World Wide Panorama mailing list archive

Mailinglist:wwp@yahoogroups.com
Sender:Robert C. Fisher
Date/Time:2005-Jun-24 15:20:00
Subject:Re: Fisheye vs. Rectilinear

Thread:


wwp@yahoogroups.com: Re: Fisheye vs. Rectilinear Robert C. Fisher 2005-Jun-24 15:20:00
Hi Tom
I have used both the 14mm Sigma and currently own the 14mm Nikkor. My 
personal choice is the Nikkor, superior contrast and sharpness with 
really low flair. I had purchased the 14mm Sigma when I bought my Fuji 
S2, after shooting a few months with it I wasn't happy with the images 
so I rented the 14mm Nikkor for a few days and was really pleased with 
the images I shot with it. I bought a 14mm Nikkor the next week, boy 
did my wallet hurt. The Nikkor was $1500US as opposed to the Sigma 
which was around $700US. The thing that I think I noticed was the 
detail in objects farther from the camera. I also have a 8mm Sigma and 
see he same thing, good sharpness up close but lack of definition in 
things farther away. Some times sharpening will bring out these details 
but sometimes not.

The answer to your question is yes you can get higher resolution in 
your images by going to the 14mm, you will also be shooting 22-24 
images per sherical pano. I think the raw stitches from my 14mm were 
around 16K px by 8K px. The panos I shoot with my 10.5mm are 8450 x 
4225 px.

As for the flair issue I find flair more of an issue shooting interiors 
than exteriors. It's hard to control every light inside a space you may 
not have full control of. I have shot many interiors where you have 
lots of track lighting or lights in the ceiling that you need to light 
the shot but flair the lens in some of the images. Also the look of the 
point sources are different with the two lenses, I like the look of the 
14mm Nikkor more than that of the Sigma.

If you think your client will notice the difference and you can afford 
the 14mm Nikkor go for that one but if you like the look of the Sigma 
then I would use that lens. Rent both lenses if you can and shoot some 
quick tests to see the differences. The 14mm Nikkor I rented was 
$50/day at Samy's Camera in Los Angeles. There should be a camera store 
in Winston or Charlotte you could find the lenses for rent.

On Jun 24, 2005, at 6:52 AM, Tom Lassiter wrote:

> I've been using a 10.5 mm Nikkor, stitching with PTMac, and getting
> good sharpness and easy stitches with PTMac.
>
> I'm trying to land a client who has an extremely critical eye for
> detail and resolution. He also has a low tolerance for distortion, so
> the spherical QTVR images will have a more limited wide "zoom" so
> than I might normally deliver.
>
> The question: Can I expect more detail/higher resolution in the
> finished image by switching to a 14 mm rectilinear lens? Reviews of
> the Sigma 14 mm seem fairly positive, except for flare. I'll be
> shooting interiors, so that may be less of an issue. Or for a
> super-critical client, is the 14 mm Nikkor wide-angle necessary?
>
> Thanks for any guidance.
>
> Tom
>


Cheers
Robert C. Fisher
QTVR Photography/Cinematography
www.rcfisher.com


Next thread:

Previous thread:

back to search page