I am soon planning a trip out west to the Grand Canyon, Bryce Canyon and Zion Canyon and will be taking my FZ1000, FZ200 a d my Canon T2i and a few lenses for it. I plan to use the FZ1000 for all of my video and most of my still photos. I am not sure if the 25mm wide angle is wide enough for this scenery. I have a 12-24 for my Canon T2i and may take it but it is big and heavy and not as sharp as I would like so I dont want to take it if the FZ1000 25mm wide is wide enough for these subjects. I want to travel as light as possible but want to be sure I have enough wide and telephoto to cover these landscapes. If you have been there and photographed these Canyons I would like to know your thoughts as to what lens focal lengths worked for you. Thank you!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
FZ1000 wide enough?
- Thread starter Bigbuggy
- Start date
David 247
Senior Member
I haven't been to those canyons yet, but find it very easy to shoot a 2 or frame panorama full rez pano to compensate for any lack of width, if the lens isn't wide enough. Have to stitch in post but the results are still very good. The in camera pano works good but is much lower resolution.
Case in point. Due to crowds, couldn't back up enough to get the whole plane in at 24mm. Quick 2 shot pano stitched in lightroom 6. 20 seconds in post processing. With a little more work can compensate for the distortion.
Hardest part was catching the back end with no people in front.
Now this is with the LX100 instead of FZ 10 seconds to shoot.
Here is an FZ1000 pano. Had to downsize quite a bit because too big to post to DPR full size. Probably 30-45 seconds to shoot the whole thing with the camera held in portrait format to maximize the vertical pixels. Again a manual stitch but very easy now days.
--
- David
"The only good camera is the one you have with you when opportunity provides."
Gallery: https://500px.com/lightweaver2
Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/davidwendelrobinson
BLOG: Through David's Eye: http://www.throughdavidseye.com
Last edited:
I just got back from a Las Vegas-Zion-Bryce etc loop and was very happy with the FZ1000 for stills. Without question a very wide lens has its place (Horseshoe Bend in Page, AZ) but I didn't feel constrained.
With video, you're limited to about 28mm at the wide end because the camera uses some the sensor for image alignment/stabilization.
With 4k video you're limited to 37mm at the wide end because the camera's giving you an 8mpx crop of the sensor, not a downsample of the full sensor.
Lots of trip images in the albums at the link in my signature.
If you're starting from Las Vegas, don't miss Nevada's Valley of Fire State Park which is on the way to Utah.
With video, you're limited to about 28mm at the wide end because the camera uses some the sensor for image alignment/stabilization.
With 4k video you're limited to 37mm at the wide end because the camera's giving you an 8mpx crop of the sensor, not a downsample of the full sensor.
Lots of trip images in the albums at the link in my signature.
If you're starting from Las Vegas, don't miss Nevada's Valley of Fire State Park which is on the way to Utah.
Thanks David, a pano is a worthy consideration and I havent shot a pano in years mostly because I dont want the odd frame size calling for a custom size frame. I usually want to get a few shots from my vacation photos worthy of a big standard size print, 24x36 or 30x40 and these are standard frames but panos require a custom frame and they are expensive . I may experiment with some just for the fun of it!
Thanks Sherman, I am coming from Texas so wont be going quite that same route. Yes the video is definitely not as wide but for me I would have to resort to my 60D or T2i for video to get wider and video on those cameras for me is a pain and not the quality I can get from the FZ1000 so I will have to do a little panning if necessary to get the view. I think I will be happy with the 25mm of the FZ1000 but I just dont wont to get there and find out it is not enough. Thanks for your input Sherman.
Sherman, these in Bryce are really beautiful, looks like you were there late evening or early morning, good light, Also I wondered if you used a polarizer on these, sky is really blue. What filters would you suggest using on these canyon lanscapes?
Timj351
Senior Member
Hi BigBuggy, I wish you well on your trip and will be looking forward to seeing some pics afterward.
A tip for shooting panos is to shoot them with the camera held in the vertical position. This allows more picture information to be captured vertically as well. Taking 5-8 shots this way prevents the image from becoming too wide and still accommodates traditional framing sizes. Even so, I believe it's better to capture more information for the most cropping choices later.
-Tim
A tip for shooting panos is to shoot them with the camera held in the vertical position. This allows more picture information to be captured vertically as well. Taking 5-8 shots this way prevents the image from becoming too wide and still accommodates traditional framing sizes. Even so, I believe it's better to capture more information for the most cropping choices later.
-Tim
Thanks Tim, we are looking forward to the adventure, wish it was not so far from home, Texas to Utah is near 1000 miles one way and my 70 year old skinny back end hurts me a lot now without the hours of driving. That is a great idea, framing the shots verticle, I have played with that here at home a little but not enough to perfect the technique but give it a few shots.
Thank you. They were taken at sunrise from Bryce's Sunset Point. (We got lost trying to get to Sunrise Point, which is about 1/2 mile to the west, and lets you see more of the eastern bowl in the rising sun). I actually liked the glowing backlit structures to the west (such as P1120006 and 1120037) even more than the bowl, so Sunset Point might just have been the better choice.
I didn't use a polarizer, and I needed to do a fair bit of pushing to handle the dynamic range. The OOC JPG is on the left, and the final image from the .RW2 is on the right. That might account for some of the sky's deep blue.
The sky was incredibly clear, and I ended up not using any filters for the entire trip. Where there were clouds, they looked great even without the polarizer, so I didn't even try.
OOC JPG (left) and final image from RW2 (right)
--
Sherm
SHERMANLEVINE’s albums | Flickr
www.flickr.com
Sherman, I am going to take my polarizer but I am also going to take graduated filter. I think these shots with a fair amount of sky line would benefit from that more that a polarizer and I have combined the two in some cases. I just hate the constant putting on and taking off of a filter. I usually hand hold the ND filter because the cokin filter holder gets in the edge of my frame. If I have my polarizer on and want to use the graduated then I have to screw the polarizer back off and I am afraid in the constant use of these I am going to scratch them or drop one off the canyon. Not sure what the solution is for that.
Problem with graduated ND filters is that the horizons aren't flat in Utah. You might be better off with exposure bracketing and some HDR at home. My wife took this one at Grosvenor Arch in Utah - Three raw images at +3,0,-3 (7 stops total) None of the individual images looked anywhere near as good as the HDR
--
Sherm
SHERMANLEVINE’s albums | Flickr
www.flickr.com
Beautiful shot and I agree, rocks and trees that get into the skyline make it very hard to effectively use a graduated ND filter. But the bracketed exposures for the HDR require a tripod to keep each frame the same. My bad left arm may not let me use a tripod much. I have a torn rotator cuff on my left arm and have not been able to get a shot to kill the pain. I am now down to less than two weeks until trip and cant get in to see doctor so I will have to live with the pain and carry as little as possible. I will take a light weight tripod and use it where I can. I am afraid that at the Grand Canyon the crowds will make it very hard to use a tripod and get a good shot, Bryce and Zion I hope are not that crowded.
1helices
Forum Enthusiast
If you shoot in portrait orientation, I fail to see why you cannot get 3:4 aspect ratio with three or four shots?
Yes I agree I am sure you can get the 4:3 ratio from portrait style panos, I just have done so little of it that I would find it difficult to get them done right and they take more time to get and on vacation I dont know how much time I will have to devote to that level of photography. As I mentioned in a previous post to Sherman Levine that I am dealing with a torn rotator cuff on my left arm and can not support much weight so carrying a tripod as I would like to so I could do some HDR photography as well as some panos will be limited. I just have not done much in the way of pano shots but I certainly agree they would be a way of getting a quality wide view.
David 247
Senior Member
Well for what it is worth, I shot panoramas with my FZ1000, all handheld. Portrait (vertical) mode. Shoot loose to allow for necessary cropping. Here are two examples. One is a 7 shot with the FZ1000, the other is a two shot quickie, stitched with an emphasis on perspective (straight) lines with the LX100.
I turn on the 9 grid for viewfinder and screen and make sure I am overlapping each shot by 30% ( 1 Grid line). Second shot took a few seconds for two quick shots. the 7 shot maybe 30 seconds max. No tripod needed. With stitching software today, putting them together is very easy and quick for most subjects.
From the same shooting position, I could only capture about 75% of the plane in a single shot. The two shot combined gave me 100% plus plenty of leeway for cropping. I used Lightroom's "perspective stitching to keep lines straight. (again, only 2 quick frames handheld)
This was a 7 frame but cropped heavily. As you can see, the horizontal alignment was all over the place (I was in a hurry). But still allowed me to get a large and very useful pano.
Turn on the grid in the camera (I leave it on all the time now as it helps with horizon and structural alignments visually). Shoot vertically, overshooting top and bottom and both sides a little. Overlap 25-35% and 80% of the time you'll have a keeper. The grid makes it so easy. Don't even have to move your feet. I can do most of mine right in lightroom now, but if all else fails I'll use PTGUI which is windows and mac compatible and does a real good job. It can even do multiple rows and columns if you want to capture lots and lots of detail. Again, no tripod or difficulty involved. After your first few you'll feel like a pro. I shot handheld panos, multiple frames that were so large I had to reduce them down to about 25% to be able to post them on DPR.
Admittedly, sometimes it doesn't work out, but that happens less and less with experience. All visual. No other gear needed. I have done this several different cameras but it is so easy with the FZ1000.
--
- David
"The only good camera is the one you have with you when opportunity provides."
Gallery: https://500px.com/lightweaver2
Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/davidwendelrobinson
BLOG: Through David's Eye: http://www.throughdavidseye.com
Last edited:
David 247
Senior Member
No, pano mode will limit you to just over 2000 pixels when shooting vertically (portrait). A bit less if shooting horizontally. I look at my subject, take 2 to 4 exposure readings across the planned scene (mentally just get the reading from the camera), average it mentally in my head and set that manually. Even if it isn't perfect most stitching software will equalize it. Shooting horizontally that will give you a maximum of 3648 pixels in height or shooting vertically 5472 pixels in height. Even with a lot of "slop" in alighment you still have final manually stictched images of 3000 to 4500 pixels in height which is significantly larger and higher rez the in camera pano.
Now if you can get by with the smaller in camera pano, it will still deliver good results 80% of the time I would estimate. Some subjects just don't do good panos. Never had a hard time with landscapes except for irregular forests or busy city scenes with a lot of motion. Also some software will deghost a panorama so you can set a single image as your primary and it will remove moving objects from all other overlapping images.
Amazing technology we have these days. Practice makes perfect and pretty soon you develop a visual idea of where to overlap and where not too. If in doubt, shoot two with slightly different overlaps.
With practice it is very quick and even easy for us older folks with a tad bit of unsteadiness. Shoot RAW and it is amazing what can be done with just some highlight and shadow adjustments to equalize exposure if needed (and in the final pano)
--
- David
"The only good camera is the one you have with you when opportunity provides."
Gallery: https://500px.com/lightweaver2
Videos: https://www.youtube.com/user/davidwendelrobinson
BLOG: Through David's Eye: http://www.throughdavidseye.com
Last edited:
You might want to buy the inexpensive 10-18 Canon lens for your DSLR. Gets great reviews. About $250 with rebate going on now. A bit of a hassle to carry 2 cameras, but would given where you are going having a true wide option might be worth it. You don't list your other lenses forthe T2i, but maybe for some places the 10-18 and whatever other lenses you have would be a good solutiion. For most things the FZ1000 has great range, but for your destination I can see how a really wide lens would be a real plus. Also shooting a superwide lens is different than taking a pano shot so doing a pano isn't the answer all the time.
Similar threads
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum