Re: Fisheye or Rectilinear lens for spherical movies?

[Steve Shapiro <sgshiya@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Subject: Fisheye or Rectilinear lens for spherical movies?


> I'd like to try my hand at creating spherical panorama movies, similar
> to the Smoothmove or Ipix panoramas.  From what I understand, I should
> be able to do this using Helmut's panorama tools and Photoshop to
> transform and stitch the images.  I'd like to buy an extremely wide
> angle lens, and since I have an Olympus camera I'm looking at either the
> Zuiko 16mm full-frame fisheye or the Zuiko 18mm rectilinear lens.  Are
> there any compelling reasons to purchase one over the other?  Would the
> new Bessa L with 15mm Heliar be suitable, since it probably would be
> cheaper than either of the two Zuiko lenses?
>
> Thanks,
> Gary
>
In my limited experience [some 30 years of photography] andfrom reading
Kingslake' "History of the Photographic Lens," which support my petty
theories the best panorama photographs are made with a flat lens having more
elements or less air space than a clear, sharp lense of a construction with
an air space to offer greater depth of field.

In the 'sweep' of the panorama photograph, the horizon and other seemingly
straight horozontal lines become curved as a matter of the physics of
dealing with the depth of light and perception.  I have a rapid rectlinear
that makes my 'views' look like tapistries; and the Goerz lenses I use bring
the same views to life andput me into them.

You have to decide what effect you want; and the one I decided on had to do
with offering a sense of recollection rather than a sense of reaction with a
curved balence in that picture.  If you have an opportunity to use them
both, decide what applications will be used for each, probably come the the
conclusion that you'll need them both.

Discussion on storage shelve, anyone?

Steve Shapiro, Carmel, CA
sgshiya@xxxxxxxxxxxx
'the dude abides'