GoPro lens - could it have been rectilinear?

I don't have one myself, but every video I've seen from a GoPro has used a
wide-angle lens that is moderately fisheye - meaning that the horizon and
other straight lines bend unless they go through the center of the lens. I
guess it's really just plain old barrel distortion.

Would it have been possible for GoPro to use a lens with the same 127-
degree field of view, but rectilinear instead of fisheye? If it is possible,
would it have been prohibitively expensive for a camera of this price range?

Well, obviously I don't know anything about lens design, but to my eye the
fisheye effect, even though modest, is a "con" for this camera, and just
wondered if a different approach might have been possible, or might be
possible, without losing the wide angle field of view.

In article ,
Peabody wrote:

I don't have one myself, but every video I've seen from a GoPro has used a
wide-angle lens that is moderately fisheye - meaning that the horizon and
other straight lines bend unless they go through the center of the lens. I
guess it's really just plain old barrel distortion.

Would it have been possible for GoPro to use a lens with the same 127-
degree field of view, but rectilinear instead of fisheye? If it is possible,
would it have been prohibitively expensive for a camera of this price range?

Well, obviously I don't know anything about lens design, but to my eye the
fisheye effect, even though modest, is a "con" for this camera, and just
wondered if a different approach might have been possible, or might be
possible, without losing the wide angle field of view.

It could be done with fancy optics, but then you'd have extreme
rectilinear distortion. Fisheye probably looks better at 127 degrees.
Distortion is the nature of changing the viewing angle so much between
recording and playback.

In article , Peabody wrote:

I don't have one myself, but every video I've seen from a GoPro has
used a wide-angle lens that is moderately fisheye - meaning that the
horizon and other straight lines bend unless they go through the
center of the lens. I guess it's really just plain old barrel
distortion.

Would it have been possible for GoPro to use a lens with the same
127- degree field of view, but rectilinear instead of fisheye? If
it is possible, would it have been prohibitively expensive for a
camera of this price range?

Well, obviously I don't know anything about lens design, but to my
eye the fisheye effect, even though modest, is a "con" for this
camera, and just wondered if a different approach might have been
possible, or might be possible, without losing the wide angle field
of view.

Why? Just do it in post. Get a lens profile for Photoshop or Premier, one
second of googling gave me this:

http://www.htw-mechlab.de/index.php/undistortion-der-gopro-hd-hero2/


--
Sandman[.net]

On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:32:07 -0600, Peabody
wrote:
: I don't have one myself, but every video I've seen from a GoPro has used
: a wide-angle lens that is moderately fisheye - meaning that the horizon
: and other straight lines bend unless they go through the center of the
: lens. I guess it's really just plain old barrel distortion.
:
: Would it have been possible for GoPro to use a lens with the same 127-
: degree field of view, but rectilinear instead of fisheye? If it is
: possible, would it have been prohibitively expensive for a camera of
: this price range?
:
: Well, obviously I don't know anything about lens design, but to my eye
: the fisheye effect, even though modest, is a "con" for this camera,
: and just wondered if a different approach might have been possible,
: or might be possible, without losing the wide angle field of view.

Because of the way a GoPro is used, weight must be a major consideration. The
more correction elements you incorporate, the heavier the lens will be.

Bob