aizan
Veteran
stitching aside, it's about time for a dedicated panoramic camera. what specs would you want to see on it?
- aps-c sensor stretched to 6x17 or 7x17 proportions.
- fixed 24-90mm-e f/4 lens
- manual zoom ring.
- built-in evf in the corner.
- weather sealing.
- shutter speed and aperture dials, like on leica x cameras, with detents every 1/3 stop.
- aps-c sensor stretched to 6x17 or 7x17 proportions.
- fixed 24-90mm-e f/4 lens
- manual zoom ring.
- built-in evf in the corner.
- weather sealing.
- shutter speed and aperture dials, like on leica x cameras, with detents every 1/3 stop.
majid
Fazal Majid
A digital X-Pan. Not going to happen, though, the sensors would be prohibitively expensive.
That said, it should be possible to make a digital Noblex without too much fuss using a linear CCD or CIS sensor similar to the ones used inside scanners. Panoscan makes something similar, and there is the Seitz/Roundshot line as well, including one in 6x17 format.
DougK
This space left blank
I'd also like to see a digital XPan. Stitching is OK, but it definitely has limitations that a panoramic-aspect sensor would address.
hausen
Well-known
Digital Xpan would be a nice dream, but for now will make do with RX-1 + Nodal Ninja 3. Tiny kit.
rbelyell
Well-known
while a digi xpan (yes, i do have a film xpan) is a wish that will most likely remain unfulfilled, the fuji x series cams are the next best thing, and equally most likely to be the best pano alternative we will have. at the 120 degree option youre getting something like a 1:3 or 4 aspect ratio. the pictures are crystal clear and exhibit very little noticeable distortion. i very much enjoy pano photography and have a few wide format film cams. but i also really enjoy both the process and results of my x100 pano experiences.
tony
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Let's think about that aps-c sensor stretched to a wide screen ratio. If we change the aspect ratio of the sensor, of course, it won't be aps-c any more. But how about making the aps-c sensor do the job of a dedicated sensor the size of an XPAN negative?
How do you do that? I'd say by using an an anamorphic lens, just like they use to put a 2.35:1 image onto a 1.33:1 film frame. The lens squeezes the image down to fit the sensor. During playback, the camera's electronics would stretch the image back to its correct proportions.
It's not complicated. In fact, you don't really have to have a digital XPAN. You could put the anamorphic lens on any digital camera, say a D300 or D700 or M9, or . . . The camera would not have the capability of stretching the image out; but it could be done in post with a simple plug-in for Aperture, Lightroom, iPhoto, or what have you.
If a variable anamorphic lens were used, you could pick your own squeeze ratio. I'd like 2.2:1, please.
Edit: I meant I'd like the final picture to be 2.2:1, not the squeeze ratio. At 2.2:1, the picture would match the aspect ratio of 70mm Panavision. And at 2.35:1, it would match CinemaScope. That would be nice, as well.
Last edited:
rluka
Established
Wouldn't that sacrifice the resolution ?
Not really perfect, but I wished there's cheap toy camera version of the scanning linear sensor panoramic camera.
Could accept the picture to be more crappy on par with those toy digital camera, it will be used for toy anyway.
Not really perfect, but I wished there's cheap toy camera version of the scanning linear sensor panoramic camera.
Could accept the picture to be more crappy on par with those toy digital camera, it will be used for toy anyway.
Lss
Well-known
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Sure, there would be some loss. But you would still get to use the full pixel count of the sensor. An 18MP or so sensor isn't hard to come by these days. There's plenty of resolution left: 35mm anamorphic Panavision looks great on a 50 foot screen!
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
One of the things which has been really made faster and better by digital cameras are panoramic images, why don't just take advantage of this instead of wishing for something which is never going to happen. In fact, pictures can be taken so fast and glued so perfectly that one can use the technique also to take pictures of large groups, just look at the work of Ryan Brenizer, Jarek Wieczorkiewicz or Sergey Zaytsev, just to name a few.
GLF
GLF
aizan
Veteran
eh, stitching is basically a hack. people want to make panoramas, but there aren't any "affordable" digital panoramic cameras.
now is a good time for advanced compacts, and i don't think it's unreasonable to expect that fuji, sigma, panasonic, or maybe ricoh or hasselblad will tap this market sooner or later.
now is a good time for advanced compacts, and i don't think it's unreasonable to expect that fuji, sigma, panasonic, or maybe ricoh or hasselblad will tap this market sooner or later.
rbelyell
Well-known
stitching is stiching, its a post, as in 'after' photo effect. its not a pano, at least to me. and i personally find that 'post processing' process a pain in the neck. face it, fuji like panning panos are the ckosest we're gonna get. enjoy them, practice them, get better at them. theyre really great.
tony
tony
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Even in the old good Widelux different parts of the film were hit by light at different times. And the XPan uses a slit of the circle of the lens, like putting 5" of 135 film into a 4x5" holder and taking a picture with a Super Angulon. I mean, let's face it "panoramic" is always a trick however you do it, lenses produce round images and our eyes and brain don't process 270 degree view like bird's eyes and brain...
GLF
GLF
Lss
Well-known
What you describe is a stitching operation, one that is done automatically without much user input. It often results in pretty obvious stitching errors. There's nothing wrong with using this feature (it's quick and convenient), but others require more control over the results and better quality.
A large sensor panoramic camera is unlikely to happen in the short term, it would be very expensive. But there are many possible compromises that may very well give panorama fans something that works for them (to give a high-quality single-exposure-time panorama). The solution is not necessarily a single camera, or a single sensor, but an array of some sort.
majid
Fazal Majid
Anamorphic lenses are extremely expensive. Even ones for projectors easily cost over $2K, despite having modest resolution requirements.
majid
Fazal Majid
Of course, the RX1 also has Sony's excellent sweep panorama mode. Do you even need a nodal slide with a lens as short as the Sonnar on the RX1?
I've used a Gigapan Epic 100 with a M9 and 90mm APO-Summicron ASPH to yield 30Kx5K panos with exquisite detail. A motorized head like the Gigapan or the Kolor Panogear is not that much more expensive and yields much more consistent results.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Why not use a large available sensor, as in the 49mm wide Hasselblad CFV-39 digital back. Crop it to about 21mm in height, and you have a wide picture with aspect ratio 2.35:1, like CinemaScope. Used with the existing 30mm XPAN lens, it would be as wide as a film XPAN with a 37 to 38mm lens (which I think would be ideal on the XPAN).
doolittle
Well-known
A fixed wide-angle lens full frame camera with a high resolution sensor would be one option. With a panoramic overlay on the screen or evf. A 21mm or 24mm lens would provide a similar angle of view to an XPan with a 45mm lens. Or a 15mm lens for the Xpan 30mm look. A crop from a 36mp sensor would result in a 12mp panoramic image, which is still a reasonable size.
A 21mm lens optimised for the A7r would be nice too.
A 21mm lens optimised for the A7r would be nice too.