The Use Of Wide-angle Lenses

[eurasianthai]

I actually just love wide-angle lenses.

They allow you to take, well, wide-angle photos

This is the lens I actually use most, the Canon EFS 10-22mmm, and I just love it.

A picture taken last Sunday in Carrefour Rama 4 in Bangkok.

[eurasianthai]

And a wide-angle lens is sure required to take a photo of escalators in Suvarnabhumi airport

[The Vulcan]

I would suggest that both of these images would benefit from distortion correction.

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Nice images though.

[skippybangkok]

[eurasianthai]

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Indeed, but it was shot at 10mm.

And we kind of like the distortion.

And well, we're lazy.

Edited February 8, 2010 by eurasianthai

[phetaroi]

I would suggest that both of these images would benefit from distortion correction.

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Nice images though.

I don't mind the "distortion"...and I sure don't know how to correct it. Tell me how.

But what I would like to know is why so many photos posted on the forum are so fuzzy. Is it the forum or the photographer?

[Slaps]

I would suggest that both of these images would benefit from distortion correction.

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Nice images though.

You took the words out of my mouth mate

exactly what I was gonna say

[The Vulcan]

I would suggest that both of these images would benefit from distortion correction.

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Nice images though.

You took the words out of my mouth mate

exactly what I was gonna say

welcome aboard LOL :D

[The Vulcan]

I would suggest that both of these images would benefit from distortion correction.

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Nice images though.

I don't mind the "distortion"...and I sure don't know how to correct it. Tell me how.

But what I would like to know is why so many photos posted on the forum are so fuzzy. Is it the forum or the photographer?

Looks ok on my screen - maybe your monitor?

Anyway, Photoshop>transform>warp or PT lens for correction (or both)

[VerbalKint]

Use a Tokina 12-24 for photographing property, and love it.

In case of distortion I use photoshop: [filter] [distort] [lens correction]

When using the same lens at the same focal length (in my case 12 mm for small rooms/bathrooms) it's easy to make an action in p'shop that will do the distortion correction for you.

[astral]

SilkyPix is a cheaper product than Photoshop and provides some useful distortion correction tools.

[Portlandstone]

Do you guys use your wide angle at very low f-stop (in range from 2.8 ~ f/8)? I have a Sigma 10-20mm and when I do that at the 10 range, people come out looking a bit like the beings in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, long and stringy, especially if they are away from the center of the frame. While I might think that is to be expected at wide aperature, another concern I have is that towards the bottom left I get a noticeable amount of blur, while the right side and center are relatively sharp. If I increase to f/9 and above it reduces it, but even going much higher it seems I can still pick out a bit of blur in the bottom left. Of course going up to a very high f-stop always improves it, but then of course the major hurdle of shutter speed. Any comments, photoshop techniques?

[The Vulcan]

Do you guys use your wide angle at very low f-stop (in range from 2.8 ~ f/8)? I have a Sigma 10-20mm and when I do that at the 10 range, people come out looking a bit like the beings in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, long and stringy, especially if they are away from the center of the frame. While I might think that is to be expected at wide aperature, another concern I have is that towards the bottom left I get a noticeable amount of blur, while the right side and center are relatively sharp. If I increase to f/9 and above it reduces it, but even going much higher it seems I can still pick out a bit of blur in the bottom left. Of course going up to a very high f-stop always improves it, but then of course the major hurdle of shutter speed. Any comments, photoshop techniques?

Same problem with my Sigma 12-24mm on FF

This is shot at 12mm and the "fall-off" in the bottom corners is obvious - I'm working on this!

In between I tend allow more image than is needed and to then crop out such distortion

[The Vulcan]

Not my images but aren't these shots marvelous use of a wide angle lens?

I would never have thought of such a technique

Wide angle

[Curt1591]

Haven't invested in a DSLR as yet, so I achieve my wide-angles through panos:

[The Vulcan]

Haven't invested in a DSLR as yet, so I achieve my wide-angles through panos:

Impressive.

What software do you use and what technique viz, how many shots etc

[Curt1591]

Haven't invested in a DSLR as yet, so I achieve my wide-angles through panos:

Impressive.

What software do you use and what technique viz, how many shots etc

Photoshop's little known "Photomerge" feature is about the best I have found. If you have Photoshop, go to file, then automate, then Photomerge.

These where created from between 3 and 6 shots.

I sometimes use a bubble level I made to help keep the horizon straight. You can find cheap levels at many "20 baht" tables.

The shots from the original poster seem to have a left favoring list. This would be avoided with the level.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Curt1591

[The Vulcan]

Haven't invested in a DSLR as yet, so I achieve my wide-angles through panos:

Impressive.

What software do you use and what technique viz, how many shots etc

Photoshop's little known "Photomerge" feature is about the best I have found. If you have Photoshop, go to file, then automate, then Photomerge.

These where created from between 3 and 6 shots.

I sometimes use a bubble level I made to help keep the horizon straight. You can find cheap levels at many "20 baht" tables.

The shots from the original poster seem to have a left favoring list. This would be avoided with the level.

Good. I've got PS.

Another question - do you allow for overlap when shooting?

I've read somewhere that the optimum results for perfect blending are to allow something like 15% overlap to merge (or something like that)

As you can gather I know nothing about this technique but it is interesting

[Nordlys]

In both cases the barrel and pincushion is evident and parallelism needs attention to strengthen the shots - in other words they are a bit wonky!

Indeed, but it was shot at 10mm.

And we kind of like the distortion.

And well, we're lazy.

Agreed distortion should be corrected, but it's not too apparent in those pics.

Next time try using tripod or raise ISO to avoid shooting with maximum aperture so the edges will appear sharper especially when shooting at wide end of your zoom. Your second shot (airport) would also benefit from pan-focus with higher F stop (deeper depth of field) and it also helps eliminate vignetting.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Nordlys

[Nordlys]

Same problem with my Sigma 12-24mm on FF

This is shot at 12mm and the "fall-off" in the bottom corners is obvious - I'm working on this!

In between I tend allow more image than is needed and to then crop out such distortion

This is why I didn't buy Sigma 12 - 24. What can you do about it other than to crop when F8 doesn't eliminate it? And wouldn't it better if you just avoid using wide end than to crop so your photo would at least merit from more pixels? I had this problem with my Sigma 17 - 35, now it's gone after I changed to Canon 17-40L, which is sharp edges to edges from wide open (or at least tolerable, and can be corrected with higher F stop). I heard it's even sharper with EF16-35 F2.8L II.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Nordlys

[The Vulcan]

Same problem with my Sigma 12-24mm on FF

This is shot at 12mm and the "fall-off" in the bottom corners is obvious - I'm working on this!

In between I tend allow more image than is needed and to then crop out such distortion

This is why I didn't buy Sigma 12 - 24. What can you do about it other than to crop when F8 doesn't eliminate it? And wouldn't it better if you just avoid using wide end than to crop so your photo would at least merit from more pixels. I had this problem with my Sigma 17 - 35, now it's gone after I changed to Canon 17-40L, which is sharp edges to edges from wide open (or at least tolerable, and can be corrected with higher F stop). I heard it's even sharper with 16-35F2.8L II.

There's a very good article somewhere on the 'net which I've misplaced at present. It goes into great detail how to CORRECTLY use thus 12-24 lens to avoid this "fall-off"

Seemingly, if you adjust your body angle and peer closely through the VF you can see the "fall-off" happening and can correct it by adjusting the camera angles etc - better still use a tripod and level it up correctly - too much effort in this heat I'm afraid.

I did try it once - tripod set-up, leveled accurately etc and it does work.

This was shot at 12mm and looks a lot better

I'm just to lazy to put it into practice!

[Curt1591]

Good. I've got PS.

Another question - do you allow for overlap when shooting?

I've read somewhere that the optimum results for perfect blending are to allow something like 15% overlap to merge (or something like that)

As you can gather I know nothing about this technique but it is interesting

15 to 20% should be OK. Put the photos to be merged into a single folder, then select that folder to be merged. Sit back and watch the scripting go to work.

When done, crop as desired.

[eurasianthai]

now it's gone after I changed to Canon 17-40L, which is sharp edges to edges from wide open (or at least tolerable, and can be corrected with higher F stop). I heard it's even sharper with EF16-35 F2.8L II.

The 17-40 L is quite an "old" Canon lens which does not cover much of a range.

On my Canon 450D, that is.

What camera do you use these days, Nordlys?

[Nordlys]

now it's gone after I changed to Canon 17-40L, which is sharp edges to edges from wide open (or at least tolerable, and can be corrected with higher F stop). I heard it's even sharper with EF16-35 F2.8L II.

The 17-40 L is quite an "old" Canon lens which does not cover much of a range.

On my Canon 450D, that is.

What camera do you use these days, Nordlys?

I wouldn't exactly call 17-40L as an old lens and it actually does cover more range than your 10 - 22 (how much range do you need anyway?). Old or not it's still an L lens and I've never seen the "fall out" at the corners I see in your Suvarnabhumi photo.

I've been using EOS 5D for the last 5 years. I love it so much I have no intention of upgrading it to Mk2 (but perhaps to Nikon D3s or D700).

Edited February 12, 2010 by Nordlys

[eurasianthai]

(but perhaps to Nikon D3s or D700).

So you'll sell your Canon lenses?

[Kan Win]

Haven't invested in a DSLR as yet, so I achieve my wide-angles through panos:

Very nice panos. Thank you for sharing them with us.

I do like taking them as well.

More here

Sawadee

[angiud]

So, which kind of wide-angle you people suggest for a canon 450?

I have already a Canon 100 macro, a Canon 70-300 EF DO and the standard Canon 18-55

Something not so crazy expensive!

[eurasianthai]

For the time being, for cropped Canon cameras, there is only one available from Canon, the EFS 10-22mm.

A very nice one, by any standards, but not really cheap

But you also have the Sigma 10-20mm, and the Tamron 10-24mm.

Can't really comment about them, maybe some others can?

Edited February 16, 2010 by eurasianthai

[Nordlys]

Wife and her brother, at his condo in Na Klua, Pattaya.

17mm, F5.6, 1/30, ISO500

[astral]

How about this one

http://www.ciao.co.uk/Productinformation/C...m_lens__5600164

5.7 - 80mm at f1.6.

Only for those with deep pockets.