Xpan, my favorite camera

[jonah]

Xpan is my favorite camera.
Since I'm not from an English speaking country, I will let photos to speak for me.

Most of the photos was taken by Xpan+45mm/4+Kodak 5207.

 

[jonah]

 

[jonah]

 

[jonah]

 

[jawarden]

I would love to have one of those one day. So cinematic. Thanks for sharing!

 

[jonah]

 

[boojum]

Is anybody shooting Xpan now? From what I have read the film cameras are risky. If they work they may soon break. If they break they may be repaired, but the chances are not good. This leaves digital as all that is left. I can do an in-camera crop for Xpan which means I lose the top and bottom. I'd like to try some Xpan shots but am all new to it and wonder if there are any tips that could help beginners errors. Anyway, here is one from out on the country near the Columbia River in Oregon.

The format is pleasing in its panoramic view and cinematic in the same manner. I should try it a bit and see how I can use it, if only to mask my errors.

B0001317 by West Phalia, on Flickr​

 

[Retro-Grouch]

Is anybody shooting Xpan now? From what I have read the film cameras are risky. If they work they may soon break. If they break they may be repaired, but the chances are not good. This leaves digital as all that is left. I can do an in-camera crop for Xpan which means I lose the top and bottom. I'd like to try some Xpan shots but am all new to it and wonder if there are any tips that could help beginners errors. Anyway, here is one from out on the country near the Columbia River in Oregon.

The format is pleasing in its panoramic view and cinematic in the same manner. I should try it a bit and see how I can use it, if only to mask my errors.

B0001317 by West Phalia, on Flickr​

Not exactly true that digital is all that's left. There are a few medium format cameras that will take backs that give roughly the same Xpan format on 35mm film, 24x58mm. Probably the cheapest option is the Bronica ETRs, for which one can purchase the 35W back. Unfortunately, those backs are scarce, and will easily set you back about $600.00. That's the cost of a complete camera (body, lens, finder, and normal back).
I do have the ETRs system, so I've been very tempted to get the 35W back. I suppose I ought to, before they get even more expensive!

 

[yossi]

I still have an XP II in my dry cabinet. Purchased new long ago with the 45f4 lens but hardly used, due to the difficulty in scanning the pano format. Need to use a special film holder to scan it with my Nikon Coolscan 9000. That said, it is a delight to use this camera. The 45mm lens is a very fine lens too. HERE is one shot I took last year. Fomapan 100 developed in R09 and scanned with Coolscan 9000. (I have the Centerfilter but didn't use it.)

I really should use it more while it is still working...

Oh yes, I also managed to mount a PC-Nikkor 35mm f2.8 lens on the XPAN II via an adapter and use the whole VF to frame. The PC-Nikkor 35mm has big enough image circle to cover the full negative (almost, like 90%). Of course this works only with scale focusing as it is not RF-coupled, but that is easy when f8 or smaller aperture is used. The PC-Nikkor 35mm is not as wide as the original XPAN 30mm f5.6 lens, but it costs only 10% of it and gives excellent image and without the need to use external VF.

 

[filmtwit]

YEs. So, Mine's* been out of commission for just over a year and half when it stopped rolling film into it and the slow speed side of the dial stop'd being accessible. I spent a few months looking for someone here in US to fix it, but nearly everyone said no. I finally happened upon Wilco Jenson in Netherlands who said he could fix it. I sent it over and it sat in customs for 2 months due to me mislabeling his address. It finally came back and since I dropped $70 on shipping it I looked around to see if I could find something better than USPS and every international shipper (Fedex, USP, ect) wanted close to $200 to ship it. So back to USPS, but this time in a box much smaller.... and the cost to send it again was still $70 (ugh). The first time around USPS gave me free insurance for $1k, but this second time around they wanted more money for it. Nope. Anway, second time around it makes its way to Netherlands and despite me writing all over the paper work and the box that it was camera for repair and return to the USA Wilco was changed $200 import taxes (UGH). Wilco had it fixed in less than a week and ready to ship, payment was what I expected (much cheaper then getting another Xpan/TX1 body), so good money spent. Return, it sat for just over a week in US Customs/Los Angeles (I don't think I've had a package wait that long in US Customs before). It landed locally last night and of course USPS didn't deliver on a Saturday... so now waiting for MOnday to have camera back where it belongs.

BTW_ if a cheap Xpan/TX1 body not working came my way cheap, I'd go threw the above headache again just to get it back into the world, running and taking pictures..... of course I'd sell it too.

hasselblad-reparaties.nl

www.hasselblad-reparaties.nl

Mine = Fuji TX-1

 

[filmtwit]

Not exactly true that digital is all that's left. There are a few medium format cameras that will take backs that give roughly the same Xpan format on 35mm film, 24x58mm. Probably the cheapest option is the Bronica ETRs, for which one can purchase the 35W back. Unfortunately, those backs are scarce, and will easily set you back about $600.00. That's the cost of a complete camera (body, lens, finder, and normal back).
I do have the ETRs system, so I've been very tempted to get the 35W back. I suppose I ought to, before they get even more expensive!

THose systems tend to be closer to 2:1 and not 3:1

Keep in mind that Fuji GFX system and Hasselblad 701 have built in digital cropping for 3:1 shooting, so you can compose and shoot xpan-like within those camera systems.

 

[boojum]

I ship for repair with an international shipper. They seem more geared for what is going on. And if it is a round trip for repair there should be no charge. But we know that. (

Film is possible but difficult. One, the camera mechanism and two, film sources. And in Xpan format you are burning up film twice as fast. And then, as mentioned, scanning. It does seem digital is the only practical way forward. If there is no in-camera cropping why can this not be done in post? Just a little gaffers tape or masking tape across the viewfinder could emulate the field captured after crop. Just an idea.

Anyway, I would like to take a shot at it and see what happens. Sonnars cover all of my sensor so I can use them and I have a weakness for Sonnars. But that means electronic shutter. First I will have to learn how to make use of the format with the mechanical shutter and see what happens.

This is an early test shot off my back porch at sunset. That is the beautiful Columbia River as it passes by Astoria, OR, on its way another 12 - 14 miles to the Pacific and the Columbia Bar, possibly the worst bar in the world. That is Washington State on the other side of the river.

B0001287 by West Phalia, on Flickr​

 

[WoodallP]

There is always the Texpan; I tried it once with a GSW690. It worked well and of course the whole setup was so small 😂

 

[boojum]

There is always the Texpan; I tried it once with a GSW690. It worked well and of course the whole setup was so small 😂

But then again there is the stumbling block of film stock. It does not appeal to me but I understand it appealing to others. But color is limited, expensive and going through it at a double speed gets scary. And then the difficulty of scanning the image. So while I do understand the appeal of film I cannot face the cost and difficulty involved.

Other than the HB I do not know if there are other digital panoramic format cameras. It is a tempting format. And I will try my luck with it. The question I have is should I confine myself to bucolic scenes or should I shoot regular shots framed in a panoramic format? Probably the latter to try and get a feel for the format.

And 24x36 can be cropped in post into panoramic. The problem with this tack is that 1) little negative left to work with and 2) "seeing" panoramic with a normal viewfinder. Masking tape can fix the viewfinder problem but a good sized sensor would seem helpful.

So while there is a romantic appeal to the format is it quixotic or practical? I'll try and find out for my use and keep you guys posted, good, bad and otherwise. You may get bored. But then think of the effect on me. ;o)

 

[shawn]

THose systems tend to be closer to 2:1 and not 3:1

Keep in mind that Fuji GFX system and Hasselblad 701 have built in digital cropping for 3:1 shooting, so you can compose and shoot xpan-like within those camera systems.

GFX is 65x24 which is 2.7:1. Panasonic FF mirrorless also have 65x24 mode and a 2:1 as well. My S1R with a 24mm in 65x24 mode is almost exactly the same FOV as the xPan with the 45mm on it. Files are still about 26 megapixels in that mode. Sigma fp, fp L, and all the Quattros have a 21:9 (2.33:1) mode on them too.

 

[boojum]

OK, another just screwing around shot off the back porch. You can see why today is stay inside with a steaming hot bowl of black bean soup rather than go out shopping and rattling around. We are in a bad storm which whips up now and again, we even are getting thunder and lightening which is almost unheard of along the coast. And small hail. I'm staying in. Hot soup and a "nice glass tea".

The ship is heading upriver to Kalama for grain of some sort. The rail lines end there with a lot of cars of grain that are stored in elevators and loaded onto ships. The grain is from our interior where grain is the major crop. Those ships are a lot lower in the water on the way out.

B0002113 by West Phalia, on Flickr​

 

[Ororaro]

Love the Xpan. Fuji nailed it.

 

[snaefell]

But then again there is the stumbling block of film stock. It does not appeal to me but I understand it appealing to others. But color is limited, expensive and going through it at a double speed gets scary. And then the difficulty of scanning the image. So while I do understand the appeal of film I cannot face the cost and difficulty involved.

You can get a panorama plate for the Texas Leica. The format will then be 24x80, you can either use roll film (which is a waste of film) or use some adapters for 35mm film. You will probably have to apply a few layers of self-adhesive tape to the film winding spool to make the counting mechanism of the camera work. Plus you need to unload the camera in a changing back since there is no way to re-spool the film in the camera (not needed for 120). Ideally you also make a mask for the finder. Works pretty well.

 

[filmtwit]

But then again there is the stumbling block of film stock. It does not appeal to me but I understand it appealing to others. But color is limited, expensive and going through it at a double speed gets scary. And then the difficulty of scanning the image. So while I do understand the appeal of film I cannot face the cost and difficulty involved.

The Xpan/TX1 lets you also shoot in 6x9 on a 35mm film (singlish frame).

 

[boojum]

We seem to have fallen into a confusion of formats. Xpan is 65:24, screen 16:9, and there is also 3:2/9:6. For the sake of discussion should we decide on one or just use this format collection for "pano" in the discussion? Xpan is pretty wide while the :screen" is pretty comfortable as we see it in movies all the time unless we are watching oldies. 3:2 kind of sneaks in under the door. So what is the consensus on this?

This thread seems a collecting point for folks who like the wide format in general. We are limited by the formats of our film cameras or what our digital cameras can be made to crop internally. Additionally we can shoot on any format or film and crop in post. So while this thread is labeled "Xpan" I am certainly willing to learn from anyone who is shooting wide format. It is an interesting format and adds new requirements to the game, like keep it level and different framing. OTOH I do not think how I frame any of the three formats I have listed will get me into MOMA. ;o) This is just some fun stuff.