On Thursday, 29 November 2012 at 16:02:03 +0800, RizThon wrote:
>>   Ultra wide-angle 8mm fisheye lens with exaggerated perspective and
>>   approximately 180° angle of view, for dramatic effects
>>
>>   Ultra-wide 139.3° diagonal field-of-view for 4/3 size image formats
>
> Of course if you use the same lens with different sensor size, the result
> will be different. That's why the Nikkor 10.5 on a small sensor has a 180°
> diagonal while on a fullframe sensor the HFOV is around 180°.

I seem to be having difficulty making myself clear.  My apologies.  To
spell it out:

- The Olympus 8 mm lens, designed for Four Thirds sensors (21.63 mm
  diagonal), covers an angle of 180° along this diagonal.

- The Samyang (I think that's the original manufacturer), also 8 mm,
  covers an angle of 139.3° along this same diagonal.

And as I said, the difference in angle can't be explained by
distortion alone.

>> Did you read the article?  It specifies numerous different
>> projections.  And the difference between 140° and 180° can't be
>> attributed just to distortion.
>
> Indeed:
> "The angle of view of a fisheye lens is usually between 100 and 180 degrees[
> 1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens#cite_note-bare_url_a-1> while
> the focal lengths <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length> depend
> on the film
> format <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_format> they are designed for."

That wasn't what I was referring to, but arguably it needs to be
improved.  The reference is barely authoritative, and "Film format"
sounds positively archaic.

I was referring to section 3,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisheye_lens#Mapping_function which
discusses the projections and gives a reason for the big differences
in angle.

> At least now you should have a better idea whether or not you want
> that fisheye lens!

I don't see any input to that decision from this discussion.

> I have a fullframe fisheye and it's quite practical to only take 6
> pictures horizontally (I have a pano head so I also take a zenith,
> but I always have issues stitching the nadir, as the shot is
> handheld to avoid seeing the tripod).

Indeed.  I've taken the coward's way out and done without a nadir, so
looking straight down shows a black hole.

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger [email protected] for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua

Attachment: pgpwdXOqCZ38f.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to