Ultra wide prime or zoom?

[RAH]

Not sure if this is useful but : I have an Oly 10 mk 2 with a 12-50 that sits on the front. If I have to get ultra wide, I will use the PANORAMA on the scene mode on the camera, take the photo with the camera on its side (usually up to 3 pictures but can do more) and stitch together with HUGIN (free software to download) which will convetr it to a TIFF and does a really good job. The focal point is at the end of the lens so I put the thumb at this point and pivot round (Thanks Rob Trek and your videos).
I do get over 9/10 panoramas that work - so this is very reliable and now just part of the armoury. May be worth a try and wont cost anything?

I take a lot of panoramas, just as you describe (vertically oriented camera). I do think that they are really not quick enough to be a great substitute for an ultra-wide lens, however. I think of panos as more of a specialty, for EXTREME shots, like this:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I usually take many more overlapping shots than I need. I make no attempt to overlap them a certain percent - like say 1/3 - I just take a lot, gradually shifting the camera. It's faster without being too fussy about how many you take, I think. At stitching time, I often wind up using only every-other shot, but better to have too many than missing some! For stitching, I find Microsoft freeware Image Composite Editor to be just about perfect and much easier to use than Hugin:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/projects/ice/

Anyway, much fun!!

 

[Petrochemist]

According to this calculator, 8mm is 94.47 degrees horizontally, and 7mm is 102 degrees.

Diagonally, they are 107 and 114.2 degrees, respectively.

Camera Field of View Calculator (FoV) (scantips.com)

Looks like a handy calculator, easier than my spreadsheet for many comparisons (& displaying many factors I haven't added on mine).
I used internet sensor dimensions in my calculation, but this calculator still seems to differ slightly when using the same dimensions.
My calculations for rectilinear lenses use the excel formula =degrees(2*ATAN(focal length/(2*sensor dimension)))

 

[Petrochemist]

I usually take many more overlapping shots than I need. I make no attempt to overlap them a certain percent - like say 1/3 - I just take a lot, gradually shifting the camera. It's faster without being too fussy about how many you take, I think. At stitching time, I often wind up using only every-other shot, but better to have too many than missing some! For stitching, I find Microsoft freeware Image Composite Editor to be just about perfect and much easier to use than Hugin:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/projects/ice/

Anyway, much fun!!

I also use ICE, very simple to use & a great tool, shame it doesn't work on my Raspberry Pi, but I can't really blame MS for that.
Most of my cameras have a thirds overlay in the viewfinder, I generally use that to ensure slightly over 1/3 image overlap & to try & keep the images the same vertically when shooting handheld (most of the time).

 

[Brownie]

Looks like a handy calculator, easier than my spreadsheet for many comparisons (& displaying many factors I haven't added on mine).
I used internet sensor dimensions in my calculation, but this calculator still seems to differ slightly when using the same dimensions.
My calculations for rectilinear lenses use the excel formula =degrees(2*ATAN(focal length/(2*sensor dimension)))

Yeah, not sure how accurate it is. I figured it would be close. It's the only one I can ever find that isn't dedicated directly to security cameras.

 

[mfturner]

I don't see the 9mm BCL mentioned, it's easy to de-fish and cheap enough that it might give you a feel for whether you might enjoy an UW, and it might help you decide if AF is a must have. I love mine, and it's also opened me up to fish eye distortion which I like for some things.

I'm enjoying might time star scapes lately, so my next UW will be a prime to get f/2 or so. But that's me.

I do stitch panoramas for scenic views to get a little more width with my walk around zooms, but where that lets me down are moving subjects (people, pets, etc) and vertically, I'm rarely happy with 2D stitching.