sooner
Well-known
Let me begin by saying my intention is not to offend or pick a fight here, but rather to provoke an enlightening discourse. No, seriously. I only recently learned about the Xpan, and at first found myself sucked in. The photos on Photosig from this camera are phenomenal. But then I started thinking...
Basically this camera just tacks two 35mm frames together in one shot to create the panorama. I don't see how this is any different from taking two shots with a regular 35mm camera and stitching them together with software, or heck even doing it two overlapping prints.
But the real problem for me is the price. For the same price as a used Xpan, you could buy into medium format and get much better resolution from the larger negative. I just bought a Fuji GA645 for $360, or easily a third the cost of the Xpan.
Finally, is there any trouble processing and printing film from this camera? Can you take a roll of 35mm film shot with this camera to Walgreens and get panoramic prints?
Okay, all you devoted Xpan users, show me the folly of my initial analysis--and don't take it personally, please. I must be missing something......John.
Basically this camera just tacks two 35mm frames together in one shot to create the panorama. I don't see how this is any different from taking two shots with a regular 35mm camera and stitching them together with software, or heck even doing it two overlapping prints.
But the real problem for me is the price. For the same price as a used Xpan, you could buy into medium format and get much better resolution from the larger negative. I just bought a Fuji GA645 for $360, or easily a third the cost of the Xpan.
Finally, is there any trouble processing and printing film from this camera? Can you take a roll of 35mm film shot with this camera to Walgreens and get panoramic prints?
Okay, all you devoted Xpan users, show me the folly of my initial analysis--and don't take it personally, please. I must be missing something......John.
CJP6008
Established
It is a good peice of kit - lenses are very sharp. It is not as huge as a medium format camera. I like it. You can easily carry it about, switch from 35mm to panoramic at the flick of a switch. Only draw back is that the lenses are not too fast (although at f4 they would not be unfamiliar to your average SLR with superzoom user.
yes your local minilab will struggle with the negs but it was never aimed at the sort who get their film processed at such places. it was squarely aimed at the pro and v serious amateur market. Rent one and try for yourself. there are places in London that rent them. I would guess that any major city with a large number of pro photographers in (like London) would have places that might rent you one.
yes your local minilab will struggle with the negs but it was never aimed at the sort who get their film processed at such places. it was squarely aimed at the pro and v serious amateur market. Rent one and try for yourself. there are places in London that rent them. I would guess that any major city with a large number of pro photographers in (like London) would have places that might rent you one.
eric
[was]: emaquiling
sooner said:
You should check out 6x12 or 6x17 images from 120 film! Shazam.
szekiat
Well-known
just a few nits with your logic here. Firstly, the way the xpan does it is to use something akin to a medium format lens on a 35mm camera. It allows a 28mm field of view to be obtained using a 45mm lens hence lowering the distortion. While it is possible to obtain a panoramic photo using stitching, edge distortion is often an issue and the only other way to overcome it is to use a minimal distortion lens (T/S or 50mm) and take more than just 2 shots to stitch together. This will also require you to use a tripod and a proper panoramic head, all of which the xpan does not require. So in that sense, u're paying for the convenience and when u add up the cost of a proper stitching setup, its not that much less.
2nd, its not fair to compare a GA645 against an xpan. A In fact, at 6.7cm per frame, it takes a 6x7 camera to obtain the same wideness as the xpan. This still doesn't offer more resolution than the xpan if u then have to crop of the top and bottom to make it panoramic. As for price, a Mamiya7 RF is nearly the same price if not more than an xpan. The only medium format i know that can out perform the xpan would be the 6x12 and 6x17 which cost a lot more!
No offense meant dude. Its different.......
2nd, its not fair to compare a GA645 against an xpan. A In fact, at 6.7cm per frame, it takes a 6x7 camera to obtain the same wideness as the xpan. This still doesn't offer more resolution than the xpan if u then have to crop of the top and bottom to make it panoramic. As for price, a Mamiya7 RF is nearly the same price if not more than an xpan. The only medium format i know that can out perform the xpan would be the 6x12 and 6x17 which cost a lot more!
No offense meant dude. Its different.......
PlantedTao
Well-known
Round 1...Fight!
Yeah, it was the pictures on the web that made me really want it. But it was also the build quality...it feels just a good as a leica with optics that are top notch. The resolution is incredible...you have to look at it as a MF camera and 35mm. The pano negs are MF and can go as large as your Fuji. I haven't even tested the limits of how big I can go. I do tradition wet darkroom work so stitching a neg together doesn't seem that easy to me...computer or darkroom.
I have no problem processing the film, I just get the negs uncut and do all the prints myself...I believe getting prints from a 'store' is the biggest problem and why people end up selling.
It is a nice pano AND 35mm camera...small, built like a tank, versatile, and 35mm film is everywhere.
It is expensive, but once you hold it and use it you can feel where the money went besides R&D.
The other 'thing' I like about this camera is the format is very similiar to the widescreen movie format...it makes for very interesting compositions that I have not seen with any other camera because of the speed and ease of use taking a pano.
It IS a cult camera in my opinion...so may not be for everyone.
Cheers.
Jason
Yeah, it was the pictures on the web that made me really want it. But it was also the build quality...it feels just a good as a leica with optics that are top notch. The resolution is incredible...you have to look at it as a MF camera and 35mm. The pano negs are MF and can go as large as your Fuji. I haven't even tested the limits of how big I can go. I do tradition wet darkroom work so stitching a neg together doesn't seem that easy to me...computer or darkroom.
I have no problem processing the film, I just get the negs uncut and do all the prints myself...I believe getting prints from a 'store' is the biggest problem and why people end up selling.
It is a nice pano AND 35mm camera...small, built like a tank, versatile, and 35mm film is everywhere.
It is expensive, but once you hold it and use it you can feel where the money went besides R&D.
The other 'thing' I like about this camera is the format is very similiar to the widescreen movie format...it makes for very interesting compositions that I have not seen with any other camera because of the speed and ease of use taking a pano.
It IS a cult camera in my opinion...so may not be for everyone.
Cheers.
Jason
eric
[was]: emaquiling
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
It is a great system. The lenses are excellent, ergonomics great, pictures breathtaking in panoramic.
Only two minor complaints:
1) lenses were slow compared to Leica m-mount
2) motor drive is unnecessary, would have preferred a hand advance to conserve battery and keep noise level down
Had someone made an adapter to mount M lenses on the xpan, or the camera been made in M mount, it would have been perfect.
Only two minor complaints:
1) lenses were slow compared to Leica m-mount
2) motor drive is unnecessary, would have preferred a hand advance to conserve battery and keep noise level down
Had someone made an adapter to mount M lenses on the xpan, or the camera been made in M mount, it would have been perfect.
sooner
Well-known
Thanks for the comments, and no offense taken here! You all raise some good points, but for me it would still come down to price; for that price, I could just about get a Mamiya 6 system. But they have different purposes, and the size and availability of 35mm are handy. Then again, for the price of a Leica I could buy the Xpan AND the Mamiya.....It always comes back to money.
Ben1
X-pan #1 Fan
I dont really think the xpans price tag is solely due to the fact its a panoramic camera. The price also comes with the name, ie hasselblad...
I must admit, it scared me to fork out $5k (aus) for the xpan w/45mm, but ive never once regretted it. Its true what they say, you only get what you pay for. These cameras are built like bricks, and the advantage they have over true MF/LF gear is they are alot more portable. Ill get my xpan to places you wouldnt even consider taking a 617.
I must admit, it scared me to fork out $5k (aus) for the xpan w/45mm, but ive never once regretted it. Its true what they say, you only get what you pay for. These cameras are built like bricks, and the advantage they have over true MF/LF gear is they are alot more portable. Ill get my xpan to places you wouldnt even consider taking a 617.
sleepyhead
Well-known
When talking about price, don't forget the price of film and processing - the Xpan takes about 20 pictures on a 35mm 36-exposure roll, while the Mamiya 6 only takes 12 shots on 120 film. So if you want to do a lot of 3:1 panorama work, the Xpan will save you money.
The 45mm Xpan lens is just about the best lens I've ever used in terms of sharpness, and it has lovely bokeh.
Still, I sold my Xpan because I just didn't fall in love with the 3:1 format. I prefer to shoot 6x6 or 6x9 and crop if that's the look I'm after.
The 45mm Xpan lens is just about the best lens I've ever used in terms of sharpness, and it has lovely bokeh.
Still, I sold my Xpan because I just didn't fall in love with the 3:1 format. I prefer to shoot 6x6 or 6x9 and crop if that's the look I'm after.
Ben1
X-pan #1 Fan
Technically the xpan pano's arent 3:1 though..
more like 2.6:1 or there abouts, but yeah, after scanning i always resize to 3:1 for the "true" panoramic look.
Your right about the 120 film as well... it IS pretty expensive for both the film and processing costs.
A definite advantage there for the xpan!!
more like 2.6:1 or there abouts, but yeah, after scanning i always resize to 3:1 for the "true" panoramic look.
Your right about the 120 film as well... it IS pretty expensive for both the film and processing costs.
A definite advantage there for the xpan!!
tron
Established
You said you own an XPAN yourself which means you have first hand experience as a user. I am surprised you cannot see how handy this camera is.
I have used the Contax G and the Leica M together with the XPAN. At the end, I threw the Gs away. The only reason I am still keeping my Ms is because of the large aperture which I need every now and then, and of course the variety of lenses available that I like trying out.
If we're talking about shooting pictures and nothing else, it's the XPAN that I use most frequently.
I have used the Contax G and the Leica M together with the XPAN. At the end, I threw the Gs away. The only reason I am still keeping my Ms is because of the large aperture which I need every now and then, and of course the variety of lenses available that I like trying out.
If we're talking about shooting pictures and nothing else, it's the XPAN that I use most frequently.
stephanj
Member
Flyfisher Tom said:
I expect the motor drive is necessary if you want the facility for changing formats since the film needs repositioning. A panoramic only with a manual advance would have been interesting though.
Stephan
kbg32
neo-romanticist
There is something about using a true panoramic camera as opposed to stitching together frames to achieve a desired effect/result. Both are valid. It depends on how you see. They are both different means to an end, with entirely different conceptual results. In using a true panoramic camera, you begin to see in that format.
Last edited:
kbg32
neo-romanticist
BTW, panoramic cameras have been around since the beginning of photography. There has always seemed a need for some to record the world as close to what human vision is with both eyes, approximately around 120 degrees with peripheral vision included. Humans tend to see the world wider horizontally then vertically. There was a photographic show some years ago, at the Met, that had a panorama, a daugerotype, from the 1850's. The photographer had used a water filled lens to achieve a 120-130 degree angle of view.
Last edited:
Film dino
David Chong
[Firstly, the way the xpan does it is to use something akin to a medium format lens on a 35mm camera. It allows a 28mm field of view to be obtained using a 45mm lens hence lowering the distortion. While it is possible to obtain a panoramic photo using stitching, edge distortion is often an issue and the only other way to overcome it is to use a minimal distortion lens (T/S or 50mm) and take more than just 2 shots to stitch together.] Szekiat
I think one inherent issue with stitching is that the parts of the image that appear at the edge of the first stitched frame become the centre of the cobined/ stitched image, & since lenses generally dont perform as well at the edges than the centre..
Szekiat is also right in pointing out that the XPan lenses have a wider image circle than needed for 35mm
As for the motorised film "advance", it's actually rewinding each exposed frame back into the cassette- when a fresh film is loaded the entire roll is pulled out & wound into the receiving chamber at the other end of the camera, & as you expose each frame- normal or panoramic- it's pulled back into the cassette. Meaning that each exposed frame is automatically saved from accidental exposure (not that this happens too often) should the camera back be opened.
I think one inherent issue with stitching is that the parts of the image that appear at the edge of the first stitched frame become the centre of the cobined/ stitched image, & since lenses generally dont perform as well at the edges than the centre..
Szekiat is also right in pointing out that the XPan lenses have a wider image circle than needed for 35mm
As for the motorised film "advance", it's actually rewinding each exposed frame back into the cassette- when a fresh film is loaded the entire roll is pulled out & wound into the receiving chamber at the other end of the camera, & as you expose each frame- normal or panoramic- it's pulled back into the cassette. Meaning that each exposed frame is automatically saved from accidental exposure (not that this happens too often) should the camera back be opened.
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
>These cameras are built like bricks
Unless you drop it on a concrete floor... Like I did. And at least Hasselblad USA is parts starved and it's approaching three months and I still don't know when I will get it back repaired.
Unless you drop it on a concrete floor... Like I did. And at least Hasselblad USA is parts starved and it's approaching three months and I still don't know when I will get it back repaired.
MP/CLE
Established
I have yet to regret my purchase of the xpan II system... the 30 is absolutely incredible. I was always really impressed with my Leica production/quality but the Hasselblad prints have been their equal with an easier wide angle plus pano capability. Now my photofinisher finds it easier to print my initial rolls in 6 by 14 (maybe 5 by 13) inch prints for my review! This just keeps getting better! I cannot consider this system to be a gimmick... just a wonderful alternative to the normal Leica and scads of lenses.
Catto
Photographer
Xpan Xcellence
Xpan Xcellence
Yeah, I'm with Jason on this one, really love viewing the world in CinemaScope for a change. I had an Xpan on loan from a friend for a few weeks and enjoyed finding panoramas everywhere - although it's my first experiment in non-35mm formats so perhaps that'll wear off eventually. I liked the 90mm lens, too - the ability to be both zoomed (so to speak) and wide is nice - simultaneous compression and expansion of the image & frame.
I spend most of my time with a Canon 1DMkII and a Ricoh GRD, and have done some stitches from that, but it's a lot simpler not to have to - even if getting the film scanned is a little tricky for some labs. I think Fuji Frontier machines are set up to handle it, at least the one at my lab is.
The other problem I have with stitching is when the scene isn't static - people, moving vehicles, or (especially) waves in the image can create difficulty for smooth stitching of frames, where the Xpan will sort it all out in one. Or three, if you're bracketing - which is where I found the motor drive handy, personally.
Long story short - I'm hooked, sold my Bessa R and my Ricoh GR1, now I'm looking for an Xpan with the 45 & 90...
R!
Xpan Xcellence
PlantedTao said:
Yeah, I'm with Jason on this one, really love viewing the world in CinemaScope for a change. I had an Xpan on loan from a friend for a few weeks and enjoyed finding panoramas everywhere - although it's my first experiment in non-35mm formats so perhaps that'll wear off eventually. I liked the 90mm lens, too - the ability to be both zoomed (so to speak) and wide is nice - simultaneous compression and expansion of the image & frame.
I spend most of my time with a Canon 1DMkII and a Ricoh GRD, and have done some stitches from that, but it's a lot simpler not to have to - even if getting the film scanned is a little tricky for some labs. I think Fuji Frontier machines are set up to handle it, at least the one at my lab is.
The other problem I have with stitching is when the scene isn't static - people, moving vehicles, or (especially) waves in the image can create difficulty for smooth stitching of frames, where the Xpan will sort it all out in one. Or three, if you're bracketing - which is where I found the motor drive handy, personally.
Long story short - I'm hooked, sold my Bessa R and my Ricoh GR1, now I'm looking for an Xpan with the 45 & 90...
R!
Last edited:
wdenies
wdenies
Difficult?
Difficult?
Xpan or Mamiya6?
Instead of being involved in the Leica cult, I purchased both camera's on the second hand market.
- XPANI with 45 &90mm
- Mamiya with 50/75/150mm
At several occasions I tried to use the Mamiya as a panoramic by cropping, with little success. This has nothing to do with the camera quality but with my brain. Having the Mamiya on the eye I automatically compose for square.
Concusion : always carry both.
When will the never ending discussion about slow XPAN lenses stop? (when do you do the most shooting? : at night time during new moon or at daytime)
- is f4 not the "normal" speed for modern zoomers?
- modern high speed films offer good quality : Neopan 1600 or Ilford 3200 (see the XPAN gallery)
- both camera's are that quiet and vibration free that one can use low shutter speeds handheld.
- invest in a pocket tripod and/or a clamp
ENJOY PANORAMIC SHOOTING
Wim
Difficult?
Xpan or Mamiya6?
Instead of being involved in the Leica cult, I purchased both camera's on the second hand market.
- XPANI with 45 &90mm
- Mamiya with 50/75/150mm
At several occasions I tried to use the Mamiya as a panoramic by cropping, with little success. This has nothing to do with the camera quality but with my brain. Having the Mamiya on the eye I automatically compose for square.
Concusion : always carry both.
When will the never ending discussion about slow XPAN lenses stop? (when do you do the most shooting? : at night time during new moon or at daytime)
- is f4 not the "normal" speed for modern zoomers?
- modern high speed films offer good quality : Neopan 1600 or Ilford 3200 (see the XPAN gallery)
- both camera's are that quiet and vibration free that one can use low shutter speeds handheld.
- invest in a pocket tripod and/or a clamp
ENJOY PANORAMIC SHOOTING
Wim