Eaton Centre Panoramic

I guess since I didn’t end up buying that Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 I wanted, I’m now shooting multi-shot panoramics to make up for the lack of a super wide lens. This shot, from the Eaton Centre yesterday, is a combo of four photos stitched together. I’ve got a handful of cool Eaton Centre shots to show you but I’ll try to space them apart.

This entry was posted in Architecture Photography, Toronto, Urban Photography and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Eaton Centre Panoramic

  1. Frances says:

    Beautiful…makes me want to go shopping !

  2. Mary Lynn Muir says:

    Great sense of space and congestion at the same time!

  3. John Griggs says:

    Nice, Dave! I used to have a 10-20mm Sigma F/4-5.6 and I miss it. It was sharp and excellent.

    I recently borrowed a Tokina 11-16 from a friend and took it with me when I went to pick up my daughter at the Philadelphia airport and some output from it is on my flickr stream:

    Longwood on MFT: Family Portrait

    They’re actually wider than they look because I cropped them to 4×5 aspect ratio — but they look better now because what was at the edges wasn’t all that wonderful anyway.

    When I used my ultrawide, I used it to get dramatic “perspective” in very, very close and not for getting wide shots. A good example of that is this shot:

    Left Behind

    They focus close enough stopped down to get amazing perspective. I was literally an inch or two away from that pump when I took this one.

    My 16-35mm does okay, but I miss that extra 5-6 mm — it makes a big difference.

    • Thanks John. I’ve had my eye on that 10-20mm Sigma, too. Your 11-16mm Tokina shots are great. As for the 16-35mm lens, I was thinking of it on a full frame, which would be about the same range as the 11-16 on a APS-C camera, at least on the wide end.

      • John Griggs says:

        When I bought the 16-35, that was my intention. I can use it on my Nikon N80 film body for that range and will be with slide film (Fuji Velvia RVP100).

        However, my plan was to buy all FX lenses and make my next camera an FX — but then the stinkin’ (in a good way) D7000 came along and I fell back a few yards.

        Since my backup camera is DX as well, I figured having 2 DX cams would make my lenses work better together range-wise. I don’t feel like I’ve given anything up with the D7000 — on the contrary — but I’m not going to get the ultra wide angle now out of the 16-35. Still, the 16-35 is such a great lens for wide angle when I shoot events, and some of my industrial archaeology shooting, that’s it’s still a keeper.

        So: I may be buying another Sigma or that Tokina or even a Nikon. It won’t be a “primary” lens for me like my Nikon 16-35 and 70-200 are — so a third party non-weathersealed lens won’t be a big deal.

        I am sorry I sold the Sigma. Sigma’s can be so variable — but that one was spot on. I sold it to a Ukranian photographer that I work with so it’s still in the “family”, lol.

  4. Francis says:

    Beautiful work, look great.

  5. That’s interesting, John. I’ve been sort of second guessing whether or not a full frame is really that necessary nowadays. I would certainly save a lot of money by just sticking to what I’ve got. Time will tell. Spring’s a long way off.

  6. Wow, you captured a LOT of space, shapes and designs all in one shot!

Lazy Likes Replies

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s