera and lens can only be rented in Paris (AFAIK) and this is not very convenient for me!

Michael Fontana

July 1st, 2007, 03:05 PM

Bonsoir michael

I don't get it, what do you mean by "crashing against the edge of the camera"? is this hapening when you put your camera on portrait mode on the tripod?

What Hassie lenses do you have, I read that the Pentax 35FA is one of the best. Anyway I found none in stock on the market… (in the online shops)

Nicolas

The zörk adapter, model, four years ago, had a tripod socktet, therefore the camera is moved, not the lens. This avoids "parallax errors", which is fine, but makesthe setup more complex, as the adapter hits the body of the 1 Ds-2.

http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/Zo%cc%88rk.jpg

The PSA should move further - in this picture - towards the upper left corner; but as you see on the uploaded image, its thin plate will hit the cam.

I don't know, if Mr Zörk will still state, than you can move the cam 360 degr. , but it will not work, unless you use a more complex setup. Before I bought it, I even asked Mr. Zörk about issues with my specific cam, - the 1 Ds-2- and he didn't mentioned it.

And I had to send twice the adapter to mr Zörk, for quality issues: The rotating "klicks" weren't stopping enough the heavy 1 Ds-2. It might work for ligther cams. Finally, they forgot to add the 20 mm- (shift) marks, so I had to do them myself.

Basically, I gave up the PSA for these reasons on location, as I hate to care about "fuzzy" equipements, when shooting - meanwhile its fine in the studio, when you can reshoot within a minute. IMO, the PSA is a good idea, but I had a hard time wih its imperfections.

I had the 50 and 80 mm distagon, in use.

Michael Fontana

July 1st, 2007, 03:09 PM

For calculating your angles, you might download the freeware from kekus, who makes the pantools-plugin for Mac, and PTMac, http://www.kekus.com/software/fovcalculator.html

leonardobarreto.com

July 1st, 2007, 03:31 PM

And by the way, returning to first object of this thread, MF camera and lens can only be rented in Paris (AFAIK) and this is not very convenient for me!

Nicolas: That is what I said in the first post to your thread: Probably the best way to go is some type of stitching solution. You don't want to test a new camera on an assignment, and an entire system of a different format, plus a digital back will probably will distract you to death in best case scenario.

MF is evolving with digital, Hasselblad is going one way and Rolley/Sinar/Leaf is going the opposite --"open source" way--, and solutions for wide angle coverage are yet to mature, but there will be more options later than now, that is for sure, so the best way to think is in long term. What are your needs going to be like and which system may go in that direction...

If you come to NY we can go shoot with my humble MF/camera/lenses..../

Michael Fontana

July 1st, 2007, 03:39 PM

BTW Michael

one can't say that autopano is easy to understand, starting from scratch yesterday night I could only achieve the image posted late in the after noon today…
That said, it was on the G4 Powerbook and test and try is loooooooong with only 5 images… it took me a while to understand how to save PSD file not flattened!

and then, the result was far from perfect, I don't think the lack of nodal plate is faulty, but it is true that choosing a diagonal angle shoot in the room doesn't help much…

I'd like to know your default settings… hehe

OK, APP needs a bit of lecture of its wiki, but as it's from arround Grenoble, they have it in french, too.
I'm not sure if a G-4 powerbook is really the box to stitch, works pretty fast on a G-5-Quad with lots of RAMs.

For interiors, aka close objects, a panohead is crucial, unless you like to spend hours in PS....

Default settings: I figured out different setups, or different stitching "strategies", depending on the image requirements. From the 15 mm fisheye, to the 100 mm macro, I can use them all to stich. No additional lenses to buy....

This is one BIG advantage of stitching: It's very flexible, and when shooting, I still can enhance the "virtual" sensor size, AND the FOV (Field of View) by a adding a few shots. With a MFback, its impossible.

Example: When shooting this urbanistic panoramas, last week, (one of these beeing in that thread, another one in " Aperture and Auto Pano Pro?" ) I realised the lousy light conditions, not a beeing really good departure for what the customer wanted, but still had to be finished at the end of the week.

In better light condtions, I would have used the 50 mm macro, but as the contrast of the scene was really low, I decided to use the 100mm, bringing more resolution, aka "definition" into the picture.

Another advantage of stitching: The panohead beeing in use here is about 900 gramms, so I can carry it with me everywhere, not a big deal. On location, I can choose between shooting "normally" and stitching, maybe I'm be shooting to 80 - 90 % "normally" enough size for the magaznes, and for cover, etc, or for the principal shots, I'm stitching. I just like this flexibility.

Asher Kelman

July 1st, 2007, 03:56 PM

Here's my setup with the 6x7 Pentax and 45mm lens.

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_5478OPF_ZORK.jpg

http://www.openphotographyforums.com/2007_OPF_AK/Asher Kelman_2007/_MG_5486OPF_ZORK.jpg

This allows the Zork to be mounted very solidly on a tripod, the lens set in the rotation axis of the head and the Zork shift moves the camera, not the lens.

This way one can use the setup in portrait or landscape mode and also optionally extend the view by rotation!

Asher

Michael Fontana

July 1st, 2007, 04:18 PM

Which cam, Asher?
Does it works on the 1 Ds-2, too?

Bart_van_der_Wolf

July 1st, 2007, 04:19 PM

Sorry, I need some more help, can't do the maths!

The Pentax 35FA used with a FF 24x36 camera will give what equivalent focal?

On-line Panoramic calculators (http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm) galore!

The 35mm will still be 35mm on the 1Ds Mk II, but it depends on your intended FOV (and overlap %) how many images are needed.

Bart

Bart_van_der_Wolf

July 1st, 2007, 04:35 PM

Which cam, Asher?
Does it works on the 1 Ds-2, too?

I believe all 1D series camera bodies (with the exception of the 1D Mark III) have the same form factor.

Bart

Bart_van_der_Wolf

July 1st, 2007, 04:51 PM

Bonsoir michael

I don't get it, what do you mean by "crashing against the edge of the camera"? is this hapening when you put your camera on portrait mode on the tripod?

It's relevant to explain two Panoramic MO's (methods of operation), to a relative newbie (just on this particular subject! http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif).

Some use a full swing approach, rotating in 2D or 3D about the lens' entry pupil/nodal point, others use a parallel shift left and shift right (or down and up for a vertical pano) approach (which might cause the shifted lens assembly to bump into the grip of the body, particularly in landscape orientation). In the latter case one needs to do a relatively simple shifted postprocessing of 2 images. In the former (especially 3D) case there are few limits, assuming a solid setup nails the geometrical positioning of the lens' entry pupil.

Bart

Asher Kelman

July 1st, 2007, 05:56 PM

Which cam, Asher?
Does it works on the 1 Ds-2, too?

Yes it works on any Canon camera! The camera moves. Full clearance!

Asher

Asher Kelman

July 1st, 2007, 06:03 PM

It's relevant to explain two Panoramic MO's (methods of operation), to a relative newbie (just on this particular subject! http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif).

Some use a full swing approach, rotating in 2D or 3D about the lens' entry pupil/nodal point, others use a parallel shift left and shift right (or down and up for a vertical pano) approach (which might cause the shifted lens assembly to bump into the grip of the body, particularly in landscape orientation). In the latter case one needs to do a relatively simple shifted postprocessing of 2 images. In the former (especially 3D) case there are few limits, assuming a solid setup nails the geometrical positioning of the lens' entry pupil.

Bart

It's really simpler!

The lens is mounted and fixed. It's nodal point is set at the cetner of axis of rotation of the trpod if you wish to rotate the lens too, however that is not needed most of the time, it's just an extra capability.

The camera shift to take images from overlapping parts of the massive Pentax MF lens circle. There is no issue with stitching since we are merely sampling from adjacent parts of an unshifted single lens circle.

If you wish to also swing the lens, then one has extra reach.

Asher

Klaus Esser

July 2nd, 2007, 04:00 AM

Nicolas Claris

July 2nd, 2007, 02:11 PM

Wow, so many answers! I'll try to answer all:

Michael,
thanks for posting the pics with the Zörk, now I understand and see that Asher has a better Zörk. That could be a good rock song title, LOL!:
"Asher has a better Zörk" LOL!

BTW I like colors and compostion of your pic
http://imago.macbay.de/OPF/Zo%cc%88rk.jpg
doing so just to bring an info is a beautiffull way of living photography, this should inspire all beginners: Don't snap, express your artistic feels… Great!

-----------
"I'm not sure if a G-4 powerbook is really the box to stitch"
You're right but it's my home/Sunday machine!
Close to an hour of calculation with the powerbook G4 = a few minutes with my office Dual core intel Mac…

The problem with stiching is that foreground can be very close… even in large boats…

-------------

Leonardo, "think is in long term. What are your needs going to be like and which system may go in that direction..."

I'm an old type guy and my thinking is to produce the best possible work, at least for my own sake. Then I'll try to sell it… this is always a bet on the future (past is over), the only healthy way to built this way is to have affordable bets. I always (well nearly) have bought my gear without having to pray my banker for a loan. I pay cash, even if it makes my lunch with potatoes only (we're on the bet side).
I can't pay? I don't buy. Unless I'm sure it will be paid back within the upcoming assignements.

So I am not ready to buy now a full MF system, my aim is to test in real life, but it seems to be quite difficult… Ok, I'll certainly a different way to try… maybe "If you come to NY we can go shoot with my humble MF/camera/lenses..../" is very nice invitation that I do accept! and by the way to meet you as I do like very much your work!
----------------

Asher
your explanations and pics are brilliant, thanks!

-----------------

Klaus

For autopano speed, please see above answers to Michael

"The best way is to shoot 3 rows symmetrical - one horizontal, on up and one down."
I wonder how you do this, I can't imagine that the camera stays on th same level/place on the tripod, just rotating up, horizontal and down without TSE? Does autopano accept such distortion? Any more explanation?

Once again, many many thanks to all!

Asher Kelman

July 2nd, 2007, 02:38 PM

Hi Nicolas,

AutoPanoPro is so good you can pretty well manage, (leaning on a tree or door frame to steady oneself) to shoot a three rows, hand holding the camera, by carefully moving the camera through an imaginary nodal point of the lens! Of course a pano head would be a dream and so fast!

The further away the subject is the better!

APP can use every processor core in each Intel chip so that it would be 2 in a dual processor and 4 in a quad. I don't think CS2/CS3 can take advantage of each core like that!

My MacBook Pro 17" is way faster than my dual G5 2.3 GHZ even with half the memory.

Asher

Klaus Esser

July 2nd, 2007, 02:53 PM

"I wonder how you do this, I can't imagine that the camera stays on th same level/place on the tripod, just rotating up, horizontal and down without TSE? Does autopano accept such distortion? Any more explanation?"

Of course you need a pano-head - Manfrotto SPH for example or one of the dozens of other brands.
It should be a multirow-head. Shooting a 3-row pano with 8 pictures a row takes about 10min.

Autopano perfectly stiches and planproject it - other stitchers do it also of course . . . well: maybe not this comfortable and fast . . ;-)

TSE is obsolete - because you´re tilting the camera around the lenses npp-point, which is in combination with flatstitching more extended and more universal.

best, Klaus

Michael Fontana

July 2nd, 2007, 03:45 PM

Nicolas, look:

http://www.pixelrama.de/panorama/aufnahme/animation320x200.gif

that's one row; but the cam might be looking up and down, as well; for multirows:

http://www.pixelrama.de/panorama/geraete/vr-pro.jpg

Off course, this turns, as well, but the lens is still turning arround the so called "nodal point", more precisley: NNP

Klaus Esser

July 2nd, 2007, 07:10 PM

Michael showed a very good solution - let me show you the extreme solution for gigapixel-pictures:

motorized heads with camera-controlling
http://xrez.com/services/spher/xRez_spher9.html
http://www.xrez.com/services/spher/xRez_spher1.html
http://www.xrez.com/services/spher/xRez_spher2.html

also interesting:

http://www.360pano.eu/show/?lang=1&id=39#39

best, Klaus

Michael Fontana

July 3rd, 2007, 01:33 AM

This example was just for showing the principle's of turning upsidedown the cam.

I remind, when looking for a panohead, that someone wrote, that the Novoflex (example above) is not sturdy enough for heavy cams as the 1 Ds-2, with a bigger lens.

Therefore, I didn't went for it, but for the Seitz: (http://www.galerie-photo.com/panoramique-seitz-vr.html)

That one holds a 1 Ds-2 & the macro 100 mm precisly in position.

Michael Fontana

July 3rd, 2007, 01:40 AM

Michael showed a very good solution - let me show you the extreme solution for gigapixel-pictures:
... http://www.xrez.com/services/spher/xRez_spher1.html....

best, Klaus

Klaus, the pixorbes is not a good solution, if you want make some QTVR's as well: the Nadir will show the motor block. Personally, I don't mind having this option, as well.

Klaus Esser

July 3rd, 2007, 03:51 AM

Klaus, the pixorbes is not a good solution, if you want make some QTVR's as well: the Nadir will show the motor block. Personally, I don't mind having this option, as well.

Hi Michael!

Yes - but the PixOrb isn´t designed for cubical panos - it´s designed for ultra-highres rectilinear shootings.
For cubes you don´t need 300 pics . . . :-)
But a motorized head isn´t bad at all for cubicals also. Saves time and you can mount it on a long telescope-pole.

bst, Klaus

Klaus Esser

July 3rd, 2007, 05:42 PM

here´s my own modification of a Monfrotto Head:

http://www.klausesser.de/IMG_1089.jpg
http://www.klausesser.de/IMG_1091.jpg
http://www.klausesser.de/_MG_3849.jpg

I got the L-arm made of strong alloy and set a toothed (?) plate on it with the counterpart
on the camera-arm.

the shots were hastily taken during the experimental phase on the go . . ;-)

Asher Kelman

July 3rd, 2007, 06:11 PM

How much sag of the camera is there?

Asher

Klaus Esser

July 3rd, 2007, 06:43 PM

How much sag of the camera is there?

Asher

I don´t understand "sag" . . sorry.

best, Klaus

Oh - i see: there´s absolutely no sag there, because the tilting arm is fixed by the "teeth" of the base and the"counter-teeth" of the part which is fixed to the tilting arm.
So the "teeth" of both mounted disks grab into each other and fixes the vertikal arm and the tilting camera-arm.

you can see the "teeth" of the disk on the last picture. The counter-disk is screwed to the camera arm.
When the center-screw is loosened the arm can be tilted - when the center-screw is tightened the tilt-arm can´t be moved at all. Not a fraction of a millimeter.

There´s no sag at all. :-)