# Panoramic equipment - leveling base vs. panning clamp



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 21, 2011)

Im looking to add panoramic ability to my tripod setup (Gitzo Systematic GT3541LS / RRS BH-55 ballhead.)  And Im wondering what would be the most practical way to go.  I like a leveling base because its the more stable of the two options IMO.  The only time I would need the leveling capability is when Im doing panos though.  And I typically wouldnt want the extra height/weight.  But removing it all the time would be, well, dumb.  With a panning clamp I could just throw it on when I want to shoot a landscape and swap it right back out again.  But given the choice I would rather use the panning base of my ballhead.  Its much larger so adjustments would be much more precise.  Its kind of a toss up for me right now.  Prices are fairly close for either so that wouldnt be a deciding factor.

I havent had experience with either so any input, for or against, would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 21, 2011)

I'm not sure why you need either; the BH55 has a panning base built into it, and if you're going to level anything, level the tripod using the legs.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 21, 2011)

Do it free style man.  Shoot it with PORTRAIT orientation, snap, snap, snap......... snap.   Stitch it on photoshop.  Make sure you overlap between snap like 30%.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 21, 2011)

tirediron said:


> I'm not sure why you need either; the BH55 has a panning base built into it, and if you're going to level anything, level the tripod using the legs.



On uneven terrain it can be difficult to get the level close enough for large scale panos.  I care about things like nodal points and parallax.



Schwettylens said:


> Do it free style man.  Shoot it with PORTRAIT orientation, snap, snap, snap......... snap.   Stitch it on photoshop.  Make sure you overlap between snap like 30%.



See above.  Thats great for a recreational shooter.  But thats not going to give me results I can live with.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 21, 2011)

When you use this setup you are talking about, do you shoot it with vertical or horizontal orientation?


----------



## tirediron (Jul 21, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> On uneven terrain it can be difficult to get the level close enough for large scale panos. *I care about things like nodal points and parallax*.


You may care about nodal points, but unless you use a proper panorama mount your caring isn't going to have any effect.  I've shot some fairly large panoramas from places like the lip of Diamond Head crater and never found that it takes more than a minute at most to get the tripod precisely level.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 21, 2011)

That comes across as really arrogant.  My caring wont matter?  I already have L brackets, a rail, etc. too dude.  If I know about np's (and PARALLAX) one would assume I know how to correct for it.  The only thing Im trying to solve is how Im going to do my panning.  Lets save the other gear for another discussion.

Edit: schwetty:  will be shooting in both.  I can get by with less images/overlapping/post work if I can be more precise in my captures.


----------



## molested_cow (Jul 21, 2011)

I've always done it without tripod and seldom have any real issue with the horizon. Even with tripod, it doesn't always work out to be the way I want it.

I'd say do without tripod first and judge it for yourself.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 21, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> That comes across as really arrogant.


As does your inference that because you know the terms nodal point and parallax, you're somehow more knowledgable! 



Arkanjel Imaging said:


> If I know about np's one would assume I know how to correct for it.


 I suppose, one would, _IF_ nodal points were something that you corrected for. In point of fact, there's only one nodal point, and it's not an error of any type, ergo, you don't actually correct for it. In practice, having experimented at length, I've found that even with fairly large panoramas (say 135 deg, using four rows of eight images) unless you are using a very long lens, the nodal point has virtually no perceivable impact on the final image.



Arkanjel Imaging said:


> The only thing Im trying to solve is how Im going to do my panning...


With the panning base that is already built into your ball-head. I'm genuinely puzzled as to why you are trying to decide between two pieces of equipment with very differnt functions, when you already have all of that built into your current gear. I've looked at different leveling heads and always found them to be finicky and annoying, in addition to adding height and weight to your tripod.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 21, 2011)

molested_cow said:


> I've always done it without tripod and seldom have any real issue with the horizon. Even with tripod, it doesn't always work out to be the way I want it.
> 
> I'd say do without tripod first and judge it for yourself.



Ive done them with mediocre results with my previous setup and also without any support at all.  But Im looking to improve upon the results those processes got me.





tirediron said:


> Arkanjel Imaging said:
> 
> 
> > That comes across as really arrogant.
> ...



Hardly.  I was expressing my concerns.  I didnt indicate that I knew anything more than anyone else.  I said I care about them.    


tirediron said:


> I suppose, one would, _IF_ nodal points were something that you corrected for. In point of fact, there's only one nodal point, and it's not an error of any type, ergo, you don't actually correct for it. In practice, having experimented at length, I've found that even with fairly large panoramas (say 135 deg, using four rows of eight images) unless you are using a very long lens, the nodal point has virtually no perceivable impact on the final image.
> .



Sigh... agian, parallax is being corrected, not the nodal point.  Excuuuuuuuse me for not wording myself better.  But thanks for pointing it out.  Again,I find your tone condescending.  Im glad youve done research and gotten results.  But maybe Im looking for different or even (OMG!) better results?  Maybe Ill be shooting them with a telephoto?

Id like to hear what anyone else has to say in relation to the two pieces of gear listed.  This has already gotten way ot.


----------



## Garbz (Jul 22, 2011)

Tell me again why you need to perfectly level tripod to take a panorama? This is something completely news to me. The only important requirement to making a panorama is rotating around the nodal point to avoid parallax (doesn't sound relevant here), and even then it's only a problem if there's a significant mix between foreground and background. 

It sounds very much like you need to look for a different software solution. Given I've come up with perfect panoramas shot hand held with moving subjects in them I don't quite understand why you need a level tripod... I even shot a panorama one afternoon pissed on the way home from the pub, there wasn't a level shot to be seen and all 30 pictures came together without a single stitch mark.


----------



## Ped (Jul 22, 2011)

I have dabbled with a few 360° panoramas & I find that levelling is not generally a problem as in most cases it is simple to level during processing. Having the right gear helps too for consistent results i.e. a correctly set up pano head is perfect, but panos can be made handheld, though some practise would help there too. For all pano gear my first port of call would be Nodal Ninja, heads, levels, poles. Also; consider a stitching program, I find photoshop is a bit of let down. PTGui is good, as is Autopano I hear.

Nodal NInja: Panoramic Tripod Heads, Photography Poles and Levelers for Professional & Amateur Photographers

My Panos: http://panocorner.com


----------



## Edsport (Jul 22, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Do it free style man. Shoot it with PORTRAIT orientation, snap, snap, snap......... snap. Stitch it on photoshop. Make sure you overlap between snap like 30%.


Free style is the way i do it. I've took a few panos and no problems without a tripod. 

Not sure why you would do it in portait mode though. You can take photos vertically and diagonally to make a pano. They don't all have to be just diagonal...


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 22, 2011)

Because portrait orientation will give you the most pixel vertically and give you more room for cropping it rectangular (room for error)?


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 22, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Because portrait orientation will give you the most pixel vertically and give you more room for cropping it rectangular (room for error)?



Dot.  And the more perfectly level I can make the setup the less pixels I will have to crop from the final image.

One of my main concerns is being able to make my process repeatable.  The more variables I can remove from the equation the more consistent my results will be.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 22, 2011)

99.99% of the panos I do are shot in portrait mode.  I don't use any special pano head on my tripod, and have been able to shoot panos hand-held without much issue.


----------



## jbushee (Jul 22, 2011)

I have only limited experience, but at least for spherical panos, you want a level tripod.
Being able to fix things in post is great, but a last choice IMHO.  Why set yourself up for the extra work when it takes just a couple extra minutes of prep to avoid it?


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 22, 2011)

jbushee said:


> I have only limited experience, but at least for spherical panos, you want a level tripod.
> Being able to fix things in post is great, but a last choice IMHO.  Why set yourself up for the extra work when it takes just a couple extra minutes of prep to avoid it?



Exactly.  I dont have any plans on stitching gigapans shot handhled.  And there is a *big* difference between results that are "good enough" and "stellar".

But the more I think about it the more I lean more to the panning clamp.  I didnt realize the PCL-1 was so robust.  Its the same size as the panning base of the BH-55.  It will be a lot easier to put a QR plate on the panning clamp than mess with removing the head.


----------



## Ped (Jul 22, 2011)

Correcting levelling with 360° x 180° panos takes a second or two, even if you take the shots pefectly level, the stitching software might hit off slightly at first run. Levelling becomes more important with cylindrical panos as correcting would invariably involve cropping the image. Also, the point of least parallax (nodal point) only becomes important with scenes with near and far objects, like rooms etc. It is perfectly fine to take panos from a normal tripod or handheld of scenes where everything is far off like in a landscape scene. With closer objects in view, or doing the complete sphere, more work would be involved to hide the errors. Nodal Ninja do a good range of equipment for making panoramas. I have an old slightly war worn NN3 head that does me a treat.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Jul 22, 2011)

I will also be focus stacking.  So just about everything in frame will be in focus.  Near and far.


----------



## Edsport (Jul 23, 2011)

Schwettylens said:


> Because portrait orientation will give you the most pixel vertically and give you more room for cropping it rectangular (room for error)?


You can take shots up and down to get as many pixels you want. More than just by using portrait orientation...


----------



## jbushee (Aug 12, 2011)

Ped said:


> Correcting levelling with 360° x 180° panos takes a second or two, even if you take the shots pefectly level, the stitching software might hit off slightly at first run. Levelling becomes more important with cylindrical panos as correcting would invariably involve cropping the image. Also, the point of least parallax (nodal point) only becomes important with scenes with near and far objects, like rooms etc. It is perfectly fine to take panos from a normal tripod or handheld of scenes where everything is far off like in a landscape scene. With closer objects in view, or doing the complete sphere, more work would be involved to hide the errors. Nodal Ninja do a good range of equipment for making panoramas. I have an old slightly war worn NN3 head that does me a treat.



I guess I would have to disagree.  While it might SOMETIMES be able to level or straighten your pano, after spending WAY too mych time fixing one recently, I bought a level to toss in my bag, since the bubble on my tripod dried up somewhere along the line...

Spend a sec and set up right, instead of counting on the software to bail you out.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Aug 12, 2011)

jbushee said:


> Spend a sec and set up right, instead of counting on the software to bail you out.



This.  

 It takes waaaaay less time to set up and shoot properly than it does to correct in post.  And you just cannot duplicate the results of a multi-row pano rig by shooting handheld.


----------



## Edsport (Aug 13, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> jbushee said:
> 
> 
> > Spend a sec and set up right, instead of counting on the software to bail you out.
> ...


I don't agree. It takes less time just to take the photos than to set up a tripod. I've taken lots without a tripod and stitching in post has never failed...


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Aug 13, 2011)

Are we really gonna go down that road again?  Did you read any of this thread or just post and run?  Regardless of what you believe, YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULTS BY SHOOTING HANDHELD.  Period. Tell yourself whatever you like.   What looks great on your monitor will look like garbage as a 4'x6' print, litho, etc.

There is a reason the worlds best pano shooters use gear to get the camera where it should be.  Shooting large scale pano's handheld is like using a hammer to put together a puzzle.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 13, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> Are we really gonna go down that road again?  Did you read any of this thread or just post and run?  Regardless of what you believe, YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULTS BY SHOOTING HANDHELD.  Period. Tell yourself whatever you like.   What looks great on your monitor will look like garbage as a 4'x6' print, litho, etc.
> 
> There is a reason the worlds best pano shooters use gear to get the camera where it should be.  Shooting large scale pano's handheld is like using a hammer to put together a puzzle.



I dunno.... I've printed some of my hand-held panos up to EIGHT feet with no problems.


----------



## baturn (Aug 13, 2011)

Another guy asking for advice when he'd already made up his mind. This is starting to sound like , Wow, look at all my cool photo stuff.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 13, 2011)

Actually I suggest overlapping the images by at least 50%, unless you have to conserve space.


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Aug 13, 2011)

baturn said:


> Another guy asking for advice when he'd already made up his mind. This is starting to sound like , Wow, look at all my cool photo stuff.



Hardly. Dont troll my thread either. If I was pimping my gear Id have it listed in my sig like the other egomaniacs around here.  

The question was very legitimate. But it seems the lack of general education is holding this topic back. Very little in the way of useful information has been given. Just a bunch of nay-sayers that think their opinion is fact. :er:

Mods, you can close this at your discretion.


----------



## chakalakasp (Aug 13, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> Are we really gonna go down that road again?  Did you read any of this thread or just post and run?  Regardless of what you believe, YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULTS BY SHOOTING HANDHELD.  Period. Tell yourself whatever you like.   What looks great on your monitor will look like garbage as a 4'x6' print, litho, etc.
> 
> There is a reason the worlds best pano shooters use gear to get the camera where it should be.  Shooting large scale pano's handheld is like using a hammer to put together a puzzle.


 
Most of my panos are handheld, and most of them can be printed 5 to 10 feet wide.  Several have been licensed for thousands of dollars.  It can be done, and in some situations, it's the only practical way to do it.  I agree that a tripod is optimal in situations in which time is plentiful, and required in situations in which lighting is below the safe handholding threshhold.


----------



## Edsport (Aug 14, 2011)

Arkanjel Imaging said:


> Are we really gonna go down that road again? Did you read any of this thread or just post and run? Regardless of what you believe, YOU CANNOT ACHIEVE THE SAME RESULTS BY SHOOTING HANDHELD. Period. Tell yourself whatever you like. What looks great on your monitor will look like garbage as a 4'x6' print, litho, etc.
> 
> There is a reason the worlds best pano shooters use gear to get the camera where it should be. Shooting large scale pano's handheld is like using a hammer to put together a puzzle.


I did read this thread and posted a couple times in this thread. I'm not telling myself anything, i'm telling you that a tripod is not necessary. Take shots with tripod and take them without and see if one looks like garbage, if it do, you need to get better software or maybe a different camera. If you read the entire thread you will see that there is several people saying a triopd isn't necessary. Maybe you're saying a tripod is needed because of using a slow shutter speed than yes i agree but if you're using fast enough shutter speed to get sharp photos than a tripod is a waste of time...

I do have prints made. 1 foot by 3 feet and they look great and they're not just for my personal use, i sell them.
If you're doing 4x6 ratio, why do you need to shoot pano shots?


----------



## Arkanjel Imaging (Aug 14, 2011)

If you look at the op you will see the question is in regards to a choice between two pieces of equipment.  I never asked if anyone thought they were necessary or not.  But thats all anyone is interested in posting about.  So just drop it.


----------



## senojekips (Jul 3, 2013)

I fully realise that this is an old thread.  I never cease to be amazed at the fact that there are always arrogant people who cannot just answer the question asked by the OP and must get always assume that the poster does not know what he/she wants. 

These people seem more intent asserting their own dominance over others than actually trying to be helpful. 

If you can't be helpful, just move on, believe me you don't "know it all".

My apologies for having hijacked your thread *Arkangel Imaging*, i just couldn't help myself.


----------



## Gavjenks (Jul 3, 2013)

Garbz said:


> Tell me again why you need to perfectly level tripod to take a panorama? This is something completely news to me. The only important requirement to making a panorama is rotating around the nodal point to avoid parallax (doesn't sound relevant here), and even then it's only a problem if there's a significant mix between foreground and background.



Dunno if anybody addressed this (didn't read all the pages), but if your camera isn't on a level base, then as you rotate it, a straight horizontal line in the world will become a sine curve in your final image (with a period of 360 degrees of rotation), as the camera points more up or more down as it rotates around the un-level base.  This means that you'll have to crop off more from the top and bottom, which wastes pixels, AND even if you do crop, your image will still be warped in the part you cropped.

This is true even if you set up the nodal point correctly (two different issues).



Even if your software is able to correct for the sine wave, this will still involve unnecessary stretching or throwing away pixels in the process, which will hurt your resolution, etc. It is ideal to warp your images as little as possible in software, even if it is capable of doing so.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 3, 2013)

Gavjenks said:


> Dunno if anybody addressed this (didn't read all the pages), but if your camera isn't on a level base, then as you rotate it, a straight horizontal line in the world will become a sine curve in your final image (with a period of 360 degrees of rotation), as the camera points more up or more down as it rotates around the un-level base.  This means that you'll have to crop off more from the top and bottom, which wastes pixels, AND even if you do crop, your image will still be warped in the part you cropped............



Some softwares allow you to compensate for an off-level shot in post.


----------

