After fiddling around with this lens for a couple of days and finally finding out the difference between tilting and shifting I tried my first test stitch. I bought this lens in the hopes that I would be able to get a wider FOV for architectural interiors. Shifting this lens left-center-right gives me pretty close to the same FOV offered by the 14mm end of the 14-24 zoom but without the distortion. Please make some test shot allowances for this image... no post other than auto-merge in PS and the jpg compression is pretty bad on this web sized image. Am posting this just to give folks some food for thought and to show what this wonderful lens is capable of.
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!
Nikon PC-E24
- Thread starter David K
- Start date
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Hmmm . Looks pretty damn nice David
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I see just a touch of barrel but it ain't bad at all . Look at that back column
Re: Nikon PC-E24, stitching
Here is an experiment I did at the Mother Bethel AME Church in Philadelphia. The problem I see with this shot is a matter of perspective, not barrel distortion - notice the shape of the area around the organ. This church is very old, so the columns are not necessarily plumb, which causes altered perception. While most vertical lines are plumb I noticed the right side of the arch over the organ seemed to be off and no matter what I did in CS4 distortion filter, I had to make a choice as to where I wanted to nail down the proper vertical alignment.
Here is an experiment I did at the Mother Bethel AME Church in Philadelphia. The problem I see with this shot is a matter of perspective, not barrel distortion - notice the shape of the area around the organ. This church is very old, so the columns are not necessarily plumb, which causes altered perception. While most vertical lines are plumb I noticed the right side of the arch over the organ seemed to be off and no matter what I did in CS4 distortion filter, I had to make a choice as to where I wanted to nail down the proper vertical alignment.
Last edited:
Hello David :
Appreciate your test and sharing it with us specially as I had a similar question not too long ago.
The test you performed was when the camera was in the landscape / horizontal position. Can I request you to perform a similar test where 2 to 3 images are stitched together but while the camera is in the portrait / vertical position. I wish to gauge what the horizontal fov would be in this case. Perhaps you have another lens of a slightly longer focal length to compare just the horizontal fov between the 2 views.
Can help me with this when time permits - Thanks,
Jai
Appreciate your test and sharing it with us specially as I had a similar question not too long ago.
The test you performed was when the camera was in the landscape / horizontal position. Can I request you to perform a similar test where 2 to 3 images are stitched together but while the camera is in the portrait / vertical position. I wish to gauge what the horizontal fov would be in this case. Perhaps you have another lens of a slightly longer focal length to compare just the horizontal fov between the 2 views.
Can help me with this when time permits - Thanks,
Jai
routlaw
Member
Jai
I use this lens quite often and in fact just returned from a trip to Zion NP in Utah where I was using it daily and often with the intent of stitching frames. One can certainly do what you request with this lens but with some limitations. The shift in either direction is 11 mm for a total of 22 mm, added to the short dimension makes for a 46x36 format and a rough equivalent to about 16-18 mm lens from what I can determine. Unfortunately image quality does fall off toward the corners however with this lens. Its useable but you can certainly see the difference.
I generally use only a portion of the shift creating a square image for overall better quality when stitching frames together. The 85 PC on the other hand holds up much better to the maximum shifts.
Hope this helps.
Rob
Hi Rob,
A fov of 18mm ( horizontal ) in the portrait/vertical position would work well for me ! Yes ! I can understand that the edges are not at their best with the lens is shifted all the way - Perhaps a shift of 9mm either way would reduce the reduction in image quality at the edges.
By any chance would you be willing to post an image or two - What camera do you use - Wondering if the poor results would be further highlighted with a D3x than a D3 / D700 !
Thanks.
Jai
A fov of 18mm ( horizontal ) in the portrait/vertical position would work well for me ! Yes ! I can understand that the edges are not at their best with the lens is shifted all the way - Perhaps a shift of 9mm either way would reduce the reduction in image quality at the edges.
By any chance would you be willing to post an image or two - What camera do you use - Wondering if the poor results would be further highlighted with a D3x than a D3 / D700 !
Thanks.
Jai
routlaw
Member
Well thats if you shift to the max due you get the 16-18 FOV, but due to the soft corners most of the time I ended up going for a square format image with shifts of about 5-6 mm each way. Probably not what you were looking for. I am still editing images from the trip but will post one as soon as I can. I used the D3 along with my Betterlight scan back on this trip. The only two lenses I used with the D3 were the 24 PC/E and the 85 PC.
I suspect if the 9 micron sensor from the D3 is having problems in the corners, the D3x with its 6 micron sensor would be even worse. For this reason alone, (less than optimum glass for any of the DSLR's in short focal lengths), it's making me consider the MFDB solution again to be used when its impractical for the scan back.
Rob
routlaw
Member
Yes, exactly it does come out to the 4x5 format. Instead of shifting left and right with a vertical orientation on the camera this was a sift of up and down with horizontal orientation creating a vertical. But it works the same.
Its a great lens, though not perfect. I use it quite a bit.
Rob
How is it possible to do this lens/body opposing shifting with enough accuracy to not have registration problems?
If you shift the body 11 mm to the left (on a geared rail presumably) wouldnt you need to shift the lens EXACTLY 11mm to the right to register the pixels in precise alignment.
That sounds impossible to do with 100% accuracy manually, so i guess the software you use for stitching is correcting any slight mis-alignment?
If you shift the body 11 mm to the left (on a geared rail presumably) wouldnt you need to shift the lens EXACTLY 11mm to the right to register the pixels in precise alignment.
That sounds impossible to do with 100% accuracy manually, so i guess the software you use for stitching is correcting any slight mis-alignment?
routlaw
Member
Hi Aaron,
FWIW I have been doing this sort of thing manually in PS with my 85 PC long before stitching software was available with some reasonable accuracy. Yes the software is far easier and quicker and does a superb job. As for registration, honestly I just don't see a problem with it and at most perhaps only one pixel, well maybe two when doing this manually.
However comparing this method with pano style stitching its still more accurate, after all the pano's need to compensate for the rotation and the distortion this causes, meaning quite a bit of pixel interpolation has to be implemented. The only exception to this I am aware of is the Betterlight pano adpator, totally different concept and technology but it works very well without any interpolation what so ever.
All I can tell you is it works and works exceedingly well. I just posted several other images earlier today in Nikon forums using my 85 pc lens this way with a 3 frame stitch in some very complex scenes, ie trees, rocks etc. Each image is seamless.
Hope this helps.
Rob
Thanks Rob,
Just looking at your shots in the other thread, very impressive!
On your stitching technique with the 24pce, i am assuming you are moving both the camera and the lens, as opposed to just keeping the body stationery and shifting the lens only?
The idea of producing a square file from a dslr without cropping is what interests me.
Thanks,
Aaron
routlaw
Member
Thanks Aaron for those comments. To answer your question, no I only shift the lens either right-left or up-down, the camera is locked down on a Manfrotto 410 geared head. You only need an additional total shift of 12 mm to make a square image. I have find PS's photomerge tool to be all I need.
Rob