xpan 90mm curiosity

M

msbel

Member
Local time
12:20 AM
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
41
Hi all,

Just acquired a Xpan II/45mm kit in very nice condition. Tremendously excited. Once I calm down I will shoot some more and see what happens on the other end ;)

I am curious as to who of you xpan'ers use the 90mm lens often. I know the conversion is into a 50mm FOV - standard "eye" view.

How has the 50mm view worked out for many of you in pan mode? It seems some images I have tracked down were for closer "medium portrait uses", and some of the photos are indeed interesting.

Thanks in advance. I understand the 50mm, it's the use on pan mode that interests me...thanks in advance.

Best,
MSB
 
I owned the 90mm and never used it. Same with the 30mm. The 45mm is just so perfect.

Glad to see the Canadian dollar worked out for you.
 
Well - I passed on the 90 on fleabay, and it was bought in an hour. Think I will save for the 30mm if there is a good deal floating around sometime.....like that will ever happen ;)

MSB
 
I had the 90mm and didn't like using it. I use the 80mm often on 6x6 and thought the 90mm would be as natural but was not. I tend to go wide with the Xpan and often use a 35mm Curtagon on it.
 
I bought a 90mm a while back, I think from someone here at RFF ;- )

I like it. I'm using it for a street photography project and like the 'letterbox' look because I can add several people into the frame. It provides a different perspective. I've got some back recently but haven't scanned the negs yet due to "project priorities" ie long overdue stuff I have to do first. ;D

BTW: the 30mm, bring a lot of cash for that one!
 
Yea saw that 30 go. Attractive price compared to some of the others that have gone on there.

Jan - please post your pics with the 90mm once you have them ready to go.

MSB
 
Rayt said:
I had the 90mm and didn't like using it. I use the 80mm often on 6x6 and thought the 90mm would be as natural but was not. I tend to go wide with the Xpan and often use a 35mm Curtagon on it.
Click to expand...

I'm really curious about the set up you are using "a 35mm Curtagon.." I didn't know there were any lenses but the three discussed here.
Please tell me more! :- )
 
Jan, there are a few adapters to use non-Xpan lens. None has RF coupling. I have a Leica R Summicron adapted with RF coupling and the result is quite good. Just go back a few threads and you'll see it.

I may have to sell my 30mm setup (complete with center filter, viewfinder etc.) If I do, I will sell it at a reasonable price (for the 30mm), but not a "bargain" price. Anyone interested please PM me.

// richard
 
I did a month long road trip in which I shot Kodachrome 25 and 64 in the XPan and Leica bodies.

I shot quite a bit using the XPan, the 30 about 20% of the time, the 45 about 30% of the time and the 90 50% of the time.

I found the 90 outstanding at getting panoramic pics that don't include everything but the kitchen sink.

The other plus is that the 90 can use a polarizer and does not need a center grad.
 
When Hollywood came out with wide screen, studios and exhibitors both imagined that for the image to be valid on the panoramic format, the lens must be an extreme wide-angle. Mike Todd had Brian O'Brian at American Optical design a very wide "bug eye" lens for the Todd-AO system, along with several less extreme lenses. But in filming, the bugeye was used for only a small number of takes. Soon they realized that an image can be valid on the big screen even when a wide-angle lens was not used.

So: it turns out that there is a difference between "wide aspect ratio" vs. "panoramic." An XPAN shot with the 90mm won't be panoramic, but it can still be valid in the XPAN format.
 
I tend to use the 30mm and 90mm more than the 45mm. Of course, the 30 is unsurpassed, so I tend to go for that when I want to gobble lots of space and the background distance doesn't matter. However, I like the 90 for the opposite reason- if I want to hone-in on something specific and get that background to cuddle up to the foreground, the 90 is the way to go. I also love the 90 for it's ability to have a narrow FOV for close-ups.

For comparison, here are two photos I made from the same spot:

90mm: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=67404

30mm: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=67403

If you click on the 30mm image for a larger photo, you will see the rock on the horizon.

Unlike most others so far, I find I have a tough time finding a reason to use my 45mm!

Here's an example of the 90mm lens- not panoramic, but useful for blurring the background for making my subject "jump out" more: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=68797

30mm: complex, deep, diverse.
45mm: vanilla, dependable, consistent.
90mm: spicy, individualistic, passionate.

I've learned the personalities of my lenses. (I haven't named them yet.)
 
Last edited:
I just remembered that "Lawrence of Arabia" was filmed in widescreen (Panavision if I recall), yet it included a shot taken with a 1000mm lens. Director David Lean asked Bausch& Lomb to make this lens. B&L responded that they could design & build the lens in one year. Lean replied, "You have two weeks." They did it. The lens was used for the shot of Peter O'Toole riding his (horse? Camel?) over a distant sand dune, seen through the rising desert heat vapors. The "David Lean Lens" as it came to be known, has been used since in other films, and I understand is still available for rental.

So, again, the point being that long lenses can be used with validity in any format, including wide aspect ratio ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom