Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

is it possible to do landscape with 50mm FL on APS-c
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bluedxca93 wrote:
Gerald you might think its easy. Well i would agree if you say easier. Very quick change of lightning conditions or waves , flying birds etc. That wont go well with stitching. And these elements are part of landscapes too. Indeed in the color panorama picture i had a small swarm of some birds in the source images but in the stitched image there arent there anymore. And why? 'Cause the application decided to use another image as reference.for that part.


Easy is a relative concept, of course. Any photographic technique has its limitations. You can take panorama photos in many ways. For example, you can use an image editor or the camera itself for stitching. Most digital cameras have a panorama mode. On my Sony A99 it is very simple to take a panorama photo (I believe that in more recent camera models, the procedure may be even simpler):

Quote:

Sweep Panorama
Sweep Panorama has been a Sony mainstay for a while now and has been much copied by other manufacturers. The Sony implementation remains the best we've seen. Simply press the shutter button and pan the camera. The software does a great job of stitching the images together, regardless of how stable you are during the pan. Of course, using a tripod - as we've done in the samples below - will give the best possible results. Because the camera is shooting a sequence of images, however, any object moving across your scene risks appearing multiple times or being stretched or compressed, depending how it's moving relative to your sweep. On average though, stitching errors, when they occur are rarely noticeable except at higher image magnifications.

The panorama system is relatively flexible. Not only can you specify the direction of the pan, the importance of which we'll discuss in a moment, there are two widths of panorama available and you can shoot vertically, as well as horizontally - effectively opening up a further two options if you sweep with the camera in portrait orientation, though it'd be nice not to have to delve into the main menu to adjust these settings.

The camera locks metering during the panorama, which is entirely sensible. When shooting scenes that span varying brightness levels though, be aware that the camera meters from the initial frame. In the example above, the sweep began on the left side of the scene, with the camera facing into a backlit horizon and therefore choosing a darker exposure. Compare this to the more pleasingly exposed image at the top of this page. It was shot seconds earlier from the same location, but this time with the camera metering from the right edge of the scene. Given these results, in high contrast situations we recommend beginning your pan from the darker portion of the actual scene to ensure an adequately bright exposure.


extracted from the review of A99 by dpreview.com

On the A99, individual frames for montage of the panorama are taken at an estimated rate of 3-4 fps. In the end, the panoramic photo is ready without any additional work from the photographer. The downside is that the resolution is "only" about 10 MP. That's why I prefer to use a super or ultra wide angle when I need a panoramic photo.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gerald talking utter shite again.... Either show us some of your own panoramic work or STFU.

Using the in-camera panorama tools is hardly the best way of doing things, they exist more as a convenience for non-technical people rather than an advanced tool. Software like Hugin or Autopano Giga is massively more flexible and capable.

Here's one I shot in March with my Fuji XF1 compact, it's 9 frames stitched in Autopano Giga:



A couple more from May, again done with the XF1 and Autopano Giga. The wide end of the XF1's lens is only 24mm equiv. which isn't wide enough to capture the interior vistas of the train shed at Preston station.




I often use stitching to get ultrawide views that I couldn't achieve using the camera and lens I happen to have with me, such as this shot with a Pentax Q7 and a Fujinon-TV f1.6 5.5mm



You can get some unrealistic but artisticly interesting perspectives using the technique, this is the same day as above, Pentax Q7 and Fujinon 5.5mm again, obviously it's also been processed quite a bit, but I felt that was in keeping with the subject and it's extreme shininess



Here's a couple of more traditonal stitched images, using my Sony a850 and Minolta AF 70-210 beercan lens. First one is stitched from 9 images, second one from 10, both using Auopano Giga.




So while's stitching is not particularly difficult, to call it 'easy' is a truly stupid statement that belies the lack of experience and knowledge of the troll who said it.

Like any other aspect of photography, stitching takes time and effort to learn and master, but once you do learn how to do it effectively, you have added a powerful and flexible new tool to your arsenal so it is well worth the effort to learn and master.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice shots!

This is getting a bit off-topic, but if there are any obvious subjects near the lens (e.g. notible close foreground elements like boulders etc), best practice for stitching is to rotate the setup not around the camera tripod socket position, but rather rotate around the position of the entrance pupil of the lens (requires an offset bracket). This is to avoid the problem of parallax. With a 50mm lens the difference will not be too visible, but when stitching wideangle shots together it matters more.

Fisheyes are a problem for stitching as their entrance pupil isn't located in a fixed position (even if you could work around the issue of their projection...)


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's interesting. One thing I've found is that the best lenses to use for stitching are those that have the least distortion, for instance, a 35 or 50mm lens is generally preferable to a 28mm lens for that reason. The stitching software can have difficulty and produces a very distorited view with grossly curved lines that is very difficult to correct using tools like Photoshop's Warp.

The lack of distortion in the ultrawide projector lenses I have been playing with makes them suitable for stitching, although with such a wide view to begin with, they aren't ideal in other aspects.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
That's interesting. One thing I've found is that the best lenses to use for stitching are those that have the least distortion, for instance, a 35 or 50mm lens is generally preferable to a 28mm lens for that reason. The stitching software can have difficulty and produces a very distorited view with grossly curved lines that is very difficult to correct using tools like Photoshop's Warp.

The lack of distortion in the ultrawide projector lenses I have been playing with makes them suitable for stitching, although with such a wide view to begin with, they aren't ideal in other aspects.


Would it not be possible to correct for distortion on each individual image before stitching together? (for simple barrel/pincushion at least, complex moustache distortion is a lot more tricky in absence of a lens profile...)


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've tried that and it's hit and miss, sometimes it works, other times, the stitching software then has diffulties stitching the images together.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 2:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I've tried that and it's hit and miss, sometimes it works, other times, the stitching software then has diffulties stitching the images together.


I see.

Well in that case, (lower resolution permitting), the vertical-centre crop of a fish-eye shot is still my preferred route:

Bath, with Minolta MD FISHEYE ROKKOR 16mm/2.8 + FishEye-Hemi PP:


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's an excellent shot. I could replicate that with stitching I think, but it wouldn't be easy as it would require some work in Photoshop and the warp tool to remove some residual distortion.

One thing that stitching does allow is to make images where you have both rows and colums of images, not just 2x2 or 3x3 but some really complex things like 3x11 or 4x7.

By comparison, the built-in panorama tools in cameras aren't worth considering, they are little more than a toy in terms of capability.

This was with a Schneider AV-Cinelux f2.8 60mm projector lens on my Sony a850, it's 8 images in a 2x4 grid:



This was the a850 again but with the Minolta AF 70-210 beercan, 4 images in a 2x2 grid:



Point being, stitching is a very versatile tool that enables all kinds of persepctives and views, it's not just for making landscape vistas.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the church shot!. Not sure what adjustments you did to it, but it has an Atkinson Grimshaw painterly feel to it! Like 1 small

Stitching big landscape vistas from 50mm images is certainly one possibility if you only have a 50mm lens (to get back to the original topic).


PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2022 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure what I did to the church shot, the sun is setting just to the left of the church, and it was very dull, weak light due to the time of year, so I probably turned up the contrast a lot.

I have a lot of examples of landscapes done with a 50mm lens and stitching, it's a technique that works well as 50mm lenses tend to have very ltitle distortion and be long enough that you get a load of fine detail in the end result after stitching.