Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/01

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] To the pano stitchers...
From: rgacpa at (Robert Adler)
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 07:20:09 -0800
References: <> <>

There is also a way to find the nodal point manually while you're at the
scene and the camera is on the tripod. Basically find an object in the
foreground and how it is positioned against an object in the background.
When you rotate the camera, the relative position of the two should not
change (i.e., the foreground object should still be in front of the same
background object as you swivel the camera along the horizon; of course it
will not be the same angle of view). Also the camera must be level during
the "pan".

Also, for a pano head, I use the Arcatech ball head. It's a terrific piece
of equipment that can hold quite a bit of weight but is very light.

As Paul Roark has shown, as an alternative, you can just go out there and
shoot with a lot of overlap and get gorgeous images!!


On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at>wrote:

> My choice is to use a 35mm lens on the M9 and mount it vertically. I use 30
> degree spacing for about 20% overlap. Because the panning support should be
> level for a single row pano your horizon (assuming flat ground) will then
> be across the middle of the frame. So there is more room to crop doing it
> that way. I focus on infinity, not a hyperfocal distance and use DoF as
> wanted for closer objects where applicable.
> Howard and I put together a couple of examples and I made some suggestions
> here (in the pretty much moribund LUG Pearls Wiki).
> Caution:
> Gearhead type article! Yes I know it can be done more simply of course.
> Cheers,
> Geoff
> On 1 February 2012 16:32, Richard Man <richard at> 
> wrote:
> > Other than the difference in number of frames to cover a particular area,
> > are there image quality differences in using a longer lens rather than a
> > shorter lens? For example, 25, 35, 50 or 75 on a full frame body, which
> one
> > may be better image quality wise?
> >
> > Thanks for any advice.
> >
> > --
> > // richard <>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See for more information
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See for more information

Bob Adler
Palo Alto, CA

In reply to: Message from richard at (Richard Man) ([Leica] To the pano stitchers...)
Message from hopsternew at (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] To the pano stitchers...)