XPan verses Widelux Quality

[whitecat]

I have the latter and am impressed by the quailty. I know the XPan is tops in its field, but how does it compare? All comments are welcome.

 

[raid]

Isn't one camera a 35mm camera and the other a MF camera?

Raid

 

[amateriat]

Widelux cameras were made in both MF and 35mm, if memory serves me at all. It's the 35mm models that I've dealth with. And comparison with the XPan is rather tricky in terms of which is "best". If pano work is a really big deal to you, the Widelux may have a plus point here and there; the XPan's big draw is that the camera does great pano work and standard-format 35mm as well – something to consider if an XPan is going to be one's principal camera.


- Barrett

 

[Finder]

They are really two very different cameras. Optically, the Xpan is far better and it can be focused. The Xpan has better control over exposure as well. The Widelux has a greater field of view, no issues with vignetting, and a faster lens - the Xpan lenses (45mm and 30mm) are really not designed to be used wide open. One has a flat film plane and suffers from the wide-angle effect, the Widelux has a curved film plane which gives it its unique qualities.

I use a Widelux and a 6x12 panoramic camera. The 6x12 flat-film plane camera is more versatile, and I would imagine the same for the Xpan. The Widelux and swing lens cameras are unique and do things normal cameras cannot. While my 6x12 is a workhorse, I keep the Widelux for its special properties. I would say an Xpan and Widelux would make an exellent combination, but one is not really a replacement for the other. If I was limit to one, my tastes would go to an Xpan as it would be more versatile - Jeff Bridges may not agree.