Samyang 8mm Lens settings
Carl von Einem
have you ever used the search box of the panotools wiki?
http://wiki.panotools.org/ -> "samyang"
According to Michel Thoby
http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.html
the lens uses stereographic projection.
You possibly get more help by people (and faster, too) if you care to
give some detailed information, in this case...
- Is your lens shaved?
- Canon has full frame as well as crop sensors so the brand alone is
useless info to others.
- What did you already try, at which point in your workflow do you struggle?
Carl
Emad ud din Bhatt schrieb am 17.04.12 15:19:
Emad ud din Bhatt
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
--
Emaad
www.flickr.com/emaad
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
By what you are saying maybe you still need to correctly set your lens as a circular fish-eye one and make adequate optimizations, line v, b and (I do this) at the end a "Everything without translation" to a final line joining. That assumes you use a tripod head that makes the camera rotate around the nodal point and is well calibrated, otherwise lines wont join.
Cheers,
Carlos E G Carvalho (Cartola)
http://cartola.org/360
Carl von Einem
"stereographic" projection. I'd still use that projection instead of
"circular fish-eye" and use masks instead.
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) schrieb am 18.04.12 14:46:
>
> By what you are saying maybe you still need to correctly set your lens
> as a circular fish-eye one and make adequate optimizations, line v, b
> and (I do this) at the end a "Everything without translation" to a final
> line joining. That assumes you use a tripod head that makes the camera
> rotate around the nodal point and is well calibrated, otherwise lines
> wont join.
>
> 2012/4/18 Emad ud din Bhatt <xyz...@gmail.com <mailto:xyz...@gmail.com>>
Emad ud din Bhatt
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
--
Emaad
www.flickr.com/emaad
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
In fact I don't need to crop them, my sensor is an APS-C and the image fills it. I just use the circular fish-eye as the definition of the lens so that hugin correctly distort the images - and it has worked till now for this lens. In fact has already worked with "Full frame fish-eye" but I I had never tested with stereographic. I use the "circular fish-eye" with a 6.5mm Opteka.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
Carl von Einem
I use a Nikkor 8mm (that beast) on a Nikon D300 which has a 1.5 crop
factor. Images from that lens need to be cropped, here is an example:
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/12747460@N03/7090581225/>
I think you should try "stereographic" with your Samyang fisheye and
compare that with "circular fish-eye" :-)
Carl
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) schrieb am 18.04.12 16:12:
> Hi Carl,
>
> In fact I don't need to crop them, my sensor is an APS-C and the image
> fills it. I just use the circular fish-eye as the definition of the lens
> so that hugin correctly distort the images - and it has worked till now
> for this lens. In fact has already worked with "Full frame fish-eye" but
> I I had never tested with stereographic. I use the "circular fish-eye"
> with a 6.5mm Opteka.
>
> 2012/4/18 Carl von Einem <ca...@einem.net <mailto:ca...@einem.net>>
pd prop
Attached is a screenshot of Hugin when I enter the Samyangs details.
pdprop
Carl von Einem
>
> I think you should try "stereographic" with your Samyang fisheye and
> compare that with "circular fish-eye" :-)
From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens>
Fisheye lenses can have many different mapping functions:
[...]
* Stereographic (conform): This mapping would be ideal for
photographers because it doesn't compress marginal objects as much.
Samyang is the only manufacturer ever to be making this kind of fisheye
lens. This lens is available under different brandnames. This mapping is
easily implemented by software.
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
Carl von Einem schrieb am 18.04.12 17:15:
Carl von Einem
offends the eye. Do a test panorama in a small room with tile walls and
compare both projections. And show us your results, please. I'm curious
what difference it makes!
Cheers,
Carl
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) schrieb am 18.04.12 19:30:
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
http://cartola.org/panoramas/20120401-Fiocruz_Tour_Castelo/
If you go to the blog and search for "Opteka" you will find all of them - I always put a technical datasheet of the panos. There will be more results in Portuguese - not all posts are translated. Anyway, I am pretty satisfied with the result using the lens as fish-eye. Maybe it is due to the optimizations I do, maybe it corrects something, but I have never thought it was wrong at all :)
Some other indoor:
http://cartola.org/360/en/2012/01/04/workshop-at-iv-gnugraf/
http://cartola.org/360/en/2011/09/17/pablo-lapidusas-at-national-museum-of-fine-arts-rio-de-janeiro-brasil/
http://cartola.org/360/en/2011/10/09/family-meeting-at-home/
I tell you if I find some difference when I got to test some with the stereographic. You can also test with fish-eye :)
Hope Emad has got to stitch his pano at this time :)
I guess that with landscape shots this is not a problem that directly offends the eye. Do a test panorama in a small room with tile walls and compare both projections. And show us your results, please. I'm curious what difference it makes!
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
Carl von Einem
very nice panoramas but I wasn't mentioning the Opteka (don't know about
that lens). Also Emaad asked about the Samyang (see the subject).
And if I compare these two pages...
http://wiki.panotools.org/Stereographic_Projection
http://wiki.panotools.org/Fisheye_Projection
...there is some difference as I was earlier trying to point out with
the flickr link to one image from my 8mm f2.8 fisheye Nikkor. That one
certainly uses "circular fisheye".
Sure you can correct most of what you "cause" with a different
projection type with some overlap and proper optimization but still I
would set my input images to be stereographic if I was working with the
Samyang 8 mm.
Can you post one example shot from each of your indeed interesting
lenses (uncropped), so I can compare that side by side with my 8mm
Nikkor shot?
Carl
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) schrieb am 19.04.12 01:30:
> I have tested here with a project where I used before the lens as
> "circular fish-eye". The result is about the same. The optimizations to
> achieve the result have also been the same, so I really think it doesn't
> make much difference and both will do well.
>
> 2012/4/18 Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) <cart...@gmail.com
> <mailto:cart...@gmail.com>>
kfj
> I have Canon 40d which is a cropped sensor.
> My Samyang is not shaved as I have cropped sensor DSLR.
>
> I create 360x180 panos. I have simply put 8mm in lens type and hugin
> automatically calculates values. But the final image has strange distorted
> look.
stereographic, and if you use that, the lens correction coefficients
you need are smallest. Here's a values from a typical lens.ini file
for it:
[Lens]
image_width=4272
image_height=2848
type=10
hfov=138.025
crop=1.6
a=0.00716497
b=-0.0360894
These settings probably won't be correct for you, as you use a
different body, but the lens correction coefficientsshould be similar
and the projection type is the same. But you can take it from there.
Also keep in mind that every body and every lens, even within a
series, is different. You have to calibrate your own equipment if you
want really good results.
Kay
Emad ud din Bhatt
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx
--
Emaad
www.flickr.com/emaad
Carl von Einem
<http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.html> shows
me that Michel Thoby actually pointed to the fact that both the 'Samyang
8mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS' and the 'Opteka 6.5mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS' are
identical products.
Though there is a difference: the Opteka lens
(<http://opteka.com/opt65ii.aspx>) comes with a detachable lens hood
(sun shield) while the Samyang has a fixed one:
<http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Samyang_shaved.jpg>
<http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z374/dmc1965/newalbum/65_II_ALT1.jpg>
I really love these marketing heroes... did you know that Mercedes will
sell the Renault Kangoo soon, just with a big star added?
Carl
Emad ud din Bhatt schrieb am 19.04.12 14:25:
> Thanks all for your support.
>
> I feel Optika and Samyang both are same with different brand names.
> These lenses are sold with different bran names.
>
> I will try to create equirects this weekend....
>
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
I also thought Opteka and Samyang were the same or at least very similar, I have heard that before. As you asked for some samples, I have some here if you still want to see:
http://cartola.org/arquivos/Sample-6.5mm.tgz
I have calibrated the lens not only using the tutorial at hugin site but also saving the lens after a good stitch, but always have to do similar optimization that finishes the necessary lens distortions to make the lines join correctly. That is why I think it doesn't matter very much if I define the lens initially as fish eye or stereographic.
Good exchange of information till now. :)
Tks,
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
To post to this group, send email to hugi...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hugin-ptx+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
Carl von Einem
up with something that illustrates what also Kay says about using the
right projection.
Cheers,
Carl
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola) schrieb am 19.04.12 16:31:
Tom Sharpless
I use the Samyang (called Rokinon in US) 8mm a lot, on APS-C cameras,
and get fewer stitching problems than with the Sigma 8mm. If you did
a good calibration, and still have trouble, I guess your problem must
be that the lens pupil is not at the center of rotation of you pano
head -- it could perhaps be off center 'left-to-right'? Or perhaps
the lens mount is loose and the lens shifts while you are shooting?
-- Tom
On Apr 19, 10:31 am, "Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)"
> Hi,
>
> I also thought Opteka and Samyang were the same or at least very similar, I
> have heard that before. As you asked for some samples, I have some here if
> you still want to see:
>
> http://cartola.org/arquivos/Sample-6.5mm.tgz
>
> I have calibrated the lens not only using the tutorial at hugin site but
> also saving the lens after a good stitch, but always have to do similar
> optimization that finishes the necessary lens distortions to make the lines
> join correctly. That is why I think it doesn't matter very much if I define
> the lens initially as fish eye or stereographic.
>
> Good exchange of information till now. :)
>
> Tks,
>
>
> 2012/4/19 Carl von Einem <c...@einem.net>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks for that hint! A second look at <http://michel.thoby.free.fr/**
> > SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.**html<http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.html>>
> > 'Samyang 8mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS' and the 'Opteka 6.5mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS'
> > are identical products.
>
> > Though there is a difference: the Opteka lens (<http://opteka.com/opt65ii.
>
> > <http://i1186.photobucket.com/**albums/z374/dmc1965/newalbum/**
> > 65_II_ALT1.jpg<http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z374/dmc1965/newalbum/65_II_ALT1.jpg>
> > googlegroups.com <hugin-ptx%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/**
> > group/hugin-ptx <http://groups.google.com/group/hugin-ptx>
Tom Sharpless
fisheye when you optimize lens parameters; Hugin will find the best
fitting curve anyhow. If you did not optimize or calibrate, then
calling it stereographic would be preferable.
>
> I also thought Opteka and Samyang were the same or at least very similar, I
> have heard that before. As you asked for some samples, I have some here if
> you still want to see:
>
> http://cartola.org/arquivos/Sample-6.5mm.tgz
>
> I have calibrated the lens not only using the tutorial at hugin site but
> also saving the lens after a good stitch, but always have to do similar
> optimization that finishes the necessary lens distortions to make the lines
> join correctly. That is why I think it doesn't matter very much if I define
> the lens initially as fish eye or stereographic.
>
> Good exchange of information till now. :)
>
> Tks,
>
>
> 2012/4/19 Carl von Einem <c...@einem.net>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks for that hint! A second look at <http://michel.thoby.free.fr/**
> > SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.**html<http://michel.thoby.free.fr/SAMYANG/Early%20test%20report.html>>
> > 'Samyang 8mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS' and the 'Opteka 6.5mm 1:3.5 FISH-EYE CS'
> > are identical products.
>
> > Though there is a difference: the Opteka lens (<http://opteka.com/opt65ii.
>
> > <http://i1186.photobucket.com/**albums/z374/dmc1965/newalbum/**
Carlos Eduardo G. Carvalho (Cartola)
I probably have all those problems together with my self made panoramic head. I have plans to make a more stable set on it someday :). The last camera plate I did is a little unstable and sometimes I forget to reposition the camera when I change between the 6.5mm and 10mm lens or the opposite. I think I have just assumed that there will always be some necessary correction and nowadays I just do them :)