Yes, it does, but you learn to work within that limitation finding alternative angles, stitching only two shots rather than three, etcPresumably, shooting towards the edge of the lens circle with a rising front degrades definition a bit.
Frankly, I don't know. I try to be careful when shooting, so whatever photoshopping I do is minimal.Is this less degrading than when you add (or subtract) pixels with photoshop perspective?
Either/both, but as I said before, I try to shoot in such a way as to minimize post processing, so whichever corrective tweaking I have done so far has not been extensive enough for me to find out whether any of them is more detrimental than the other.do you squeeze (subtract) or stretch (add) or do a bit of both?
Kirk is vastly more experienced than me on this score (and plenty of others), so perhaps he can be more helpful than me on this.
Not necessarily, if you stitch using longer lenses you do manage to avoid or at least reduce the wide angle look. It is just more work. On the other hand, architectural photography does impose technical restrictions on your tools, and the wide angle look is to some extent inevitable.I think one of the dangers of going this route is that every image starts getting that wide angle look to it, which might make it tough to separate your images from the rest of the herd.
Bookmarks