Camera recommendation

[Cycle61]

Yes, 10mm is extremely wide. Wide enough that you have to be careful not to get your feet in the picture. The number refers to the focal length of the lens, which is not the same as the physical length, although there is often some correlation. The camera you listed has an 18-55mm lens, which actually works out to about 27mm equivalent on the wide end due to some geekery about sensor size and all that. That plus a Canon 10-22mm would be a good kit for what you're doing.

 

[yella600rr]

Hey Roose, do you have a HD GoPro?

I think it was Karbon that posted up some stills he took with one on FB and they turned out really nice but they did have some fisheye effect on the outer edges. I'm not sure if the pictures will be anygood with indoor lighting.

 

[CockyRooster]

Actually I bought the HD GoPro with that in mind, but my environments were a little too challenging. It was amazingly capable that got me 90% there, but I'm trying to represent my work as professional as possible. You know...smoke and mirrors.

 

[Marineh]

Any wide angle lense with a full frame dslr will be good.

 

[maxandgrinch]

How about a comparison? I know I'm curious.

GoProHD, Nikon 10.5mmFisheye, Sigma 10-18, on ancient non fullframe D70. Used distorion correction cranked to 100% in LightRoom, and the embedded lens profile for the Fisheye, and the closest profile for the Sigma which was some 12mm. All taken about 10am Wedensday, in the smallest room I could find - about 4 feet by 6 feet, plus the shower.

Very interesting results IMO.

Didn't screw around with exposure settings, just 'Auto' and self timer

The GoProHD can probably be straightened even more with some time in PhotoShop.

 

[CockyRooster]

I have mostly no idea of what you just said, but I'm liking the 10mm wide the best.

Excellent comparison. That helps me understand what I'm looking for.

 

[CuriousMike]

The GoPro could also make rubber balls if you sneezed.

Holy distortion.

 

[maxandgrinch]

Could be the first BARF thread in weeks with actual proof and facts - hope nobody gets 'a break,' because of the opinions and feelings expressed herein.

The Sigma (not great but....) is about $400, add the camera body, wireless remote, software, software training, and then the 75lb capacity suction cup and a 7lb camera head mount...... wouldn't you rather use your GPHD and put another $1k into your track bike to shave .2 off your lap time?


Distortion? Those are the 'processed images,' here they are before tweaking

10.5Fish

GPHD

Also interesting is here is where I told the software to fix the GPHD like it was the 10.5mmFisheye, and then toned back the distortion slider some- I really don't have time for this.... GP looks pretty damn good for the cost vs. quality in daylight IMO

The best camera is the one you have when you need it. You think Oscar Grant cared that nobody had a RED camera to show what happened to him?

 

[Joebar4000]

I had gotten those magnetic lenses for the cybershot but they work like crap for me. It just makes a fisheye shot and cropped on the sides because the sizes are dissimilar. I think I'll keep my eyes open for a deal on a low end SLR with preferences towards Canon.

Huh, I'll have to go and see what brand mine is - I was pleasantly surprised how good mine was. It just barely gets used because I almost exclusively carry my big DSLR around instead, or just live with it.

The other option that nobody has mentioned, is just use photoStitch - CS4 has it built in, and it's good enough that it figure out exposure differences based on the EXIF data - does a damn good job at reducing vignetting effects too.

Just take a bunch of pics and tell Photoshop to stitch them together.

Nice thing about that is, you can get a much less distorted image than a fisheye, and in effect, you're turning your camera into a massively megapixel picture-taker without the expense of a shiny camera, or extra noise at low light levels

 

[maxandgrinch]

....Just take a bunch of pics and tell Photoshop to stitch them together.

Nice thing about that is, you can get a much less distorted image than a fisheye, and in effect, you're turning your camera into a massively megapixel picture-taker without the expense of a shiny camera, or extra noise at low light levels

But he's in tiny spaces: Automation FTW!

 

[CockyRooster]

I've looked at the Canon Rebel t2i and for just a little more $ the D20 seems like a better solution with it's more professional slant, and there seems to be real good deals on a used D20 from people upgrading their equipment. This, a 10mm lens, and a tri-pod Seems like a pretty good setup, yes?

 

[maxandgrinch]

I've looked at the Canon Rebel t2i and for just a little more $ the D20 seems like a better solution with it's more professional slant, and there seems to be real good deals on a used D20 from people upgrading their equipment. This, a 10mm lens, and a tri-pod Seems like a pretty good setup, yes?

....and some software to make the straight lines straight again, you're heading down the right path.

None of my shots were done with a tripod. But you should have one anyways, and a wireless remote so you can get out of the mirror or not get a classic 'I tripped as I was running out of the shot' self portrait, never show a trash can, and always flush the floaters.

 

[CockyRooster]

Please tell me that's not family.

 

[maxandgrinch]

Please tell me that's not family.

Nope - the lead up shots are the classic, 'we are so hot Romy, straight back, lift chin - stick 'em out, here' 'Michelle, I'll put some more of my ass over the railing so the railing doesn't look as huge'

Another self timer win:

 

[Yakoo752]

So if we are gonna talk lens correction I'll talk too

http://www.dxo.com/us/photo/dxo_optics_pro/optics_geometry_corrections#Lensdistortion

took me 2 minutes to correct this image with the above program and this is low rez version as I don't have much time

Max I like what you did there