Pano Head Advice

[cliff123]

Hi, I'm very keen to try some 180/360 photos. However I currently don't have a pano head, and looking at some of the prices of them (£450) won't be getting one very soon. Does anyone have any advice on a good cheap pano head, or alternative ways in getting the best pics regarding rotating around the nodal point? Any advice would be welcome.

I do vaguely remember someone on this forum some months back developing a cheaper homemade system which I think he was offering to produce for other forum members. If your still about, and your pano head works I'd be very interested to hear from you.

Thanks, Cliff.

[_dobbo_]

As you say £450 is a lot - it depends how much you care... For a 180 degree (or less) pano I'd say put the camera in manual mode (don't forget manual white balance), whack the lens to 35mm, and just shoot. Various photomerge/panoramic packages will take care of the rest.

At less than 35mm you'll have a lot of distortion to deal with so may struggle, in my experience at least.

[windandwave]

The Panosaurus looks like great value at $75:
http://gregwired.com/pano/Pano.htm

Slightly flimsier than something like the Nodal Ninja, but hopefully not a problem unless you're using something like a 1D.

[stuthemong]

Do you have a fisheye (or <14mm rectalinear) lens yet?

Google 'philopod' and you'll be able to do without one, although it is more tricky and takes longer in PP. Depends what you want to do, but I'd *urge* against trying to shoot a 360x180 with a 35mm lens!!!!

Edited by stuthemong on Sunday 31st August 14:16

Edited by stuthemong on Sunday 31st August 14:17

[Goldeeno]

Do you really need a panoramic head?

Personally if your using Adobe CS3 there isnt really any need for a head, or even a tripod. But ive not really read into panoramic heads.

Edited by Goldeeno on Sunday 31st August 15:15

[stuthemong]

Goldeno,

For shots like that, not really. All depends what you are doing, and how long you have to spend on it / how important it is you get the shot

[Fordo]

ive had great results using some stitching software, and mounting the camera on the tripod at its nodal point:

http://www.edb.utexas.edu/teachnet/QTVR/NodalPoint...

mounting the camera at the nodal point stops things in the foreground misaligning when you stitch them.


Edited: Just read up on pano heads, it appears they are designed to allow you to adjust the position of the camera so its mounted at its nodal point! I just made up a bracket that does something similar

Edited by Fordo on Tuesday 2nd September 19:04

[stuthemong]

This is what happens when you try to take a pano without a panohead in a tight scene.

http://www.360precision.com/sbm/test_out.mov - right hand click, save as.

I have got so much work to do to make this stitch, like, hours left No room for a panohead up there though, even though I managed to use a monopod as a makeshift nodal positioner, the parallax was still off the page (not helped by the balloon moving 10's of feet, and pitching&rolling)

[Scho]

the need for a head or not is all about paralax.

if you've got things in the foreground and the distance they are going to move a shed load in relation to each other (and make a crap stitch) IF your lens does not rotate around it's nodal point (where the light crosses-as opposed to where the tripod is!)

if things are all in the distance (like the example posted) you can get away without a pano head.

it is possible to make your own pano head for use with your specific lens and body...in fact.... i'm sure a guy called white fly swatter had some cheapies for sale on here that he made.

ps.have a look at realviz stitcher.

Edited by Scho on Wednesday 3rd September 09:42

Edited by Scho on Wednesday 3rd September 09:43

[CVP]

Another software solution to consider is Autopano Pro. I try it for panos like the example posted and it works very well for me. It should also cope with 360 degree spherical projections.

Chris

[Whitefly Swatter]

Scho said:

i'm sure a guy called white fly swatter had some cheapies for sale on here that he made.

Yup still got some if anybody is interested

WFS

[stuthemong]

Scho said:

the need for a head or not is all about paralax.

It is ALL about parallax.

If the nodal point (or 'entrance pupil' if you are being pedantic) is off, you can (scene dependant) get parallax errors - these are what make stitching hard.

Edited by stuthemong on Wednesday 3rd September 21:05

[_dobbo_]

stuthemong said:

Scho said:

the need for a head or not is all about paralax.

It is ALL about parallax.

Is there an echo in here?

Parralax
Parralax
Parralax

Edited by _dobbo_ on Wednesday 3rd September 23:15

[Scho]

stuthemong said:

Scho said:

the need for a head OR not is all about paralax.

It is ALL about parallax.

If the nodal point (or 'entrance pupil' if you are being pedantic) is off, you can (scene dependant) get parallax errors - these are what make stitching hard.

Edited by stuthemong on Wednesday 3rd September 21:05

glad to hear you'd back me up on that one Stu