The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Stitching vs wideangles

Paratom

Well-known member
I wonder about the pros and cons for a tech camera of stitching vs using a wider lens and why people stitch.

The pros for stitching I see is:
-(much) higher resolution
-eventually less distorsion
-maybe you need less lenses

The pros for using a wider lens instead of stitching I see:
-you need less time taking the image and less time processing it (specially if you also use white shading)
- you can judge the exposure of the whole image in one histogramm - so it should be easier to find the right exposure compared to maybe having different bright subjects in the left and right of 2 stitched images
- you dont have any problems with subject movement (clouds, trees in the wind, people,....
- you capture one moment as it was when using a wide angle, a stitched images is like melting different points in of time into one image by software(maybe more a mental thing)
-better/easier for composition

And maybe for those who own both, a nice ultra wide angle (lets say 23,24,28) and a lens with large image circle (lets say 45,47,...) what do you prefer: stitchingor just using the wide angle and why?
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Subject movement isn't usually an issue, especially if you manually mask the stitched layers yourself. Clouds are probably the worst offenders, on a windy day.

One advantage of stitching you missed is the extra FOV possible with this method, which is the main reason I use it. Secondary reason is the extra resolution.
 

thomas

New member
I think I agree to all of your points.
Upside of wider lenses and single shot is certainly better corner sharpness.
On the other hand if you are up to big prints stitching is superior as long as corner sharpness is within a certain quality. I feel that I can get very good results at around 70MP-80MP with the P45/47XL in conventional image format (i.e. cropped to 3:4 or 2:3). So it's basically twice the image plane of the P45.
I think there is a lot to figure out for your particular needs and demands...
 

Clawery

New member
I think I agree to all of your points.
Upside of wider lenses and single shot is certainly better corner sharpness.
On the other hand if you are up to big prints stitching is superior as long as corner sharpness is within a certain quality. I feel that I can get very good results at around 70MP-80MP with the P45/47XL in conventional image format (i.e. cropped to 3:4 or 2:3). So it's basically twice the image plane of the P45.
I think there is a lot to figure out for your particular needs and demands...
I'd have to agree with Thomas on this. Corner sharpness and sheer file size would be incredible with stitching, especially if you do a 3+ image stitch. The big factor is what subject matter you will be shooting. If you are doing interiors or landscape, you would have the luxury of stitching. With other faster moving subjects you may consider single shot w/ wide lenses.

One more thing to consider is what camera you will be shooting with. If it's a standard MF body, you will have to consider one of the many pano head options that are currently on the market. Another option that can offer both wide angle and stitching (in camera) are the Cambo WDS or RS. There are current threads from Don Libby of Iron Creek Photography comparing both systems here on Get DPI.

Chris Lawery(e-mail Me)
__________________
Sales Manager, Capture Integration
Phase One, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 404.234.5195
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I'd have to agree with Thomas on this. Corner sharpness and sheer file size would be incredible with stitching, especially if you do a 3+ image stitch. The big factor is what subject matter you will be shooting. If you are doing interiors or landscape, you would have the luxury of stitching. With other faster moving subjects you may consider single shot w/ wide lenses.

One more thing to consider is what camera you will be shooting with. If it's a standard MF body, you will have to consider one of the many pano head options that are currently on the market. Another option that can offer both wide angle and stitching (in camera) are the Cambo WDS or RS. There are current threads from Don Libby of Iron Creek Photography comparing both systems here on Get DPI.

Chris Lawery(e-mail Me)



__________________
Sales Manager, Capture Integration
Phase One, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 404.234.5195
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up

Chris,
personally I have decided for the Artec, but I was interested in the subject in general.
It might influence my future lens choices. For now/ as a start I have decided for a "compromise" lens, the 35HR. It doesnt allow me much stitching/shift, but it has the angle of vieew which I find usefull for many shots.
Now I was thinking which focal length might be ideal if one wanted to do stitching. a shorter focal length with a large image circle (like the coming 40mm HR or the Schneider 35 XL) or a little longer focal length with an even larger image circle (like th 47 XL, or even something in the 60-100mm range)
I have never been a fan of stiching by turning the camera, but with shift/sliding adapter it could be easier/more accurate/better.
Cheers, Tom
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I do a lot of my Pano shots with longer lenses like the Phase 150mm for landscape work. Sometimes in landscapes you just can't get close and more times I find a longer lens the answer to this. One reason I have not gone to a tech camera yet but that maybe my style of shooting also. But my last 3 shot Pano of Lake Powell was the 150 and it's killer sharp corner to corner. Now this is me and my style but my fear is a tech camera will slow my creativity. I like to shoot more freeing feeling. Hard to describe but I am a floater when I shoot
 

jlm

Workshop Member
keep in mind that panos and stitches are different, panos are not subject to corner sharpness/lightfalloff that occurs near the fringe of the lens' image circle used in a stitch.
othoh, a stitch keeps the back in the same plane so you won't have perspective changes
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
Stitching is a term used these days to describe any joining of images together, regardless of whether the sensor moved around the plane, or the whole camera moved.

Of course each technique has its pros and cons as you point out.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Funny that this should be the first thing I read this morning. Ken Doo and I were talking and lenses and what would make a good "one-lens wonder" for a technical camera. Here's my take on stitching and wide angles...

24mm: No option of movements so this is a true one shot wonder. I guess one could attempt to do a panoramic by physically moving the camera using some sort of panning device however I've found the 24 can produce a large enough image that can be cropped into panorama proportions with little effort. You can also squeeze a little more by using 5mm shifts however you need to be prepared for the slight vignetting that'll occur.

35mm: This is a sweet lens capable of shifts going into the extreme.

72mm: Get out there a little bit better than the 35 with movements past 10mm.

120mm: Will really bring the viewer into the scene and appears to be very friendly on movements.

Back in the days of shooting 35mm I often used very long lens for my landscapes out to a 500 that I had for awhile.

So which is better stitching or one-shot wide. It really depends on a couple factors; what lens do you have with you and more importantly what are you attempting to convey/capture. I agree with just about everything that's been said about both regarding IQ so there's no need for me to go there. If I were out and had my 24 and 72 with me I might choose either one depending on how close I wanted to capture.

Re subject movement: It can be a PIA however it can be done with a little planning.

Not sure if I answered the original question however these are just my first thoughts as I finish my coffee:sleep006:

Don
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I do a lot of my Pano shots with longer lenses like the Phase 150mm for landscape work. Sometimes in landscapes you just can't get close and more times I find a longer lens the answer to this. One reason I have not gone to a tech camera yet but that maybe my style of shooting also. But my last 3 shot Pano of Lake Powell was the 150 and it's killer sharp corner to corner. Now this is me and my style but my fear is a tech camera will slow my creativity. I like to shoot more freeing feeling. Hard to describe but I am a floater when I shoot
Guy, interesting, I just felt that using a tech camera and groundglass and all manual slows me down and forces me in a positive way to take more more time for composition, but still all this with an adorable simplicity.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I do a lot of my Pano shots with longer lenses like the Phase 150mm for landscape work. Sometimes in landscapes you just can't get close and more times I find a longer lens the answer to this. One reason I have not gone to a tech camera yet but that maybe my style of shooting also. But my last 3 shot Pano of Lake Powell was the 150 and it's killer sharp corner to corner. Now this is me and my style but my fear is a tech camera will slow my creativity. I like to shoot more freeing feeling. Hard to describe but I am a floater when I shoot
Guy, interesting, I just felt that using a tech camera and groundglass and all manual slows me down and forces me in a positive way to take more more time for composition, but still all this with an adorable simplicity.
Everyone certainly has their own style of shooting which is a good thing if shooting my yourself. Sandy and I have always had different styles; I'm much more deliberate while Sandy is more "free-wheeling" - and that was when we both were shooting 35mm. I slowed down much more after MF and just about stopped now that I'm on a TC. Sandy will have taken several images by the time I have the tripod and camera setup for the first shot.

Personally I enjoy shooting a TC more each time I use it. You can't be in a hurry. It slows your senses down to the point that you become part of the landscape and you see more.

I might miss not using longer lenses however the 120mm seems good and it looks like I can go longer.

As always this has been my 2¢

Don
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Personally I enjoy shooting a TC more each time I use it. You can't be in a hurry. It slows your senses down to the point that you become part of the landscape and you see more.
This one of the reasons I might not be well suited for a workshop - I'd slow everyone down to a crawl.

Don
 

thomas

New member
It might influence my future lens choices. For now/ as a start I have decided for a "compromise" lens, the 35HR. It doesnt allow me much stitching/shift, but it has the angle of vieew which I find usefull for many shots.
Now I was thinking which focal length might be ideal if one wanted to do stitching. a shorter focal length with a large image circle (like the coming 40mm HR or the Schneider 35 XL) or a little longer focal length with an even larger image circle (like th 47 XL, or even something in the 60-100mm range)
Tom, I think the 35XL as second lens to the 35HR is not really the best option. Sure, the XL offers more movements but likely you are not going to flat stitch all the time and basically you have twice the same focal lens.
The 47XL is a great option as it offers really hugh image circle. With this lens you can use the full amount of shift the arTec is capable of. In addition you have a different focal lenght to the already existing 35HR.
Or maybe the 60HR or the Digitar 72. Me personally I'd feel the gap from 35 to 60 or even 72 a bit limiting this is why I would go for the 47XL.
But I think after some time and some more experince with your arTech and the 35HR you will see what your are missing. I thought about several lenses but infact I never needed something else as the 47XL. Maybe a 28HR ...

I have never been a fan of stiching by turning the camera, but with shift/sliding adapter it could be easier/more accurate/better.
Flat stitching is a bit easier to handle in post once used to it. The big advantage of nodal point stitching is corner sharpness. But you have to shoot much more frames. Me personally I don't like nodal stitching very much but flat stitching seems to meet my style of shooting.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
The Schneider lenses are not available for the Artec.
I also did not want to get a non-HR Rodenstock (like the 45 for example) because of the lower resolution), but the HR Rodenstocks with larger image circle are not yet available. I am not in a hurry with the decision since I have pretty much decided on the 35 allready. ( I have a 35 demo right now),
I see it as the best first lens for me, however this might differ if you think longer term about a 2 or maybe 3 lens set . After some time I will figur out what I need.
I didnt see the 35 as option for second lens (I probably wrote something which wasnt clear for the reader)

Tom, I think the 35XL as second lens to the 35HR is not really the best option. Sure, the XL offers more movements but likely you are not going to flat stitch all the time and basically you have twice the same focal lens.
The 47XL is a great option as it offers really hugh image circle. With this lens you can use the full amount of shift the arTec is capable of. In addition you have a different focal lenght to the already existing 35HR.
Or maybe the 60HR or the Digitar 72. Me personally I'd feel the gap from 35 to 60 or even 72 a bit limiting this is why I would go for the 47XL.
But I think after some time and some more experince with your arTech and the 35HR you will see what your are missing. I thought about several lenses but infact I never needed something else as the 47XL. Maybe a 28HR ...

Flat stitching is a bit easier to handle in post once used to it. The big advantage of nodal point stitching is corner sharpness. But you have to shoot much more frames. Me personally I don't like nodal stitching very much but flat stitching seems to meet my style of shooting.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
a 3 x 3 shifting stitch is pretty easy with the Horseman and it's click stops every 5cm. doing a 3 x 3 pano is not so simple unless you have a two axis rig with a degree scale on each axis...i suppose the cube owners can chuckle here.
 

thomas

New member
The Schneider lenses are not available for the Artec
WHAT??? All plans regarding a possible swap in the future are cancelled right now and forever. Sinar is a footnote of the market and offers a camera only for Sinar and V mount and exclusively for the Rodenstock lenses (without any reason but narrow-mindedness).
They are so studip, I really don't get it. Heck, what a company!

I didnt see the 35 as option for second lens (I probably wrote something which wasnt clear for the reader)
ah, okay
 

Paratom

Well-known member
WHAT??? All plans regarding a possible swap in the future are cancelled right now and forever. Sinar is a footnote of the market and offers a camera only for Sinar and V mount and exclusively for the Rodenstock lenses (without any reason but narrow-mindedness).
They are so studip, I really don't get it. Heck, what a company!
I hope I didnt say something wrong and I dont know what they plan in the future but thats seems the situation right now.
Not so much a problem for me but I totally agree it would be nicer if they offered both options.
 

etrump

Well-known member
A few other reasons:

1. Sometimes you don't have the lens you need for the scene you want. Stitching gives you a lot of flexibility without the quality loss of a zoom lens.

2. With stitching you can go wider without the WA distortion of switching to wider glass.
 
Top