Hi, finally after having the Canon Rebel + Sygma fisheye stolen I'm about to buy a more practical and cheaper equipment, with the same internet efficiency. For what Ive read in forums and in specialized sites, differently from the SLR cameras, the digital ones manage to make panoramics more easily because the do it from just two circular photos. Only thing Im sure is that Ill use the fisheye FC-E9 lens with a digital camera.

The big question is, whats the best camera in terms of cost-efficiency for this lens? Searching for info in sites, Ive think that a good choice would be the coolpix 8400 or 8800, but the 8800 needs three circular photos, not only two. Hence, Ive concluded that the 8400 would be a better choice, but this camera seems to be a bit awkward and outdated its even quite hard to find it in online stores. Browsing this frum, Ive noticed users using the Canon Powershot Pro S3 that seems to be a competent and more modern cmera that accomplish the same task, but I havent seen in Agnos site any recommendation on this camera model for this job.

My question is, would I get the same functional result with both cameras (doing two circular shot)? What would be other camera recommendations for the FC-E9 lens, independently of resolution my objective is internet publishing that doesn`t need that much resolution.

Thanks.... thanks...

or Canon PowerShot G6?

Nikon Coolpix VS Canon G6 VS Canon S3 ? + FC-E9

???????

The FC-E8 is a superior lens to the FC-E9 which is softer and less sharp. The ultimate solution using a FC-E8 is either the older Nikon Coolpix 5000 or the only newer (Nikon) camera that can adapt to the FC-E8 is the Coolpix 8400.

Basically the FC-E9 is not a great choice for a lens full stop.

After all the years I have been doing panoramas and contributing on forums I have yet to see a Canon to Nikon or Sony, Panasonic or any other brand handle the Nikon Fisheye better than the Nikon Coolpix Series itself.

If it was me in your shoes I would by a Nikon Coolpix 5000 and Nikon FC-E8.

That brings me to the fact I have a mint set up for sale. See this thread:

Regards, Smooth  

ow..... but in sites.. the FC-E9 is a superior lens, no? is newest?

coolpix 8400 lost to 5000?

anybody in the forum use a fc-e9 ou fc-e8 ?

Smooth is right!!

FC-E8 (older and smaller) lens is superior to the FC-9 (newer and BIGGER lens).

The finer details:
Sounds weird but its true. The coolpix 5000 + FC-E8 will make a better quality image than any other Nikon coolpix camera combination regardless of camera model. There are ways to adapt the FC-E8 lens to newer coolpix cameras using step rings. And ways to adapt it to DSLR cameras but this involves the use of step adapters plus the use of short focal length zoom lens. Now this may actually work optically but it seriously degrades the image due the changing of the focal length with the step rings and limited optic capability of the zoom lens. Your back to the start. I don't know if an adapted FC-E8 will make a better or worse image than the non adapted FC-E9 but I will bet it's not much of any better.

The reason for this is as follows.

Nikon failed to make the newer FC-E9 a better lens. This is basically related to diopter size vs sensor size. As the mega pixels go up in a camera so does the sensor size. The lens must project the correct size image circle onto the sensor. In order to do this with newer coolpix cameras at larger mega pixels the lens had to be enlarged. As you make the "glass" larger it becomes exponentially difficult (which = expensive) to produce a lens that is error or fault free. In fact ALL lenses have some amount of faults. We always talk about a "fast" lens as being good. This means it "performs" at wide open apertures. To get performance out of a lens at its extremes of aperture take very high quality grinding of the glass to very exact specifications and advanced lens coatings. This is costly. Nikon I am sure could make such a lens however it would cost thousands of dollars and be beyond most peoples budget.

Now take into consideration this lens makes a full image circle. This means the lens must "resolve" all the light in a 180 by 180 scene. Due to the amount of light captured the lens must have good resolving power. Resolving power of a lens is one of the things that equals performance. The light rays must be  bent and compressed through the diopter circle. During this compression some rays are disturbed by running into each other. This is known as "Diffraction". The resolving power is ultimately limited by diffraction.

One of the variables that effects the resolving power is the diameter of the lens. The larger the diameter the greater effect diffraction will have on resolving power. As diameter increases so must the other factors or else you get increased diffraction.

Diffraction in a lens causes blurring. It also causes chromatic aberration ( red and blue halos around the edges of the image). The FC-E9 suffers much more from chromatic aberration than the FC-E8.

The fact that the FC-E9 suffers from increased chromatic aberration is proof in its self that the lens has diffraction problems because there would not be chromatic aberration if the lens didnt have any diffraction problems.

Diffraction is also effected by lens coatings. All things including glass have a reflection amount. Some light is reflected off the surface and therefore does not make it into the lens. Or it is reflected off the internal lens elements and bounces around causing more diffraction.

When you see a rainbow in the sky that is caused by diffraction of light through rain drops. Its very similar to chromatic aberration in a lens. You could say that a rainbow is a chromatic aberration.....LOL. If you could pear through one of those rain drops as a lens you would see the rainbow around the edges of the image. This little note is more related to focal length but is interesting non the less.

The last thing is "Angular resolution" ( AR). AR in a lens is the ability to direct light rays as close together as possible (radi

Lee... thanks for u book about the equipament...

before i had the CANON REBEL + SIGMA 8mm + NN3 + Manfrotto.

i needed 6+T+B and the stitch od T+B is very problem...

now... after my assalt... i think in buy a FC-E9 or E8... because... with 2 shots.. i can make a panorama... correct?

reading the Panoweaver Manual... the sigma8mm + DSLR ... the X conversion... not can shots 2... only DRUM IMAGES to stitich.... 4 or 6...

2 shots(full circular) is more simple!!!! :)

where a can buy a coolpix 5000 ? ??

the FC-E8, exist in AMAZON.. but coolpix 5000 ? only used

i cant use a FC-E8 with other coolpix most new not? example FC-E8 + coolpix 8400 or other?

If i buy again a 8mm + nikon DSLR.... with my nodalninja3... is bad...I would have a other PANOHEAD... strong panohead. example: MANFROTTO or KAIDAN....  the cost is verryyyyyyy HIGH!!! i dont have a lot of money... in Brazil... one dollar is 2.4 (REAL) my currency :)

sorry by my terrible english!!! :)

smooth seller the equipament... but a i have a NN3 + tripod... + panoweaver.. u can sell to brazil the camera + lens + MrotatorA?

You wrote: "2 shots(full circular) is more simple!!!! :) "

Easier how....in time...in stitching...in getting a better shot.....not really.

2 shot is not any faster or easier than shooting 3 or 4. Think about it man. How much time does it take to shoot 4 with the sigma vs 2 with the FC-E8.....man we are talking about seconds here.

Stitching either one of these will take the "same amount of time" unless you want to get the stop watch out and actually time it. So mabey you spend 2 or 3 extra minutes on an image....isn't that worth it to get like 10 times better quality.

There is no "real" difference in time or skill.

The only real difference there could be is if you shoot with a 8 to 12 megapixel camera. The larger your images are the more time it "MIGHT" take to process these. But if your computer is slow and you dont need full screen images then simply shoot at a lower pixel size. I would not recommend this but it is an option.

The Nikon D70s is a 6 megapixel camera. The coolpix 5000 is a 5 megapixel camera.....no real difference here. A DSLR camera with a quality lens will make a BIG difference in quality. Processing either of these is going to take the same amount of time.

So...no it's not any easier....nor is it any harder.

You do however need to know how to use your camera. If you spend 10 minutes fiddling around setting your camera up then yes is take longer. IF you use manual, set the shutter/aperture/white balance and shoot your done in 60 seconds.

Or just use AE-LOCK.. Either way its the same.

There are many, many threads here on shooting with the Sigma 8mm and how to operate the camera, shoot the scene and post process it. It's all here man.

IF you really want to gut a CP5000:
Smooth's offer is "unbelievable"....but it....buy it now!!! you wont ever find a set up like that all in one. It's got everyting. Extra wide angle lenses, cords, batteries. And it has the Agnos MrotatorA....the best rotator there is.  EVERYTHING. WOW. I am suprised it is still for sale.

I don't want to rain on Smooths deal but if you choose to use a Sigma take a look at Bo's rotators. He makes them himself at a very cheap cost. He does this to help out people in other contries who have limited funds.
http://www.bophoto.com/bracket/index.html

I can't understand why after using a Sigma you want to go backwards and get something of lesser abilty.

Oh....one tip/idea.  If you live where being mugged is a regular possibility I would suggest disguising your equipment in a sports bag or regular suitcase. Don't look like a photographer. Just an idea. I khow you are thinking why invest again when it might get stolen.....again.

General Lee