So, if you can't float an Xpan,....

[Vickko]

Would a cropped image from an SWC Hasselblad, or Hasselblad 501CM with 40mm lens, be roughly the same as what the Xpan produces? I'm thinking yes - same horizontal FOV, crop to get the vertical FOV, and 60mm wide negative with the A12 back, vs the 67mm with the Xpan.

Close enough?

Or does the 45mm on the Xpan produce a different perspective than the 38mm or 40mm on the MF camera?

Vick

 

[Jubb Jubb]

Sure.. you can do all these things... but it's still not shooting with an xpan!

 

[Tim Gray]

Depends on your definition of 'roughly' 🙂 I'd say yes, but I'm flexible. If you shot from the same location, perspective would be the same. As far as framing, the SWC/501+40mm lens would be slightly wider, but the negative wouldn't be as wide (55mm vs 65mm). Probably pretty similar in the end.

What you really want to do is look up the horizontal field of view for the lenses on their specified output format. The SWC has a horizontal field of view of 72 degrees (according to the Zeiss spec sheet). Which is the same as a 25mm on regular 35mm film. And I think the Xpan 45mm gives about the same field of view in panoramic mode...

 

[Rob-F]

Would a cropped image from an SWC Hasselblad, or Hasselblad 501CM with 40mm lens, be roughly the same as what the Xpan produces? I'm thinking yes - same horizontal FOV, crop to get the vertical FOV, and 60mm wide negative with the A12 back, vs the 67mm with the Xpan.

Close enough?

Or does the 45mm on the Xpan produce a different perspective than the 38mm or 40mm on the MF camera?

Vick

This is indeed a valid alternative to the XPan. The 38mm Biogon or 40mm Distagon will of course give a wider field of view than the 45mm Xpan lens; though not as wide as the 30mm, which can often be too wide. It is not always easy to find a subject that makes good use of the 30mm field of view. An advantage of the 38 or 40mm lens on rollfilm is that the aspect ratio does not have to be so extreme. A 27mm x 54mm image with 2:1 aspect ratio can at times be more pleasing or appropriate to the scene than a 24 x 65mm image that works out to about 2.75:1 or so. So I use both the Xpan and the Hasselblad 500CM for my "Wide-Screen" pictures.

 

[Vickko]

Thanks guys.

The thing is I have an SWC and the 40mm. No Xpan though, and not really the $3K to buy in.

 

[Jubb Jubb]

3K is a very expensive buy in and a rip off.. my xpan was just over 1K.

 

[ljsegil]

Xpan with the 30mm lens. Wider than any rectilinear medium format lens available, cropped film or otherwise, but I think not too wide to shoot with comfortably on the Xpan (I find it truly pleasurable to use in the right settings, I don't think framing a composition is really much more challenging than using a 21mm lens on 35mm full frame (which might be a reflection on my own poor ability to compose a decent picture)). All that said, I just recently purchased a Mamiya 7 with the 43mm lens and have ordered the 35mm panoramic film adapter for it, so we'll see how that goes. It should produce a negative of the same dimensions as the Xpan, but will have the FOV of the Xpan's 45mm lens, I should think. Of course the Mamiya will never approach the small size and convenience of switching formats that the Xpan offers, but the quality possibilities and convenience which might be possible with one camera to shoot both panoramics and medium format seem worth investigating to me. Not quite sure what my aversion is to just cropping medium format to get a panormaic aspect ratio, but I think perhaps being forced to frame to the limits of the film may just work better for my loosely disciplined mind and eye, maybe I just visualize more carefully knowing that I cannot sneak in a little bit more to the image, yet not enough to pleasingly fill the full medium format frame.
Larry

 

[BSchall]

I've always been intriqued by the pano aspect so finally bought a Horizon 202 swing lens camera. For $200, a cheap way to get into panoramic photos. Much cheaper than a Widelux. The swing lens design takes some getting use to but a lot of fantastic photos have been taken with them (see Jeff Bridges' Widelux photos).

 

[ashfaque]

If you come across any relatively cheaper (less than 600 GBP) fully working XPan with lens , please let me know. I don't really care about the outlook.

MIchael and Monz: Amazing. Just goes to show how little I know about photography (or anything for that matter)!

@monz: I love that 1st shot . In the 2nd shot the kid looks skinnier than he probably is! 😀 I'm going to visit your flickr site right away. 🙂

 

[Monz]

@ashfaque: thanks 🙂 For 600 GBP you may just about get an user XPan/45mm if you are patient and look hard on eBay and at fairs. I think it's important to make sure the lens in good condition and has the hood included (they cost 150 GBP separately and are rare). The centre spot filter can be had reasonably easily later (again about 150 GBP). Make sure the frame lines work correctly before parting with cash (there is a weakness in the design in this area).

 

[rbelyell]

have you thought of/researched hand-holdable chinese mf cams like the gaoersi 6x12 or 6x17 or similar by Da Yi? as i mentioned the big beneift of these is they can be shot without tripod, like xpan, only they are less expensive and yield bigger 120/220 negatives. you supply the lens, a large format coupled with a shutter, and the company provides a cone to mount the lens to the camera and a vf for your chosen fl. focusing is by zone/hyperfocal calculation.

in theory i find this option more appealing, though i have neither cam, because i find 6x12 more appealing to my eye. i feel the xpan yields images i find too wide for my taste. but for other tastes there are also 6x17 models which can be m asked to shoot 6x12 and 6x9.

 

[didjiman]

In theory... 🙂

Well, I tried a Fotoman 617 and found that its advantage over an XPan is not large enough. If you are going to lug that around, you may as well go with a 617 with movement, which is what I did and I bought the Shen Hao 617.

I have to say that despite the Fotoman 617 and the Shen Hao, I still prefer the XPan (II) much more. You can't hike up Half Dome with a 617 camera, but you sure can with an XPan!

have you thought of/researched hand-holdable chinese mf cams like the gaoersi 6x12 or 6x17 or similar by Da Yi? as i mentioned the big beneift of these is they can be shot without tripod, like xpan, only they are less expensive and yield bigger 120/220 negatives. you supply the lens, a large format coupled with a shutter, and the company provides a cone to mount the lens to the camera and a vf for your chosen fl. focusing is by zone/hyperfocal calculation.

in theory i find this option more appealing, though i have neither cam, because i find 6x12 more appealing to my eye. i feel the xpan yields images i find too wide for my taste. but for other tastes there are also 6x17 models which can be m asked to shoot 6x12 and 6x9.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Re ... cropping MF to the panorama format:

Isn't this a little like owning a V8 and yanking off a few spark plug leads on the days you feel like driving a four cylinder?

😀

Not really. No 6x12 back can hold the film as flat as a good 6x9 back, so it's a bit 'swings and roundabouts' on which is better: all-in 56x112mm or 56x84mm cropped to 42x84mm. As I have better wide-angle lenses for 56x84mm, I go for that with wides, but 56x112mm at 100mm focal lengths and above. And a 617 needs to be reloaded awfully often.

As for V8s, I always preferred straight sixes, straight eights and V12s. But then, I've never tried a V16.

Cheers,

R.

 

[rbelyell]

well the 6x17 does seem somewhat larger than the 6x12 that i prefer. the 6x12 seems eminently portable. my understanding is the portability of the 6x12 in those hiking situations you speak of is part of the marketing campaign of the camera. i have heard from those on other forums who use the gaoersi for street shooting. both the 6x17 and 6x12 are much less cumbersome than the fotoman, at least according to that which i've read on line.

 

[didjiman]

// EDIT: Incendiary comment deleted 🙂 -rfm

 

[Vickko]

Yeah, this is what I'm worried about regarding the "new old stock" Xpan that I found. I bet it has been in a box since 2004, unused, but all seized up.

Vick

.... Make sure the frame lines work correctly before parting with cash (there is a weakness in the design in this area).

 

[Jubb Jubb]

I'm with you there Keith. Cropping is one of my biggest dislikes in photography.

 

[GaryLH]

I partially agree with you Keith, which is why I have an xpan to start with. But there are times when u just don't have the right camera with u... And u c a shot that only works as a Pano. If it is static in nature, then shoot multiple shots and stitch post process. If the scene has some moving elements your better off to crop.

Btw on your x100 , have u tried the sweep Pano mode?

Gary

 

[hausen]

I agree with Keith and that is why I have bought an Xpan.

 

[Vickko]

I guess I don't understand the cropping thing.

If I use an SWC with its 38mm lens, and crop the film to 24mm x 60mm, that doesn't sound too far from the Xpan starting with a 24mm wide film but capturing a 65mm wide photo.

Either way, the vertical size is the same.

In one case, I've cropped it at home, the other case, the camera body did the cropping. And with the SWC, I've got the advantage of extra leeway on the vertical.


....Vick