What Lenses Do You Use for Panoramics?

[keithcooper]

very wide options

Although what works with it takes a lot more guesswork/experimentation, I've stitched 14mm shots, such as below and used a shifted TS-E17 for wide coverage.

To stitch vertically shifted images I first extend the canvas by twice the shift (the same technique that I use to fix residual CA if needed)

The wider the pano view, the more important it becomes to consider the projection geometry used after the initial stitching.

Just a few more options to push things a bit beyond the usual pano look ;-)

 

[DigitalDivide]

I use Fuji SW 90/8 on 617

Nice shots Superka! I was wondering if someone would mention any of the medium format panoramic film cameras. I'm curious - did you need to use a center filter for these pictures?

I have lusted after the Fuji GX-617 for a while, but it is a bit expensive for what would be very much a niche camera for me. Even more so the insanely pricey Horeseman models. I do however have a Noblex 6/150 Pro that I recently got on eBay; it just came back from a complete overhaul and repair, and I'm really looking forward to using it for the first time. 8)

 

[aroo]

I end up with 2 or 3 rows of photos in PS, which is really irritating.

Ya for sure. Break them up into smaller groups and then stitch the stitches, it usually works!

 

[mackguyver]

I end up with 2 or 3 rows of photos in PS, which is really irritating.

Ya for sure. Break them up into smaller groups and then stitch the stitches, it usually works!

Hmm, didn't try that one. I'll have to dig those photos up this weekend and give them another try. Thanks for the tip!

 

[Logan]

17-40 handheld unless the subject is very far away, then 70-200
photoshops auto stitching, on auto or sometimes cylindrical.

 

[Vern]

I most often use the 24mm TS II for it's optical quality and ability to shift for seamless, distortion free panos. Also use the 70-200 II a lot.

Here's a pano from Canyonlands, the Needles, Druid Arch - 4 portrait oriented shots w the 24 + HDR. Too wide an angle to cover by shifting this time.

 

[Superka]

I use Fuji SW 90/8 on 617

Nice shots Superka! I was wondering if someone would mention any of the medium format panoramic film cameras. I'm curious - did you need to use a center filter for these pictures?

I have lusted after the Fuji GX-617 for a while, but it is a bit expensive for what would be very much a niche camera for me. Even more so the insanely pricey Horeseman models. I do however have a Noblex 6/150 Pro that I recently got on eBay; it just came back from a complete overhaul and repair, and I'm really looking forward to using it for the first time. 8)

Hello! Yes, I use Center ND, for 617 and 90mm it is a "must have".
Fuji GX is really expensive. I use Chinese DaYi camera, there is also Gaoersi brand, that is more affordable then Fuji. Still, there is one great camera for 6x17 - it is Shen Hao PTB 617. I never used it, but those who did - were happy. If I would buy 6x17 now, I'll go for Shen Hao PTB 617, probably.
I don't like Noblex because of its cylindrical projection. I prefer rectangular.

 

[surapon]

Since starting to take panoramic shots more seriously a year or so ago by purchasing a basic RRS single-row pano kit, I've struggled a bit to find my footing with the best lens(es) to use. Lenses in the 35-70mm are frequently recommended, but I've seen mind-blowing panos at much wider and longer focal lengths.

I've been most successful with my 50L (seriously) and mildly successful with my 24-70II at 24-35mm but I'm very curious to hear to what others use and why. If find the 24-70II to have rather high distortion at 24-35 that makes stitching more challenging, whereas the 50L shots always come together perfectly.

If you use primes vs. zooms, or other lenses altogether (macro, fisheye, tilt/shift, etc.) I'd like to hear about that as well.

Dear Friend, Mr. mackguyver .
Yes, Long time ago, I use most 24 mm Lens ( 24-70 mm) to take 3-4 Photos and Stitch to gather in PS.
But Until last year, I get TS-E 24 mm. F/ 3.5 L MK II and never go back to use 24-70 L for Panoramic again.
Yes, For TS-E, I use Shift ( Vertical position VIA. Camera Body), and get 3 times of larged files.
Yes, I just get 14 MM Lens, But I never use for Panoramic Photos, because of the Distortion of the edges of the photo that hard to get the great Stitched Photo.
And So many time that I use 8 mm Fish eye Lens and shoot at the middle of the View, For Minimum Fish eyes effect, and Crop as the Panoramic Picture.
Have a great day, Sir.
See you next 12 days, After I come back from Utah National Parks Trip.
Surapon

 

[atkinsr]

Assuming distance isn't an issue (requiring either super telephoto or ultra wide angle), when I shoot panoramas, it's usually with the idea of printing a large image, so i tend to shoot vertical with the highest resolution lens I have with me. if I plan on going *really* large (canvas, etc) and I'm stitching anyway, I will sometimes zoom in as far as possible and take a ton of images (20-30 isn't uncommon) and make one large image out of them for increased pixel density... something akin to (though smaller than) a gigapixel type image.

 

[surapon]

Yes, Long time ago, I use most 24 mm Lens ( 24-70 mm) to take 3-4 Photos and Stitch to gather in PS.
But Until last year, I get TS-E 24 mm. F/ 3.5 L MK II and never go back to use 24-70 L for Panoramic again.
Yes, For TS-E, I use Shift ( Vertical position VIA. Camera Body), and get 3 times of larged files.
Yes, I just get 14 MM Lens, But I never use for Panoramic Photos, because of the Distortion of the edges of the photo that hard to get the great Stitched Photo.
And So many time that I use 8 mm Fish eye Lens and shoot at the middle of the View, For Minimum Fish eyes effect, and Crop as the Panoramic Picture.

 

[Rocky]

In my mind, the reason of making Pano is because the lens is not wide enough to cover the scene that you want. On the survey, I see the percentage of people using normal and tele is almost the same as people using wide or ultra wide. If you can take one picture with the wide lens, why people want to stitch 4 picture from a normal lens to get the same scene? If the scenery includes water or trees, you can never get a perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level.

 

[DigitalDivide]

Hello! Yes, I use Center ND, for 617 and 90mm it is a "must have".
Fuji GX is really expensive. I use Chinese DaYi camera, there is also Gaoersi brand, that is more affordable then Fuji. Still, there is one great camera for 6x17 - it is Shen Hao PTB 617. I never used it, but those who did - were happy. If I would buy 6x17 now, I'll go for Shen Hao PTB 617, probably.
I don't like Noblex because of its cylindrical projection. I prefer rectangular.

Thanks - I have seen some of the Chinese options online and wondered if they were any good. I haven't come across Shen Hao though, I will have to keep an eye out for it.

Yes, the Noblex is a swing lens design so the projection is quite different. It will be interesting to see how I get on with it. I think I will have to be careful with my choice of subject matter - architecture is probably to be avoided unless you want a very particular effect, or you prefer your buildings to be cigar-shaped! It is also crucial to ensure that the camera is precisely level, and it is equipped with bubble levels for this purpose (one of which is visible through the viewfinder for handheld shots).

To (sort of) answer the original question posed by the thread, my Noblex features a Tessar 50mm f/4.5 lens which swings through an arc of 146 degrees. By my calculation this is approximately equivalent to stitching with a 35mm lens on FF in portrait mode or 24mm in landscape orientation, which seems to be within the range of what most people here are using.

One big advantage of the swing lens design is that light reaches the lens through a narrow slit, so there is no issue with sharpness in the corners - even with 146 degrees of view, which is wider than anything short of an 8-15 fisheye zoom on the Canon. 8)

 

[keithcooper]

In my mind, the reason of making Pano is because the lens is not wide enough to cover the scene that you want. On the survey, I see the percentage of people using normal and tele is almost the same as people using wide or ultra wide. If you can take one picture with the wide lens, why people want to stitch 4 picture from a normal lens to get the same scene? If the scenery includes water or trees, you can never get a perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level.

Larger more detailed prints - I regularly print full width on our 44" Canon iPF8300

The 72" wide shot of Cannon beach I showed earlier would be a pretty low res crop from a single shot.

As to perfect stitching - it's a compromise and sometimes requires more post production work than others. Fortunately stitching software continues to get smarter, meaning I very rarely have to do much work related to stitching errors.

Trees and water are not the problem they might seem (it needs practice though - one reason I'm regularly trying panos, even if not for an actual print).

As to "perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level" - I don't really care, since it's the overall print that matters. The only people who can spot tiny stitching errors are people who do a lot of panoramic work, and they never ever buy prints ;-)

 

[Rocky]

In my mind, the reason of making Pano is because the lens is not wide enough to cover the scene that you want. On the survey, I see the percentage of people using normal and tele is almost the same as people using wide or ultra wide. If you can take one picture with the wide lens, why people want to stitch 4 picture from a normal lens to get the same scene? If the scenery includes water or trees, you can never get a perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level.

Larger more detailed prints - I regularly print full width on our 44" Canon iPF8300

The 72" wide shot of Cannon beach I showed earlier would be a pretty low res crop from a single shot.

As to perfect stitching - it's a compromise and sometimes requires more post production work than others. Fortunately stitching software continues to get smarter, meaning I very rarely have to do much work related to stitching errors.

Trees and water are not the problem they might seem (it needs practice though - one reason I'm regularly trying panos, even if not for an actual print).

As to "perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level" - I don't really care, since it's the overall print that matters. The only people who can spot tiny stitching errors are people who do a lot of panoramic work, and they never ever buy prints ;-)

Thanks. That answers quite a few questions in my mind. I have done a lot of stitching, mainly for the scenery that I cannot capture with my widest lens. at pixel level I can see the wave of the sea does not match and the trees does not match due to the wind. Now you have confirmed that is normal. Thanks

 

[Superka]

Some of my thoughts about panoramics and how I came to it.

http://superka-01.livejournal.com/2616.html

 

[dgatwood]

In my mind, the reason of making Pano is because the lens is not wide enough to cover the scene that you want. On the survey, I see the percentage of people using normal and tele is almost the same as people using wide or ultra wide. If you can take one picture with the wide lens, why people want to stitch 4 picture from a normal lens to get the same scene? If the scenery includes water or trees, you can never get a perfect stitched scenery if you look at it at pixel level.

Speaking only for myself, I enjoy creating 360-degree panoramas. Sadly, even my 16-35 L II won't go that wide.