That is problably because I would still use my manuall head for focal lenghs untill 24 mm and above that would not care about the nadir.
ThatÂ´s basically a good idea. But 1) it doesnÂ´t provide XMLs and 2) what about needing to lift the camera up to, letÂ´s say: 3m?
How would you move it from the ground?
I experienced situations where i definitely needed XML even when i used a fisheye - a room of 90% white, a very narrow space like a bathroom with white walls very close,
clear blues sky in the open when i stood on a tower and didnÂ´t have any item in the Zenith-shot what could be used for finding control-points (ok: if itÂ´s just the nadir shot you can move it manually).
I did a shoot in a galery - standing very close to a very long and rather high wall of only black and using a 20mm lens. Without XML it would have needed very much more time to stitch the 24 shots.
I very often lift the camera up to 2,50/3m - i can do it using my Gitzo alone - and it helps a lot in many situations. Definitely wouldnÂ´t be able to move the camera then without carrying a ladder around . . . .
i can control everything from the ground using a 3m cable on the controller while watching the cameraÂ´s live-view on a field-monitor attached to one tripod-leg)
So: IF you have a motorized head at all - you will prefer to use it all the time i bet.
But of coure there are other occasions where itÂ´s definitely cleverer to use a lightweight manual head with fisheye or 20mm (on FX).
Thank you Klaus for showing situations where an automatic panohead is helpfull.
The photographers I work with and I don't find ourself in these situations very often but that is problably just us and our approach of business.
When I do longer focal lengths I do find detection is hard but with the import wizards, without using XML, things go well first try mostly, else there is nothing some editing of x,y,z parameters can't solve, just as long as the shot was done totally level.