what's your lens of choice when shooting digital for a pano?
cheers
rb

shot.

hang on a bit..  I can't see any way at all around the 'cigar shaped'
distortion!  is there a suggestion that there is?

I can see a few ways of achieving a panorama -

use a rectilinear wide angle and crop to the required ratio**
use a fisheye and crop to the required ratio
use a swing lens (and curved film plane)
use a cirkut camera type gizmo
stitch a series together
streak photo (non pictorial, so lets skip this)
others..?

(**either in camera, as panoramic cameras do, or crop from the film after
the event)

rectilinear wide angles will yeild the least* distortion in a single (non
stitched,non moving) shot such that verticals remain vertical and
horizointals horizontal.. but a 'corrected' sherical distortion is
nonetheless a distortion in it's own right.

fisheyes being lenses with no one focal length will produce the most
distorted shot, exhibiting spherical distortion.

Swing lens cameras will (if a decent rectilinear lens is used which they
almost exclusively are) will produce true vertical 'verticals' (as only the
center of the lens is used in exposing the shot there can be NO distortion!)
and the horizontals will be totally distortion free as the lens swings on
axis, pointing at each point on the horizontal as it goes.  The 'cigar
shaped "distortion" ..well, isn't really..  If objects are placed 50' from
the lens to the left, middle and right of the frame then all appear the same
size on the film plane in the shot - they are after all, the same distance
from the film plane!  However, if a horizontal line such as a kerb exists
immediately in front of and perpendicular to the camera but above or below
the central horizontal axis, this will in the shot appear to sweep away both
left and right (either up or down) , and consequently look distorted..
however it is not distorted but a true 2D rendering of a 3D object without
the bias of the mental spacial adjustment that goes on in the human mind -
of course this is assuming a lens is used that is free of spherical
distortion.  If the kerb in question was oriented exactly ON the horizontal
axis it will form a straight line but WILL be cigar shaped - as you'd
expect, it is apparently taller directly in front of the camera where it is
closer, and thinner the further it is from the camera.  but then this is
true of all cameras.

cirkut cameras do the same as the above but move the film away at the same
time so a 360 degree shot (or more) is possible)

stitching a series does the same thing too if the focal lengths are
carefully selected to eliminate spherical distortion, just as you can make a
wide angle shot by stitching together a series of long focal length shots.
This assumes an understanding of the fact that perspective DOES NOT change
if the camera is located in a fixed position and focal lengths are changed,
and anyone can demonstrate this by taking a shot with say a 200mm and then a
shot with a 28mm, cropping the 28mm to the same angle of view and enlarging
it to the size of the 200mm shot - the images are idendical (except for
resolution, grain etc)

then there's the streak camera, particularly a moving streak camera, or
maybe an as-yet to be built cirkut/streak hybrid something along the lines
of one of Prof. A Davidhazy's linear motion cameras.  Moving the camera and
the film past the exposure point would produce a cigar-distortion free image
on the horizontal plane..

Swinging lens/cirkut/stitched and streak cameras offer the least possible
distortion of any cameras but have the major drawback that the camera must
be kept very still for the duration of the effectively long exposure.

Cameras employing wide angles and fisheyes make the exposure in one go so
motion is less of an issue, but they exibit more distortion.

Stitching is problematic if moving subjects are present in the image (as is
the case with long duration / motile lens/camera shots) but these too
exhibit little distortion, again, disclaimer about lens used..

is there something I'm missing?

k

You are obviously going to disagree with everthing I say.

Please read my original response:-

"If you want a panoramic and spend less cash look for a Noblex, or use a
DSLR
and stitching software. "

I never used the word 'same', or suggested I was comparing 'similar'
cameras, except they take panoramics.

How you can say no to my statement  "I said what I wanted to say, you can
say what you want" is beyond me.

I think you are reading too much into what I said.

Thanks