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!

tech/view cameras advises required!

gerald.d

Well-known member
Gerald,



Visually, yes, there would be if a projection type other than rectilinear is adopted, or if the horizontal and/or vertical compression feature in, for example, PTGui is adjusted. However, these features are not without issues of their own.

EDIT: In addition, if an image is produced via nodal stitching rather than shift stitching then the images will differ visually - I think - given that the former represents a 'faceted' image whereas the latter preserves rectilinearity, just at a larger size than the sensor is capable of natively.

Cheers,
I get that of course if different projections are utilised, the images will look different.

But there's nothing stopping you re-projecting a single shot from a wide angle lens.

Still scratching my head as to why, unless you want the extra resolution, you'd ever make the choice to stitch multiple images from a longer focal length.

Kind regards,

Gerald.
 

Dogs857

New member
Not sure if this is allowed but if you check out the buy and sell forum I have my Rm3di kit for sale in there which could help you out.
 

torger

Active member
I think flat-stitching and/or reprojecting makes you lose a bit of the workflow convenience of a tech cam. The whole idea of a tech cam is that you with movements get the perspective you want, shoot the image, and voila it's complete! If you stitch and reproject a lot, a panohead+DSLR combo comes in mind, you usually need to stitch more frames though but with the best stitching software it won't be much difference in time spent. I think the real gain is had if you don't need to stitch at all.
 

alajuela

Active member
I think this is one of the most informative and civil set of posts I have read in a long time - thank you all
 

AreBee

Member
Gerald,

Still scratching my head as to why, unless you want the extra resolution, you'd ever make the choice to stitch multiple images from a longer focal length.
Improved image edge quality? Reduced distortion from the lens?

Not sure. Don't get me wrong: I wouldn't do it either - just putting some suggestions out there. :)

Cheers,
 

Shashin

Well-known member
As far as the wide-angle effect where round objects appear to stretch away from the optical center, there is no difference between a single and stitched image if the angle of view is the same. It is basically a projection problem of a three-dimension space being reduced to a two-dimensional one. It is the angle of view and viewing distance that are causing that not the focal length per se.
 

goesbang

Member
Hmm. As a pro architectural shooter, the considerations for me always start with the question "What is the BEST gear currently available that meets my requirements?". I am in the business of giving my clients the best work I am capable of, so for me, this is the right place to start.
The next question I consider is "what is the price difference between the best and the 2nd best options". I measure this not in dollars but in billable days of fees. At the time I chose to go with the system I currently use (IQ180, Rodenstock HR lenses on an Alpa STC), the price difference between the Alpa and the other 2 contenders at the time was about 3 days of fees. When I consider this in terms of the expected service/earning life of the camera/lenses, in my case 10-15 years, it became a non-argument. Basically, by sacrificing 3 days of fees over the next 10-15 years, I get to use my No1 choice of kit.
Only you can make the assessment of budget vs ROI. Basically, if you are an architectural shooter, you need the highest res back you can afford, a pancake camera that you can learn to shoot without using a ground glass (workflow considerations) and the best lenses that suit the back. As the lenses will probably be in service through several upgrades of back, that most likely means Rodenstock HR's for anything much shorter than 50mm given that both the 60 and 80MP backs require these. Of course next-gen backs may not have this limitation, but you can only make decisions based on the current level of knowledge.
 
Top