How come no 24x60 panorama camera using 120 film vertically?

S

Spicy

Well-known
Local time
5:26 AM
Joined
Aug 31, 2011
Messages
671
Like a tiny version of 645, but rather 624, similar to how motion picture cameras shot 35mm running vertically.

Seems like a better way to get more shots per roll, since an X-Pan only gets ~20, and this would give 24exp with very generous 30mm for a frame plus spacing. Could probably make the camera a bit smaller too if you went with a 500c/m-style arrangement, or a hilariously squat TLR. The X-Pan/Fuji are super wide.

Just curious. I'm sure if I pondered for a while, I could probably come up with an interesting imaginary camera...



edit: I meant how come there never was one -- not why isn't Nikon churning out 2M of them a year for $200. If Hasselblad could find it profitable to do as their sole foray into 35mm, I'm sure some manufacturer at some point in time could have developed and marketed one.
 
That's a great idea, there is a camera called the ISO duplex which takes stereo images in the format you describe. Would be interesting if one could be modified with a lens that would work well for panoramic.
 
What panoramic cameras are currently in production, apart from the Russian Horizon ones?
I think perhaps the market isn't there, but I like the thinking!
 
Because you would then have a camera that took all the disadvantages of 120 film like no hard light right cassette, backing paper, less film choice, less convenient processing etc but have none of the benefits like large negs compared to the same camera using 135 film. It just makes no sense.
 
michaelwj said:
....It just makes no sense.
Click to expand...

It does to me.

I'm not sure there is a big market for a dedicated camera, but perhaps for a revolving back on something like an old RB67.

Would have been a very interesting alternative especially you could use a 6x7 enlarger to print negatives with a tweaked negative carrier.

Might be fun as a Baby Crown/Speed Graphic back too.

B2 (;->
 
Spicy said:
Like a tiny version of 645, but rather 624, similar to how motion picture cameras shot 35mm running vertically.

Seems like a better way to get more shots per roll, since an X-Pan only gets ~20, and this would give 24exp with very generous 30mm for a frame plus spacing. Could probably make the camera a bit smaller too if you went with a 500c/m-style arrangement, or a hilariously squat TLR. The X-Pan/Fuji are super wide.

Just curious. I'm sure if I pondered for a while, I could probably come up with an interesting imaginary camera...
Click to expand...

Use 35mm to 120 adapters in a MF camera that has automatic film advance and you can do this already.

Use a second set of adapters on the take up side and advance the film into an empty film reel to get around the rewind problem. Or just use something with interchangeable backs and switch them out. I have a Koni Rapid M I am going to setup this way. Just want to 3d print a negative carrier (or film gate) to help keep the film very flat.

Shawn
 
It makes sense to me, too. As a matter of fact, I got rid of my XPAN because I like much better to shoot wide aspect ratio shots with my Hasselblad 500C/M. The 40mm Distagon is reasonably wide. I have my safe shooting area for a 2:1 aspect ratio marked on the ground glass, and the A16 back allows a little but of cropping freedom. And using an A12 back allows me to keep the camera level for perspective control on architectural shots.

My 38mm Biogon is a little hard to use in this way because I don't have a way to crop the finder for my preferred 2:1 ratio. There must be a way.

I don't know about Hasselblad making a vertical 120; but maybe we could persuade them to make two new items for the 500C/M. A back with a 2:1 frame might be nice. It would probably get 20 shots per roll, maybe more.

The main thing I'd like from Hasselblad (well, Zeiss, really) is a 30mm rectilinear Distagon. I can't imagine myself wasting money on the fisheye; that look gets old fast. But a 30mm rectilinear would be very welcome. Even if they couldn't do 30mm, I'd settle for 33mm and if it has to be a little slow, then so be it.

Spicy, you are on the right track with your idea. But I think it can be achieved with existing Hassie gear; if they could make that wide lens, that would be just great! :)
 
Might be not that hard to do if you use a camera with a separate back. Change the gearing so it advances the right amount. Tell it there is 220 film in it so the counter goes further than 15/16. And change the film gate. A transparent overlay on the viewfinder should be enough.
 
How about an old Kodak panoramic? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Kod...914501?hash=item33d6ca4dc5:g:-Q0AAOSwBgtZvTwg

I have like the first one of these below, but without flash or mounts for a flash on the camera. I say like the first, since mine is also the 616. I keep meaning to give it to a friend of mine so he can make a really thin mask to use 120 film. The second on listed does seem to use 120. I have no idea what kind of panoramic these produce, nor if two could be successfully stitched together.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Kod...061440?hash=item58fe915d00:g:s40AAOSwy69ZqWGK

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-Kod...821979?hash=item25e069d45b:g:KW4AAOSwkzhZwFpA
 
Spanik said:
Might be not that hard to do if you use a camera with a separate back. Change the gearing so it advances the right amount. Tell it there is 220 film in it so the counter goes further than 15/16. And change the film gate. A transparent overlay on the viewfinder should be enough.
Click to expand...

Yes it could be done with the Hasselblad back. It would call for a skilled machinist. The film rollers would have to be transferred to the new aperture plate as well. Delicate!

I do like the vertical cropping room left by the A16 back's format.

I think a wider lens is the first thing I want. I wonder if there's a Russian one for the Hasselblad?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom