panorama software,virtual tour software
Alternate Text
Joined: 2009-06-02
Send Msg:
Posts: 49
2009-07-09
#22
Not that type of distortion, lol, they referred to it as edge softness after defishing, with the discussion that the Sigma is better for the D300 than the D700.
Alternate Text
Forum Moderator
Joined: 2002-11-23
Send Msg:
Posts: 5438
2009-07-09
#23
It is irrelevant because this edge becomes the stitching overlap. Really, it is of no concern.

Regards, Smooth
Alternate Text
Joined: 2009-06-02
Send Msg:
Posts: 49
2009-07-10
#24
Ok, thanks for the reply.

I am still working on getting camera equipment. I noticed plenty of Sigma 8mm F4 on E-bay, and a few more expenses F3.5's

Then I noticed Nikkor 10.5 mm at F2.8 for less $. I understand one may have to take a few more pictures for a full 360 x 180 with the 10.5, but I am trying to figure out of that lens requires removal of the shade thing, ala "shaved".

So far I am looking at the D300's which seem to be around $1300 excluding lenses. Too bad the Nikkor 18mm-135 would probably require too many shots in a circle for a 360x180., as then I would not have to buy 2 lenses.


Alternate Text
Forum Moderator
Joined: 2002-11-23
Send Msg:
Posts: 5438
2009-07-11
#25
The Sigma f/4.0 8mm Fisheye is old technology and suffers badly from Vignetting.

The Sigma f/3.5 8mm replacement is a far superior lens for those who do not understand how to correct the Vignetting issues or how to work around the lens flare issues the f/4.0 also suffered from.

Yes, the Nikkor 10.5mm Fisheye is a superior lens but comes at the expense of needing more shots (6+TB) in DX format.

Shaving a Nikkor 10.5mm is pointless unless you are going to use it on a FX format camera D700, D3, D3x etc. Shaving the hood for a DX format camera body will result in no achievement at all. Possibly some loss because of increased lens flare.

Regards, Smooth
Alternate Text
Joined: 2009-06-02
Send Msg:
Posts: 49
2009-07-11
#26
Thanks for the Sigma info....I am angling towards the D300.