Another Air 3 70mm spherical panorama test: Night

[GadgetGuy]

Respectfully, sir, you have an odd way of hijacking threads and starting arguments. I honestly can’t figure out what your point is.

The 70mm camera isn’t any sharper than the 24mm, but it picks up the same amount of detail on things that are roughly three times further away than the 24mm does. And that’s useful for a 360° pano. Are you disputing that?

Also: 133 12MP stills contain more data than 33 20MP stills. Are you disputing that?

For the record: My $15 program does a perfectly good job stitching the 70mm 360° panos in about 10 minutes.

We are now completely in agreement. It was your earlier claim that the 70mm was a sharper lens that I had a problem with, and how you came to that conclusion. Now that you have clarified and corrected that statement, we are on the same page. Everything else is a matter of personal preference.

 

[GadgetGuy]

It seems you’re mixing and matching functions of conventional rectilinear imagery with imagery for panoramas. This thread is about 360 panoramas, but there is repetitive mention of comparisons of the 24 and 70mm cameras that are relevant for conventional stills, but not panoramas.

On topic - for panoramas:
More resolution is good, generally. It provides options to distribute at higher resolution or to reduce resolution for specific distributions like many social media. Options in post production processes.

Less resolution is bad, generally. It locks your imagery in to a specific lower quality level, regardless of various current and future resolutions for distribution and display.

Increases in lens focal length and/or sensor resolution are how you can get best resolutions in multi-image and 360 panoramas.

Nonsense. In the context of panorama work or telephoto work of any kind a longer focal length lens provides greater magnification. In 360 panorama work (the subject of this thread) the choice has been made to image an environment. This is different than a single subject.

Off topic - for conventional single-image stills:
In the case of a single subject and single image there are still multiple reasons that one may choose a wide-angle lens perspective or a telephoto lens perspective. The same subject at the same magnification looks different when shot with a closer wide-angle or a further telephoto. One may choose on the basis of wanting a camera position that is relatively closer or further away, or the decision might be made on the desired composition of the photo; what of the subject and environment will be included or excluded, what the desired lens perspective is, etc.

No disagreement, as my prior statements are completely consistent with your further clarification. We are saying the same thing.

"The 70mm lens only offers more detail if one cannot, or chooses not to fly closer.…"

From the same location, the 70mm will, of course, offer more detail.
Similarly, on the Mavic 3 or Mavic 3 Pro, the 7x telephoto will offer even more detail.

The issue is how much more detail and at what cost in terms of flight time and post work, and for what purpose the end result is to be used.

I also stated that the perspective changes, but if that if that was unimportant, and detail was the main priority, flying closer would offer even more detail.

Lastly, atmospheric haze is magnified by using a telephoto lens, creating distortion that flying closer can often overcome to reveal more detail.

These are flying cameras.
The best "zoom" with terrestrial camera is with your feet.
The best "zoom" with a drone is flying closer.

 

[BobaFut]

No disagreement, as my prior statements are completely consistent with your further clarification. We are saying the same thing.

"The 70mm lens only offers more detail if one cannot, or chooses not to fly closer.…"

From the same location, the 70mm will, of course, offer more detail.
Similarly, on the Mavic 3 or Mavic 3 Pro, the 7x telephoto will offer even more detail.

The issue is how much more detail and at what cost in terms of flight time and post work, and for what purpose the end result is to be used.

I also stated that the perspective changes, but if that if that was unimportant, and detail was the main priority, flying closer would offer even more detail.

Lastly, atmospheric haze is magnified by using a telephoto lens, creating distortion that flying closer can often overcome to reveal more detail.

These are flying cameras.
The best "zoom" with terrestrial camera is with your feet.
The best "zoom" with a drone is flying closer.

No disagreement from me on the technical aspects of this, but from an *artistic* perspective, getting closer with a wider lens is oftentimes a recipe for a boring image. There's a reason portraits are typically taken with a telephoto lens from a bit of distance rather than a wide lens up close. So when I'm doing shoots I spend a lot of time looking for ways that I can get shots with the 70mm lens even when I could get shots with the wide angle in a minute or two and with much less fuss. It has nothing to do with the capabilities of the sensor and is all about the optical effects you get when you start "zooming" in.

 

[Occams Razor]

Lastly, atmospheric haze is magnified by using a telephoto lens, creating distortion that flying closer can often overcome to reveal more detail.

While this is true, in the context of a 360 panorama, moving closer to an area will put you even further away from other parts of the scene which will magnify the effects of atmospheric conditions for those areas. The assumption here is that if you are taking a 360 panorama then you are interested in most of the surrounding scenery.

 

[GadgetGuy]

While this is true, in the context of a 360 panorama, moving closer to an area will put you even further away from other parts of the scene which will magnify the effects of atmospheric conditions for those areas. The assumption here is that if you are taking a 360 panorama then you are interested in most of the surrounding scenery.

Indeed. That's why the selection of the location and elevation of the 360 pano can make or break the appeal of the pano, and why multiple panos should be shot from nearby locations and at different elevations from the same location, too, to find out which is most impactful. The beauty of the 24mm pano is the instant stitched result which can be downloaded and viewed in the field to see if it works or not. Usually, a good 24mm pano is often also worth doing as a 70mm pano. You can effectively use the 24mm pano as a polaroid test print. One of the biggest benefits of the longer flight times of newer DJI drones is the additional time for stopping to shoot panos along an extended flight route. My best flights now produce both videos and panos!

 

[GadgetGuy]

Respectfully, sir, you have an odd way of hijacking threads and starting arguments. I honestly can’t figure out what your point is.

The 70mm camera isn’t any sharper than the 24mm, but it picks up the same amount of detail on things that are roughly three times further away than the 24mm does. And that’s useful for a 360° pano. Are you disputing that?

Also: 133 12MP stills contain more data than 33 20MP stills. Are you disputing that?

For the record: My $15 program does a perfectly good job stitching the 70mm 360° panos in about 10 minutes.

Please accept my apologies. I just realized I was conflating your posts with those of @Ridgeback65 who was the one who actually incorrectly stated the 70mm lens was sharper. My bad!

Your venerable $15 Panorama Stitcher program is unfortunately Mac only, and my desktop is Windows, but your Spherualizer iOS pano viewer for iPad and iPhone use is a godsend! I have been looking for a good iOS pano viewer since forever! The last one I had, iPano no longer works. For $4.99, Spherualizer is worth its weight in gold, without any annoying ads! It's fully iCloud compatible, so the huge originals need not be stored on the device, unless one wants to, The app can also easily import all panos as previews directly from your Photos app, and syncs its previews gallery with iCloud!

Thank you for that tip! I no longer have to upload and export my panos into a web gallery to be able to enjoy their full interactivity on my iPad, to display and share them! Very cool! Developer is also still actively updating the app.

 

[Thmoore]

Please accept my apologies. I just realized I was conflating your posts with those of @Ridgeback65 who was the one who actually incorrectly stated the 70mm lens was sharper. My bad!

Your venerable $15 Panorama Stitcher program is unfortunately Mac only, and my desktop is Windows, but your Spherualizer iOS pano viewer for iPad and iPhone use is a godsend! I have been looking for a good iOS pano viewer since forever! The last one I had, iPano no longer works. For $4.99, Spherualizer is worth its weight in gold, without any annoying ads! It's fully iCloud compatible, so the huge originals need not be stored on the device, unless one wants to, The app can also easily import all panos as previews directly from your Photos app, and syncs its previews gallery with iCloud!

Thank you for that tip! I no longer have to upload and export my panos into a web gallery to be able to enjoy their full interactivity on my iPad, to display and share them! Very cool! Developer is also still actively updating the app.

They actually have a Quest app as well that pops the panos from your iPhone or iPad into the Quest headset. The controls are a little weird, but it works.