360 degrees panoramic VR photography
ProfHankD: Hooray! I love fisheyes and the world could use another circular 185-degree choice, especially one with a modest price, really close focus, and good IQ.
"Lensbaby deliberately designed the internal lens barrel of the Circular Fisheye to be reflective" -- BOOO! HISS! This is a very bad idea if the reflections can ever intrude on the active image circle... which at least one of the sample shots (skiing) seems to show.
Flare?? FLARE?!?!Booooooooooooooooooo!!!I am using all fisheyes ever, from the Nikon 8mm f2.8 till all the Sigma and Samyang. I shoot 360 panoramas. I wanted THIS one to expand the possibilities of my micro 4/3 system. Flare IS my enemy.
You can buy a Canon reflex camera, get Magiclantern frmware and use camera processor itself.Or tether the camera remotely through usb and a computer. WR-1 looks like huge, large cumbersome and expensive. Camera processor itself could take these duties with close-to-zero load.When I remote the camera i want to be remote, and the camera coudd be hanged anywhere, on a 6mt pole. It has to be lightweight and compact. Seems Nikon always has a specific kind of photographer in mind,that is not me, and always wants to teah him how to do its job (like the 1 stop limit in bracketing steps!!!)Canon is saved by 3rd party firmware hack. I wish I siumply could reprogram the cameras on my own needs, and not vice-versa.
Nothing new here. Pentax proposed an even nicer concept some years ago,but many other did. http://www.sandydan.com/photo/wide/sphere/nikonlrg.jpgStitching two emispheres brings some problems to the final result. You need a quite perfect fisheye lens, with a very corrected CA and fringging down to the very border. Let's say more. You need more than 180 degrees, 200 at least, an incredible flare resistance and a very precise exposition and synchro of WB, or you will ALWAYS see the stitching seam, fisheyes must be closer or you will have a large blind area!Then is better to use a squared, or a 4/3 sensor, in order not to throw away a lot of black pixels. Let's say they use a 24MP apsc sensor. The circle dia would be 4000 pixel. Cut edges, overlap area etc. and you end up with a 3500x7000 panoramic image. I stitch panoramas since 1998, and project software and panoheads since 2003. I've seen it all, nobody is doing a really GOOD non-stitching camera
munro harrap: When you vote, it does say "The BEST camera of 2012". Not the one you own, or like, or find handy cos it doesn't weigh a ton, the best one. With a D800 you can make a pro quality movie. Your prints can be as big as a Picasso or Delacroix epic painting and your macro shots , well, are potentially the best possible from any camera on the planet-if you are any good, that is. I shall spend the rest of my life trying to fulfil its potential. Even in low light it is better than 35mm ever was, and makes the D4 they charge more than double for quite redundant. You are expected to vote for the BEST camera, not some joke toy!
D800 is the camera I do use at work. For video we do use 5dmk2 with magiclantern, I do think they are still the best choice. The camera I want in my hand the whole day, the one that is always in my pocket is an Olympus. This year a LOT of the images that we used for campaigns, that we sold etc, were from it. No way the Oly is technically superior to those cameras.. for me, it is SIMPLY a BETTER CAMERA AT ALL. But it is im my taste and my way to use it.
Nikon and Canon fullframe user and owner like I am...Olympus OMD is the best digital camera of the year. It is not "the best ever" in single things, the balance of the whole things is so perfect that you desire to use it for everything. Tere is more camera in this small thing than in everything digital I used so far.
Small, well written article that depicts a very common problem. Well done!I agree with many that things are moving fast, that given truths about sensors, AF and lenses is more liquid than we are brought to think.But your article is containing some things that are to be spotted out as always relevant.The enthusiast compact camera ( a well done and intelligent one, like the XZ-1) really HAS some selling point over any other cmparably priced camera. Size, easiness of handling and closed system, added to entry-level-reflex quite comparable results in "most common situations" gives a reason to own it.When taking pictures is more than taking memories, when you use the camera to take the picture you do have in mind, you do want a really flexible tool. And in my opinion Micro 4/3 is the best compromise mirrorless avaliable now. And for a slr downgrader it substitutes the hi end PS!I do own fullframe reflex and EPL1- EPL5, no more PS for me! :-)
Hi, as both professional an passionate photographer, and being used to carry with me very uncommon photo gear, like sppecial heads, panoramic heads, 8mm f2.8Nikkor etc. I early discovered that you defenitely need to own more than one bag. The way the bag is done is foundamental in determining how much, and what gear you will bring with you, how easy you will take it out-change lenses etc.I find this one VERY interesting, but I think the system would be PERFECT on a slinging backpack configuration! You would have everything always reachable even if you have the openings on a single side. This means less frequently used openings and less problems. Plus, dear Kata bags, we deed new concept bags for micro 4/3 with those tiny, diminutive lenses. Bags aren't accessories, they are NECESSORIES! Thanx Kata for the innovations and the quality. Only thing I do not love 100% is the separated raincoat, easy to lose and uneasy to put on and off, but I appreciate it is really watertight. Luca.
Aaaahhh... Zeiss!It looks quite a deal if compared to 2nd hand 15mm f3.5 in Contax mount!!!However I do prefer old Contax mount primes adapted to 5D. And new ones still have better taste than Nikon and Canon primes (specially Canon primes, that are disappointing me so much).For those who do not appreciate the difference between the Zeiss and other lenses, if you don't see it, it means your way, taste, and preferred light condition in taking pictures is not putting your lens in crisis. No "absolute"better in lenses and tools There is simply a tool that "fits better" in your hand for that situation
@ZAnton, I tried the Samyang 14, quite unusable for me. Far prefer using the good 15mm fisheye Sigma and than correct it with PanoTools
@thx1138, you got the point. I do not like zooms, I usually prefer zeiss and do not use filters (although sometimes, I'd like a polarizing one). But I've tried that 14-24 and I can only say that it is a fantastic, German-feeling ultrawide, I'd go for it.
Well, I do not know what kind of torture they applied to their designers . It had to be bad. Or they got the same ones from Leica, just out of 80 years of frustration, where the world ERGONOMICS is censored in all its forms. I'm impressed that with my face splatted on to the camera to reach the EVF I could control the camara buttons with my nose or with tongue.All that with a body that is twice a PentaxQ and significantly bigger than a Nex7.Nikon aims to a target that is miles away from me, and prefers that are others to cannibalize their own dslr market. That said, I cannot see anything appealing on the paper about these "1" cameras. Maybe when in hand I will discover some good reason to own one.
What it COULD be, is if they can handle and deliver good results with old C and CS mount Arri, Angenieux, Bolex Paillard, Kern super8 and 16mm cine lenses!!! So, if they will, they could give plenty of satisfaction to an entire class of possible users.;-)
Todor Bodurov: Most of these photos are quite useless as evaluation samples. (Lately, this has been the case with all your samples.) Apparently, the person who has taken them does not know what a potential owner of the lens (or of the camera) is looking for. To evaluate a lens one needs to see:- Photos taken at maximum aperture, in this case at F/1.8 .- Photos that show the presence or lack of Linear Distortion.- Photos that show the presence or lack of 'Soft' corners.- Photos in which a light source is included in the frame.In agreement with previous comments, my impression from these samples is that Sony E 24mm F1.8 ZA is a mediocre lens. I think this is a false impression due to the inappropriate samples.
My impression at the moment is the same, mediocre lens, mediocre sensor-processor. (but it is a pre-production camara, isn't it?) I really hope we are wrong, it is really the kind of camera I was waiting for!
What I would really really like to see as test shot is lowlight or nightshot. I mean no high iso shot but long-exposure tripod one. I say, how does the sensor render a situation with difficult light, different lightsources, very dark and very bright areas? my high iso hysteria is in the direction to obtain good color separation, acceptable noise and usable image in a 400 iso, 30 seconds shot. Like I'm used to with film.Does the lens render halos around neon signs? Or does it give a clean, sharp and detailed image? In full sunlight, with backlight and sun quite in the border of the frame I would love my lens to have its flare, but but not to fog the entire picture. Does it give punchy and highly contrasted results? Or loads of details and good microcontrast? In the past these were the reasons I trashed nikons and canons to buy my Contax system and Carl Zeiss lenses.All the best!Luca.