p.2 #1 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
dendowling wrote:
I've been shooting shift lens stitched panos for a few years. As mentioned above when doing landscape with subjects far away the parallax wasn't a problem. But, now doing architecture or close subjects parallax is off and the overlaps don't line up. So, I've been planning to build a lens clamp like you suggested to keep the lens stationary thereby shifting the camera body side/side or up/down. I think the point of using a shift lens is to keep the 2 or 3 image pieces parallel (making the subject lines parallel). So, I don't see any need to rotate the camera around the nodal. If you rotate around the nodal your lines won't be parallel and then there's no need for a shift lens anyway. But, maybe you have a different capture/stitch method in mind.
I was also imagining clamping onto the flat sides of the squarish center piece of the 24TSE although the newer TSEs don't have these big wide flat sides. Or, maybe doing a thin clamp around the round part just behind the focus ring where the aperture range is printed but, might be trickier to build. ...Show more →
Like the first line of the OP suggests, I've been doing the shift lens/slide camera/repeat for flat stitching for a long while too. It's a bit tedious but manageable if the slide is horizontal. I tried it once or twice with the clamp vertical (to offset rise) and it's way less convenient, since the camera wants to slide out and it's not difficult to nudge the tripod (and start all over). A geared rail approach would work, but heavy complicated and $$.(Might as well get a true pano-rig and live with recent stitching software). Building a clamp that holds the lens seems relatively simple (either with flat jaws or curved indents for the lenses that have all-round parts).
The addition of rotating around the axis was not a necessary part of the original plan, but it would provide the other dimension for a multi row - let's say the flat stitch gives you 3 shots high, the rotate gives you 2 or 3 (or however many you really need) wide. (Or vice versa obviously) The clamp only provides the benefit in one axis, so the stitching software only has to mess with 2 or 3 separate (3-shot-flat-stitched) shots - rotated around the right axis.
One could shoot any rectangle within the 67mm image circle of the new TSE's with ease using 4 shots also - to get wider FOV and more MP for bigger prints with the clamp. Not so easy with the clamp-sliding system.
There may only be a few of us that would like such a clamp, so it would be even more $$$ if RRS or someone developed and made them. I still have my 4x5 outfit so this would be a backburner project (until I sell it - these thoughts triggered by the increasing MP and TS lenses from Canon to go with the rest of my Canon small format gear )
p.2 #2 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
AJSJones wrote:
Like the first line of the OP suggests, I've been doing the shift lens/slide camera/repeat for flat stitching for a long while too. It's a bit tedious but manageable if the slide is horizontal. I tried it once or twice with the clamp vertical (to offset rise) and it's way less convenient, since the camera wants to slide out and it's not difficult to nudge the tripod (and start all over). A geared rail approach would work, but heavy complicated and $$.(Might as well get a true pano-rig and live with recent stitching software). Building a clamp that holds the lens seems relatively simple (either with flat jaws or curved indents for the lenses that have all-round parts).
The addition of rotating around the axis was not a necessary part of the original plan, but it would provide the other dimension for a multi row - let's say the flat stitch gives you 3 shots high, the rotate gives you 2 or 3 (or however many you really need) wide. (Or vice versa obviously) The clamp only provides the benefit in one axis, so the stitching software only has to mess with 2 or 3 separate (3-shot-flat-stitched) shots - rotated around the right axis.
One could shoot any rectangle within the 67mm image circle of the new TSE's with ease using 4 shots also - to get wider FOV and more MP for bigger prints with the clamp. Not so easy with the clamp-sliding system.
There may only be a few of us that would like such a clamp, so it would be even more $$$ if RRS or someone developed and made them. I still have my 4x5 outfit so this would be a backburner project (until I sell it - these thoughts triggered by the increasing MP and TS lenses from Canon to go with the rest of my Canon small format gear ) ...Show more →
The shift can be very useful even when doing a single row rotational pano because it allows you to pan level but since you can shift up or down, you can have more or less foreground in your shot and don't have to be stuck with the horizon line in the middle of the frame.
Panning level with a single row and nodal plate is very quick and easy and generally error free, and you can do it quickly under changing light conditions. Multi rows are always cool, but dont work so well for dynamic subjects
p.2 #3 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
millsart wrote:
The shift can be very useful even when doing a single row rotational pano because it allows you to pan level but since you can shift up or down, you can have more or less foreground in your shot and don't have to be stuck with the horizon line in the middle of the frame.
Panning level with a single row and nodal plate is very quick and easy and generally error free, and you can do it quickly under changing light conditions. Multi rows are always cool, but dont work so well for dynamic subjects
I have the RRS MPR and PCL and 24TS for just such occasions where the flat-stitch view isn't wide enough and have done exactly as you are suggesting. The stitching software does indeed handle the lens distortion and angular distortion and (usually I use cylindrical) projection very nicely. I still like the idea of having only one image coming through a fixed lens and capturing that image in pieces that reassemble with no software needed (other than copy/paste in PS).
I just need to cultivate my acquaintance who has a nice machine shop
p.2 #5 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
There is always the option of carrying a DX body with you as well (if your on full frame) and use that to have an option of a wide stitch (though you have to adjust your distance from the subject)
Experimenting just with the crop mode I've found I can actually get a 3:1 ratio as the lens shift covers a larger effective percentage of the image circle with the smaller sensor.
I'm thinking of adding something like a Nikon D5000 to enhance the functional focal length of my 24mm PC-E to also work as a 35mm PCE
p.2 #6 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
I've also heard, although never tried it myself, that a 1.4x increases image size but also the amount of shift distance available too, since the exit pupil is further away from the sensor. Have you tried that?
p.2 #7 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
AJSJones wrote:
I've also heard, although never tried it myself, that a 1.4x increases image size but also the amount of shift distance available too, since the exit pupil is further away from the sensor. Have you tried that?
I haven't but thats an interesting idea
My Nikon 1.4x TC doesn't seem to want to fit though, I guess I'll need to try a cheapo Kenko or something for that application
p.2 #10 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
no, its not rocket science
but I wanted to make it faster - both captureing and flatstitching. Moving objects between the capture can be annoying when flatstitching; the screw-methode is way faster and more precise than when using the marks. That's basically why I added the screws, I had the marks at the beginning. In low light situations using the screws is much easier, as well.
Yes, I have the PC-28 and the zuiko 35 - both work with 11mm. They' re pretty rarely used, though, but I 'm considering flatstitching with the TSE 24, because it has very low distortion, which has been a problem with the other shift lenses.
As I can remove the screws whithout any tools, different shift lengths are possible.
One advantage of that rail-methode is its low weight, plus it doesn't takes much place in the bag.
I do °normal° stitches, aka panohead-capture plus stitcher-app as well, that's more demanding in terms of weight (+ 1.5 kg) and time of post/processing.
Here, flatstitching is used when just a little bit more of sensor size is required, or the objects look best in a panoramalike image-shape. For that purpose, panohead-stitching would be overkill.
p.2 #13 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
Cableaddict wrote:
Very interesting.
-And they verify my point that a normal shift gear can't take the full weight of both lens & camera.
In their system the lens clamp is all that holds the lens camera combo - so I'd say they CANtake the weight! But maybe I missed something - it's still early
p.2 #15 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
AJSJones wrote:
I have the RRS MPR and PCL and 24TS for just such occasions where the flat-stitch view isn't wide enough and have done exactly as you are suggesting. The stitching software does indeed handle the lens distortion and angular distortion and (usually I use cylindrical) projection very nicely. I still like the idea of having only one image coming through a fixed lens and capturing that image in pieces that reassemble with no software needed (other than copy/paste in PS).
Andy,
Since I know your equipment, I feel that one of your issues may be that you use a BH55 with a RRS panning clamp as your only clamp. The PCL-1 panning clamp is a screw type clamp which are much more work to partially loosen, move the L bracket/camera 11mm (or whatever) and retighten. With the RRS lever clamp this is much quicker and easier, as lossening the lever half way allows quick counter shifting of the L bracket while providing just a half-way opening to keep the L bracket captive. The lever readily stays at half open without a tendency to open all the way, but when desired, allows quick and easy vertical removal of the L-bracket from the clamp when changing orientations.
Get a lever clamp but keep the panning clamp with addition of a PCL-DVTL to mate with your lever clamp for those stitches >3 frames. If you also get the TSE 17 you were talking about, I can't imagine 2 rows X 3 frame shift with >90 degree angle of view in portrait mode.
p.2 #16 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
Cableaddict wrote:
Yes, you missed something. Read the ad copy again.
They specifically beefed-up the mechanism, vs all other existing shift-lenses, so this system can work safely.
I was just looking at the pictures
For 1D series or some of the other things Hartblei contemplates being attached, I think the rugged mechanism is a good idea. For a 5D2 with no grip (I don't like the size and weight of the 1 series or gripped xD) I think the mechanism is probably OK if treated with care However, these Zeiss lenses look kind of interesting
p.2 #17 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
Mike K wrote:
Andy,
Since I know your equipment, I feel that one of your issues may be that you use a BH55 with a RRS panning clamp as your only clamp. The PCL-1 panning clamp is a screw type clamp which are much more work to partially loosen, move the L bracket/camera 11mm (or whatever) and retighten. With the RRS lever clamp this is much quicker and easier, as lossening the lever half way allows quick counter shifting of the L bracket while providing just a half-way opening to keep the L bracket captive. The lever readily stays at half open without a tendency to open all the way, but when desired, allows quick and easy vertical removal of the L-bracket from the clamp when changing orientations.
Get a lever clamp but keep the panning clamp with addition of a PCL-DVTL to mate with your lever clamp for those stitches >3 frames. If you also get the TSE 17 you were talking about, I can't imagine 2 rows X 3 frame shift with >90 degree angle of view in portrait mode.
I don't have a problem with the PCL screw clamp - it's nice an big and easy to unlock enough to shift the L bracket smoothly. It's doing the vertical offset that requires any kind of clamp (screw or lever) to operate vertically that is more tedious (the clamp has to be vertical and is therefore not over an axis of rotation if the ball is flopped to 90 degrees). It's the 3 frames vertical with more than one column that got me thinking about all this, not the horizontal 3 flat stitch and 2 rows (that's easy with either clamp). The 17 would likely only be a 3frame flat stitch (to give it the FoV of as low as 11mm or so) but the longer FL possibilities are for upping MP rather than going ultrawide.
p.2 #18 · Shift-lens clamp for parallax-free flat stitch?
AJSJones wrote:
I don't have a problem with the PCL screw clamp - it's nice an big and easy to unlock enough to shift the L bracket smoothly. It's doing the vertical offset that requires any kind of clamp (screw or lever) to operate vertically that is more tedious (the clamp has to be vertical and is therefore not over an axis of rotation if the ball is flopped to 90 degrees). It's the 3 frames vertical with more than one column that got me thinking about all this, not the horizontal 3 flat stitch and 2 rows (that's easy with either clamp). The 17 would likely only be a 3frame flat stitch (to give it the FoV of as low as 11mm or so) but the longer FL possibilities are for upping MP rather than going ultrawide. ...Show more →
I had thought that your plan for vertical panos was to use your Wimberley sidekick with the traditional rotational movement to achieve one row atop the other, and use the shift mechanism for the horizontal set of 3.?
Mike K
Now this version of the lens does not have Zeiss glass (or I probably would have kept it) and probably a less expensive mechanism as well, but the design looks very similar to those currently being sold by Hartblei with the Zeiss glass. There is a reason they are called super rotators: The shift and tilt mechanisms are not actuated by twisting small knobs and sliding the lens angle or sliding the lens shift; but rather by twisting the entire lens assembly (different rings). Even the direction of the tilt and shift mechanism is independently rotated with internal tabs on the lens mount flange. These rotating rings for tilt and shift are quite stiff, thus the little levers you see on some of the pictures, it helps to have something to grab on to to get a bit of leverage, otherwise its like opening a stiff jar lid. The levers are optional and you can screw in up to two per ring for a total of 4. This may be portion of their claim that they are beefed up, perhaps the internal gears are even larger than before? Does stiff equate with beefy? In any case there are no small knobs and the lens does not slide from side to side like the Canon or Nikon tilt shift.
Mike K
)
and is therefore not over an axis of rotation if the ball is flopped to 90 degrees). It's the 3 frames vertical with more than one column that got me thinking about all this, not the horizontal 3 flat stitch and 2 rows (that's easy with either clamp). The 17 would likely only be a 3frame flat stitch (to give it the FoV of as low as 11mm or so) but the longer FL possibilities are for upping MP rather than going ultrawide.