--
The field of view is 360deg. A wide lens will give you a wider FOV vertically, too.
You need to stitch, I think, if you want to get wider than that. I can print at 30X40 at 300 dpi from my 5D with a 16-35, but that's not a panorama.
You definitely have to stitch to produce images that wide.
Did you just crop that from a larger image, basically just changing the aspect ratio from 3:2 to 16:9? Or did you take several images and stitch them?
Not sure about that. If you take the same image with the 70-200 f4L, compare a crop to an uncropped version of the same scene from the 100-400, I think the 70-200 might show better. Now, if you put a telextender on the 70-200 f2.8L, and compare it to the 100-400 at 400mm, the 100-400 comes out ahead.
Heheheh.
Only hand held. The 70-200 f2.8L IS is less sharp, wide open, than the 70-200 f4L, non IS or IS version, is also wide open. The f2.8 isn't quite as sharp as the f4, even at f4. At f5.6, it catches up to the IS f4, from what I've seen.
All things being equal, the f4 is sharper on a tripod than the f2.8 is, also on a tripod.
--
Like I said, splitting hairs. My 70-200 f/4 IS was indistinguishable from a friends very sharp 135 f/2L both at f/4 on both our cameras (5D) and my 5D2.
--Did you just crop that from a larger image, basically just changing
the aspect ratio from 3:2 to 16:9? Or did you take several images
and stitch them?
--
Before I bought my 100-400 I tested the Sigma 120-400. There is no comparison. The Sigma is nowhere near as sharp and is veiled like it has cellophane stretched over it. Check out LensRental for their view on Sigma. A real eye opener.
--
Sorta. But that makes for an awful lot of panels stitched together. And a 6x8 foot pano, does it really have to be 300 dpi? That's an awful lot of resolution, I'd think that 100 dpi would be sufficient, 300 would be necessary if you have a viewing distance of a couple of feet away, that's the normal acceptable printing res of an 8x10 print. From a distance needed to effectively view the 6x8 entirety, 100 dpi might even be overkill, unless you were mounting it in a very constricted area, and your viewers can't get very far away from the image.
--
--
Shoot vertically in some cases, but not to "eliminate distortion." The same amount of distortion is there in a photograph whether you shoot it vertically or horizontally, and if this is an issue you can remove it in post.
--
300 dpi is 300 dpi. And there is a distinct difference between my 135 f2 and 70-200 f2.8L IS, believe me. But, overall, what you say is what I get. It seems to be more about apparent pixel/dot density, and not actual resolution.
Well, most of what I've read by people who shoot them involve using the lenses you already have, so zoom vs prime is probably, indeed, moot.
Probably pixel density. It's similar between the two cameras.
--
