@MiguelATF Well you guessed the basics of it already
Yes, I always shoot first the focal point of the image, the part of subject or composition I want to be in focus, to get it sharp and to determine my (manual) focus setting for all the frames. The exposure and WB are set in advance, as they, as well as focus, cannot be changed throughout the process. Once I snapped the first (and the sharpest) frame, I usually go down, overlapping between a third or a half of the frame, until the edge of the desired frame. This also have to be at least approximately determined in advance, otherwise you wouldn't know how many frames to get in each row.
It is somewhat tricky, as while you shoot the sequence, you see only a tiny bit of composition, like peeping on your world through the keyhole, so you have to previsualize a bit in advance and tell yourself something like "I'll stop at that pole on the left and that fence on the right", for example. That way, once you reach the set "mark" you stop, in order not to make too many frames.
I'm used to shooting vertical rows; I start from the focal point of the image, swoop down several frames, depending on that preset "boundary", than swoop up until vertical border. Then I shoot the vertical row to the right, overlapping a half, from top to bottom, then continue the next from bottom to top, zig-zaging to the right edge. Then I return to the focal point and move to the left, and zig-zag to the other side.
Depending on subject, the lens I'm using, the time and my patience, it can range from 20something to 100something frames per composition. And the effect can vary a lot, depending again on subject and distance ratios, so you never really know what you will get until the final image is stitched. It is a lot of work, and sometimes I curse myself, but when everything falls in place, I quite like the result, and the cycle begins anew
I'll put here an example of sorted (but never stitched) frames for one image - here I missed one frame at the bottom while shooting so I never actually finished it
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
And here is one comparison, back from 2019 when all this was new to me and I was doing some research on my own beside just reading about it. The white rectangle in the image is the size of the single frame. With Minolta 45mm the FOV is wider, but the DOF not as shallow. With Minolta 100mm the FOV is much tighter (so you have to shoot much more frames for the same composition), but the DOF is notably shallower. The last superimposed image shows the difference in DOF in final composition; the basic composition is the same wide-angle image, but the one shot with longer lens and more frames have that shallower DOF look.
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Regarding tripod, I don't use it, and in fact I do all this in a casual way. In the Facebook "Bokeh Pano" group that I am a part of, there are guys shooting from tripods with full-frame cameras and expensive long and bright lenses so - you can guess it and it's hardly a surprise - their results look more professional than mine
All this would be better discussed in the dedicated BOKEH PANORAMA thread, but I don't think we have one. My apologies to participants and admins for this intrusion; feel free to move or delete this if it pollutes this otherwise lovely thread.