Mechanical XPAN, is it possible?

[OlivierAOP]

ok...
thinking of this: is there a way of altering a regular 120 bronica etrs back to advance only half the regular distance?
If so, by cutting a slot in a dark slide, there could be a way to get 30 panos from a 120 film.

I remembered this post after I read something about that today. Here's what can be done.

Modify the dark slide by removing almost half of it, offsetting the cut by 2-3 mm. Also remove the tab that locks the shutter when inserted.

Insert the slide, and you can expose the top half of the regular frame.

Reverse the slide, toggle the multi-exposure switch, cock the shutter and frame the bottom half.

You'd get 30 or 24 frames: ~19x56mm on 645, ~25x56mm on 6x6.

Edit. Here's another way. You mask the film back, leaving the central half (minus small offset for spacing) exposed. Toggle the multi-exposure switch and advance half a frame via the winding knob on the film back. Eyeball the half-way point between the marked frame numbers. This way you can mask the screen for framing. And you can maybe get 2-3 extra frames by offsetting the start arrow and by using a 220 back.

 

[OlivierAOP]

I gave the 2nd method a try. Works fine! With 220 insert, got 24 25x56mm frames with maybe room for one extra. Bronica SQ-A. Spacing is wacky but only one pair had minimal overlap.

20210327_142006(1) by Olivier, on Flickr

 

[OlivierAOP]

Replacement for the Zorki. Canon 7 with 50mm Bronica, RF coupled. Frame advance adjusted for 65mm frame (2 strokes) and custom pressure plate. Tried my best to adjust for lens/film parallelism with dial indicator but it's not quite there. I'd need a better lens mount.

DSCF7894 by Olivier, on Flickr


DSCF7895 by Olivier, on Flickr


SIM00691-1 by Olivier, on Flickr


SIM00689-1 by Olivier, on Flickr

 

[Phildjii]

Nice! Perfect aspect ratio 🙂

Frame advance adjusted for 65mm frame (2 strokes)

Could you explain how you adjust the frame advance?

I found another potential body for a Fauxpan: Minolta XE-1. It looks like it could go up to 24*70.
Also potentially Minolta XG-1, but probably a bit under 65 in width.

 

[OlivierAOP]

Could you explain how you adjust the frame advance?

I managed to "free" the mechanism, meaning it won't lock after advancing 8 sprockets. I then glued a stop to advance ~7.5 sprockets per stroke.

 

[shawn]

First test with 35mm in a Mamiya press back. The Mamiya advanced 35mm just fine without having to do any tricks with silicon tape as in the Fuji GSW690. So it could switch between MF and 35mm at will.

Used a 120mm takeup spool sized for 35mm.

With an 18" paper leader on the front of the film and a 6x7 back I had the full 20 exposures on the roll and could likely have 21 (shooting after the 20th on the Mamiya back). I rewound in a changing bag but of course could also just put a dark slide in and swap backs to keep shooting. Next roll I am going to try using another 35mm canister as the takeup spool. After the 20th shot there was about 2 winds of film left so it should be enough to get the 20th image in the canister to be able to open it up to cut the film without loosing an image.

Film is drying now but it looks good so far.

Shawn

 

[f.hayek]

Wouldn't it be simpler to pick up a GW690III and crop the negative?

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Wouldn't it be simpler to pick up a GW690III and crop the negative?

All these ingenious mods really underline what a cool camera the Xpan really is. Small, discreet, the ability to choose between panorama and 24x36. Too bad its price has risen sky high and there's no back-up service for the electronics. Wish i had bought one back in the day.

 

[shawn]

Wouldn't it be simpler to pick up a GW690III and crop the negative?

Then you are shooting with a telephoto, not a normal lens.

Shawn

 

[shawn]

Above are the Mamiya Sekor 50mm f6.3 on Fomapan 200
Below is Kraken 617 with 90mm Grandagon-N on Fomapan 100 (different day)

Shawn

 

[someonenameddavid]

Let's put this in perspective - your inevitable demise may occur before that of the electronics in any given item. So the entire thing may be off-base.

You will not be able to replace the guts of an Xpan with mechanical parts. There is simply no way to do it.

That said, you could get a 24x80 mask and 35 conversion kit for a Fuji 6x9 and go even wider in a far cheaper (though less light and compact) package. Similar kits exist for Pentax 6x7, which is also all mechanical.

Dante

I think the Pentax 6x7 is electronic

 

[dourbalistar]

Similar kits exist for Pentax 6x7, which is also all mechanical.

Dante

I think the Pentax 6x7 is electronic

I have the panoramic kit for the Pentax 6x7, but yes, the camera's shutter is electronically controlled and battery dependent. If the battery dies, your camera cannot fire. Ask me how I know... :bang:

 

[OlivierAOP]

All these ingenious mods really underline what a cool camera the Xpan really is. Small, discreet, the ability to choose between panorama and 24x36. Too bad its price has risen sky high and there's no back-up service for the electronics. Wish i had bought one back in the day.

I agree! The Xpan is a neat camera. Too bad I will likely never get to try one.



Regarding DIY mods, I'd like to get my hands on a broken Fuji GS645W. The 45mm non-retrofocus lens would be likely more discreet.

 

[filmtwit]

Came across a Freeman Lin Presspan which looks to a cross between a Nikon F and printed Xpan, here's teh basic info on it

https://www.35mmc.com/22/06/2020/fauxpan-just-another-diy-35mm-panorama-camera-by-freeman-lin/

ALso, there's one from sale on FB Marketplace (San Francisco) witha different lens right now and a whole lot cheaper than a Xpan would be.

 

[f.hayek]

In the end you only live once, if it's an Xpan you want, go for it!

Truth.

The XPan is a one-of-a-kind; how many things in this life can you say that about?
If after a try it's not your thing, there's someone out there who will eagerly take it off your hands for the same or more and you will lose nothing in the process. Just richer for the experience.

 

[sanmich]

Came across a Freeman Lin Presspan which looks to a cross between a Nikon F and printed Xpan, here's teh basic info on it

https://www.35mmc.com/22/06/2020/fauxpan-just-another-diy-35mm-panorama-camera-by-freeman-lin/

ALso, there's one from sale on FB Marketplace (San Francisco) witha different lens right now and a whole lot cheaper than a Xpan would be.

I wonder why not leave the prism/reflex system only as a focusing device...

 

[largedrink]

Reviving this thread. Has anyone been building panoramic cameras lately, or shooting with their modded cameras?

 

[boojum]

I have been following this thread for the mechanical re-creation of an XPan camera. It seems like the most often noted of Zeno's Paradoxes, the one about approaching the wall by halves. Each approach is half that of the one before it. In practical terms you will get awfully close to the wall but never there. And so it is with all the attempts to jury-rig an existing camera into an XPan. I applaud the inspiration that drives some of the folks working on this project and appreciate their frustration.

The problems I see is that the finished product is not too reliable and that the medium is film. Film is getting rarer and more expensive. Most of the shooters I know I buying a lot of expired stock when they can and new when they must. This does not seem like it will get better.

I have not used the XPan but if it is HB it is probably pretty good. The color is done by the chemists who make the film and who make the chemicals to process it. The image is the lens and HB is usually pretty good about this. So even while the film images are good or OK now they probably will not get any better. They will get worse. So other than the fun and therapy of making a mechanical jury-rigged XPan it looks to me a problem of diminishing returns.

I know some folks enjoy chemically based imagery, analog. There is a fellow here in town who explores the old palladium and platinum prints and some other 19th century techniques. But this is not practical for most of us. And film is getting less practical. So we are all left with digital except for a few. So the remaining digital solution, the other fork of this pursuit, is to have a camera with the software to do this. Digitally it is simple subtraction, chopping off the tops and bottoms of the sensor images. In-camera or in editor, easy-peasy.

Granted there is not the same satisfaction when doing the XPan with software but on the positive side you can be sure of getting that image every time you press the shutter. As my mechanical skills are minimal I will take the software route rather than the hardware one. But I will still follow this thread because I would iike to see what the board members are creating.

 

[shawn]

So we are all left with digital except for a few. So the remaining digital solution, the other fork of this pursuit, is to have a camera with the software to do this. Digitally it is simple subtraction, chopping off the tops and bottoms of the sensor images. In-camera or in editor, easy-peasy.

Granted there is not the same satisfaction when doing the XPan with software but on the positive side you can be sure of getting that image every time you press the shutter. As my mechanical skills are minimal I will take the software route rather than the hardware one. But I will still follow this thread because I would iike to see what the board members are creating.

xPan FOV
30mm = 94.6 x 43.6
45mm = 71.7 x 29.9
90mm = 39.7 x 15.2

S1R in 65:24 mode with
Sigma 17mm = 93.3 x 42.8
Sigma 24mm = 73.7 x 31
50mm = 39.6 x 15.2

Bonus use of the 17mm... the SWC is 72.8 x 72.8. S1R in 1x1 with the 17mm is 70.4 x 70.4.

EDIT: The Fuji GFX system has 65x24 as well but would need different focal lengths due to the larger sensor. The Sigma fp has a 21:9 mode.

 

[Godfrey]

With the 907x/CFVII 50c, you can set the in-camera crop to 65:24 for XPan format. This nets an ~18.3Mpixel, XPan format image with approximate format dimensions of 44x12.5 mm. Output files will be in this format for JPEG images and full-frame raw with cropping metadata for those applications that honor it.

The issue, for those who are trying to achieve the XPan's format and DoF, is that the smaller format will have a different DoF-to-lens opening relationships. I believe it is about 1-1.5 stops different ... that is, the 907x/CFVII 50c configured for XPan format will net the DoF characteristics at f/4 that the XPan would net at f/5.6-f/6.3. And of course a digital solution does produce film images, and film image qualities. 😀

With a Hasselblad 500CM and A16 back, you can crop the native 56x45mm format down to 56x16.6 mm to net closer to XPan format. A similar adjustment of the aperture by about 1-1.3 stops will give you the DoF equivalent. That's a fully mechanical, film camera...

G