Sorry, forgot to post the link
<http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm>
Lots of other good photo calculator tools here too besides the parallax
error stuff.
Chuck Norcutt
Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I figured this had to exist somewhere. I looked around and found a nice
> page of photo related calculators one of which is the amount of parallax
> error from being off the no-parallax-point. The output is specified in
> terms of degrees and also number of pixels in the image. Focal length
> is not mentioned as an input parameter but is certainly there in another
> form which is the image field of view. From another page I found some
> discussion of having reasonable stitching results with errors of about 6
> pixels. But there are probably a lot of caveats around that number.
>
> Anyhow, after playing around with the calculator a bit (and assuming the
> "nodal point offset" is about equal to the focal length of the lens
> away from the tripod socket) it appears that one can make a rough
> generalization for 35mm frames that no panorama head is needed if the
> closest object is at least as far away in feet as the twice the focal
> length of the lens in millimeters. eg; if you're shooting with a 50mm
> lens and the closest object is 100 feet away you'll probably do OK with
> no panorama head. You may even get away with less but, YMMV.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> Chuck Norcutt wrote:
>> I should also have added; before running out to buy a pano head try
>> shooting some on a tripod but without a head. You may find that you
>> really don't need a head. I've probably shot less than 15 or 20 panos
>> but I don't have a head and haven't needed one. Probably half of them
>> are shot hand held and are also successful. But shooting hand held I
>> still try and make my body mimic the rotation on a tripod head. All of
>> my panos are landscape type with the subject probably at least 2500
>> times the focal length of the camera away from me. There's a value
>> somewhere in the void and I don't know what it is that says if the
>> subject is X times the focal length away you don't need to worry about
>> parallax error.
>>
>> Chuck Norcutt
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|