YellowBaron
Newbie
Hi-
I bought a used XPan2. I was inspired by Gil Garcetti's Disney Concert Hall photos.
I've taken many pictures with my XPan2 using print film--Fuji superia 200 or Kodak 400UC. The pictures are horrible and so is the color. My HOLGA took better shots. It's gotta be me. This is the first time using a rangefinder. I'm so used to autofocus. The color is horrible. Should I be using the center filter (which I need to buy). Do I need to use a tripod? Do I need to use transperancy film? Can anyone help???? Am I helpless? Do I need an XPan tutor? I live in LA, CA. :bang:
HELP!
Over,
YellowBaron 19896
I bought a used XPan2. I was inspired by Gil Garcetti's Disney Concert Hall photos.
I've taken many pictures with my XPan2 using print film--Fuji superia 200 or Kodak 400UC. The pictures are horrible and so is the color. My HOLGA took better shots. It's gotta be me. This is the first time using a rangefinder. I'm so used to autofocus. The color is horrible. Should I be using the center filter (which I need to buy). Do I need to use a tripod? Do I need to use transperancy film? Can anyone help???? Am I helpless? Do I need an XPan tutor? I live in LA, CA. :bang:
HELP!
Over,
YellowBaron 19896
RdEoSg
Well-known
Ok lets start off with the film. Not horrible choices no, but I suppose you could try some 100 something if you wanted. I wouldn't worry about slide film until you are much more comfortable with the camera. Slide film is a bit unforgiving.
As for the camera. How are you focusing it? Are you making sure to use the little center square in the viewfinder? With a rangefinder, everything always looks in focus. You have to make sure you are making the overlapping images come together as one solid clear image in the center.
The center filter is necessary if you are shooting panoramics with the 45mm lens yes. However. The images won't look horrible if you don't use it. Sharpness isn't effected at all. The only thing you would notice would be the outer edges of the images being darker than the center. Some even like the effect and purposely shoot without the filter.
With the color, there isn't much you can screw up yourself. Make sure you have some good film. New, not some expired stuff a store was selling cheap or anything. Next make sure you take it to a good lab to be processed. I do NOT recommend Walmart or something of the effect.
Slide/transparency film will definately give you the best color and probably sharpest photo but you really need to be good at exposures. If you are comfortable with that then go ahead and try it. If you aren't sure yet then I would stick to regular color film for now until you start getting some consistently decent pictures.
How familiar are you with f-stops and shutter speeds? If you can scan some images and post them for us that would also help!
Good luck! Let us know if you have more questions!
As for the camera. How are you focusing it? Are you making sure to use the little center square in the viewfinder? With a rangefinder, everything always looks in focus. You have to make sure you are making the overlapping images come together as one solid clear image in the center.
The center filter is necessary if you are shooting panoramics with the 45mm lens yes. However. The images won't look horrible if you don't use it. Sharpness isn't effected at all. The only thing you would notice would be the outer edges of the images being darker than the center. Some even like the effect and purposely shoot without the filter.
With the color, there isn't much you can screw up yourself. Make sure you have some good film. New, not some expired stuff a store was selling cheap or anything. Next make sure you take it to a good lab to be processed. I do NOT recommend Walmart or something of the effect.
Slide/transparency film will definately give you the best color and probably sharpest photo but you really need to be good at exposures. If you are comfortable with that then go ahead and try it. If you aren't sure yet then I would stick to regular color film for now until you start getting some consistently decent pictures.
How familiar are you with f-stops and shutter speeds? If you can scan some images and post them for us that would also help!
Good luck! Let us know if you have more questions!
f8&go
Established
Hello & welcome YellowBaron.
Congratulations on your remarkably candid introduction!
I can't help you but good luck.
Congratulations on your remarkably candid introduction!
I can't help you but good luck.
post a sample so we can look.
wdenies
wdenies
Focussing: see excellent mail from RdEoSg.
The only problem I ever had was due to a non correct mounting of the lens: You have to turn it until you hear a rather loud click.
Colours:
Must be due to the film (not the make, but the processing:
- are they stored in tropical conditions?
- when stored in the frig you my use expired films (I do)
- negatives: too dense or too thin? One of the reasons for colour shift is a dramatic over- or underexposure
- are the results from another camera OK (same make, same lab)? It could be that for your lab the XPAN format is something special and that they have to do some tricks.
It must be possible to shoot at 1/15 sec without a tripod.
Filter: never used on the 45mm/90mm: corrections in the digital darkroom!
Recommendations:
- buy some films from another source
- try another lab and ask if they are used to the xpan format
- make shure the internal lightmeter is active (A on the speed dial)
- send us some samples (from negative and from print)
Visit our XPAN galery.
Wim
The only problem I ever had was due to a non correct mounting of the lens: You have to turn it until you hear a rather loud click.
Colours:
Must be due to the film (not the make, but the processing:
- are they stored in tropical conditions?
- when stored in the frig you my use expired films (I do)
- negatives: too dense or too thin? One of the reasons for colour shift is a dramatic over- or underexposure
- are the results from another camera OK (same make, same lab)? It could be that for your lab the XPAN format is something special and that they have to do some tricks.
It must be possible to shoot at 1/15 sec without a tripod.
Filter: never used on the 45mm/90mm: corrections in the digital darkroom!
Recommendations:
- buy some films from another source
- try another lab and ask if they are used to the xpan format
- make shure the internal lightmeter is active (A on the speed dial)
- send us some samples (from negative and from print)
Visit our XPAN galery.
Wim
YellowBaron
Newbie
Here are my sucky pictures
Here are my sucky pictures
I have been using f/16 f/22, without filter, without tripod. Since I am completely new to rangefinder cameras I'm a bit confused on what to focus on in landscape photos. That focusing rectangle isn't that big. I've seen other people's galleries and know this camera is capable to taking amazing photos. No doubt the problem is me.
I use the Darkroom in Reseda, CA. It's an excellent lab. Next time I'll try the recommended Hasselblad lab Image Experts in Hollywood.
Attached are some sucky photos.
Thanks,
YellowBaron 19896
Here are my sucky pictures
I have been using f/16 f/22, without filter, without tripod. Since I am completely new to rangefinder cameras I'm a bit confused on what to focus on in landscape photos. That focusing rectangle isn't that big. I've seen other people's galleries and know this camera is capable to taking amazing photos. No doubt the problem is me.
I use the Darkroom in Reseda, CA. It's an excellent lab. Next time I'll try the recommended Hasselblad lab Image Experts in Hollywood.
Attached are some sucky photos.
Thanks,
YellowBaron 19896
Attachments
Graham Line
Well-known
My guess is the tufas are worn out from being overphotographed. 
Did you say you were using a tripod? For these broad scenics, find a point one third of the distance into the picture, align the split image on that, focus carefully with the overlapping images, and recompose. With an RF, unlike an SLR, the rangefinder patch is the only part of the viewfinder that actually focuses.
Did you say you were using a tripod? For these broad scenics, find a point one third of the distance into the picture, align the split image on that, focus carefully with the overlapping images, and recompose. With an RF, unlike an SLR, the rangefinder patch is the only part of the viewfinder that actually focuses.
jano
Evil Bokeh
I cannot help here.. but just wanted to chime in with something. You know, it's funny. I took some tufa shots in September (different camera) there at mono lake, and nearly every one of them came out as bad or worse than yours. Both digital and film. Don't feel so bad
This looks very much like a focus, and scan issue. Like Joe sai, make sure your two images overlap on the area you are focusing on. I woulduse a tripod and shoot maybe at f8. My guess is you are shooting with the 45mm. A center filter would definetly help but you would need a tripod. Also, try some test shots with some a billboard that you can definetkly focus on.
RdEoSg
Well-known
Ok lets take a look. Your exposures aren't too bad. They are a bit over exposed though I would say. The rangefinders meter isn't as accurate as the multi zone SLR meters so sometimes it is useful to bracket your shots and take a few over and under exposed as well. In this case the sky looks pretty good but the foreground is over a bit. Still not horrible though!
The focus seems a bit off on some of them. Do you remember what your shutter speeds were? Make sure they were fast enough. Starting out I would say try to get at least 60th of a second until you get the hang of a rangefinder. When focusing on distant subjects the general rule is to focus about 1/3 the distance into the photo and let the depth of field handle the rest.
EDIT: and what Jorge said!
The focus seems a bit off on some of them. Do you remember what your shutter speeds were? Make sure they were fast enough. Starting out I would say try to get at least 60th of a second until you get the hang of a rangefinder. When focusing on distant subjects the general rule is to focus about 1/3 the distance into the photo and let the depth of field handle the rest.
EDIT: and what Jorge said!
YellowBaron
Newbie
more pictures
more pictures
Here are some more pics. I thought they were so-so. They seem overexposed.
Thanks everyone for your advice. I'll keep you updated on my progress.
Who's got some great XPan galleries I can look at?
Over,
YellowBaron 19896
more pictures
Here are some more pics. I thought they were so-so. They seem overexposed.
Thanks everyone for your advice. I'll keep you updated on my progress.
Who's got some great XPan galleries I can look at?
Over,
YellowBaron 19896
Attachments
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
Here are some samples:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=xpan&z=t
If you are not satisifed with color negative film, try some Velvia or Provia slide film, it will make a big difference.
On focusing on landscapes, you can usually get away with optimizing your f/stop to the smallest you can and then using hyper-focusing markings on your lens barrel to achieve the highest level of sharp in-focus areas and depth of field. If you have a specific subject in your landscape, then obviously focus on that.
Finally, if handheld, always shoot no slower than the reciprocal of your lens focal length. So if you are using the 45mm lens, shoot no slower than 1/45 of a second handheld.
With a tripod, just use the smallest aperture you can and a shutter release. My guess is Gil used a tripod.
good luck
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=xpan&z=t
If you are not satisifed with color negative film, try some Velvia or Provia slide film, it will make a big difference.
On focusing on landscapes, you can usually get away with optimizing your f/stop to the smallest you can and then using hyper-focusing markings on your lens barrel to achieve the highest level of sharp in-focus areas and depth of field. If you have a specific subject in your landscape, then obviously focus on that.
Finally, if handheld, always shoot no slower than the reciprocal of your lens focal length. So if you are using the 45mm lens, shoot no slower than 1/45 of a second handheld.
With a tripod, just use the smallest aperture you can and a shutter release. My guess is Gil used a tripod.
good luck
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
For a quick primer on hyperfocus, depth of field etc ... try John Shaw's Field Techniques book (I can't remember the exact name). It is a good source.
Ronald M
Veteran
My usual trick is to focus on the far point, set the focus patch on the near point and focus closer so the close image merges 1/2 way. Then stop down as much as I can.
The 1/3 in also works as do debth of fields scale or tables.
The 1/3 in also works as do debth of fields scale or tables.
aad
Not so new now.
I think it has a lot to do with the scanner-you might want to try some PS work.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
YellowBaron said:
Hasselblad's site has some good Xpan photos.
PHOTOEIL
Established
According to the time of the day , I would like to advise you to use a KR1,5 or a KR3 filter (= B+W coding), I do not recall the Wratten numbers. This, of course, is based on my proper experience whit colour reversal film.
PlantedTao
Well-known
Most of your shots were taken in the middle of the day or so, not the so called golden hour...so I would say that bright sunlight has washed out most of the color. I think if you depress the shutter release half-way while just looking at the ground you could get a better exposure...if your doing all auto that could be the problem. I would pick the exposure not the camera.
I think the best advice so far is to bracket (and takes notes on which are under and over shots) and practice focusing on billboards and signs...an easy way to see if your focusing correctly. Take a practice roll like this with no pano format and then you can get actual prints done for cheep(typical 35mm)...if they look good, then the problem is the scanner.
I think the best advice so far is to bracket (and takes notes on which are under and over shots) and practice focusing on billboards and signs...an easy way to see if your focusing correctly. Take a practice roll like this with no pano format and then you can get actual prints done for cheep(typical 35mm)...if they look good, then the problem is the scanner.
sf
Veteran
YellowBaron said:
looks like OLD film, scanned on a flatbed. IMO. Buy some new C41 and try again. Flatbeds, especially hte old ones, don't handle some films gracefully. The color looks like something out of very expired film. Some people have suggested that it may be your processing as well. Try "The Icon" on Wilshire and Cochran. They are fantastic - and really low-priced.
Last edited:
PHOTOEIL
Established
If you want to see what a good filter can do, even in high noon light, have a look at this link : http://www.photoeil.be/com/corporate/harbour/harbour04.html