MF can take a mamiya 7 lens?
Just a suggestion, maybe put a Canon EF mount on it by default? EF is an almost 'universal acceptor', then you can mount any of Nikon, Pentax, M42, Leica R lenses. The more available lenses the more popular it might be. With a Nikon mount you can only really mount Nikon lenses (and MF goes with everything of course).
Just a suggestion, maybe put a Canon EF mount on it by default? EF is an almost 'universal acceptor', then you can mount any of Nikon, Pentax, M42, Leica R lenses. The more available lenses the more popular it might be. With a Nikon mount you can only really mount Nikon lenses (and MF goes with everything of course).
I'd say why not include possiblities of using a polaroid/fujiroid as well with it?
because you have never really and deeply invested time in rotating cameras, right? The same with 3d-film and 3d-photography. Nobody needs it right? only with a rotating cam this shot would be possible:For my needs, this camera would be a complete waste of time, film and money.
their quality will be very bad compared to the adox/mx. btw: the design comes from gilda lelostec who "made" also the panomachine. it was he who made the first 50/120/360 cams. see the image of the cam.One thing has nothing to do with the other. A film camera will not be "competition" to a similar digital product, they simply two different things on every level.
There are at least 2 crowd funding projects for a design of a 360 degree ball camera that will give 360 degrees in sphere. Those are not designed for commercial use, so comparing those to a complex camera mount that creates and stitches a spherical image is pointless.
I've done more than enough digital stitching to know how much I hate it, there's a lot of pain when stitching the photos together, especially in trying to calculate the exact nodal-point to swing around (and then getting your tripod and head to actually swing around the correct point). Enough of a headache that I haven't really bothered much after testing and I'll probably sell my Nodal Ninja one day.
DIY digital (using a dslr) has the advantage that all the test shots needed are free and immediate, film SLRs can't do it cheaply or quickly (at least, not enough for me to bother).
Pre-built (film or digital) have the advantage that all the nodal point stuff has been figured out in design, all you have to do is mount it level and press the button and you're done.
There's the half pre-built and half-diy automated solutions like GigaPan, but how expensive are they?
Having an all-in-one shot film camera removes all the headaches of stitching, but then you need a huge scanner/enlarger anyway. Depends on the vertical angle of view. If you can get a 360-round-trip in, say, a 6x24cm bit of 120-film with a wide-angle lens then you can at least use an 8x10 enlarger or flatbed scanner. If your lens is narrower and you need a full 2-feet of film to get 360-degrees then there are not many enlargers or scanners on the planet that can handle that without cutting and stitching later.
The biggest annoyance when making 360-degree panos, whether film or digital, is getting the exposure right. Unless you've got a completely soft-box-cloudy sun-free day, then you're going to have major spot blown out and major spots black, even with B+W or C41 film.
Hence I'd definitely prefer a user-selectable model, at least 90/180/270/360 degrees, like a DaYi 67/69/612/617 selectable-back. Even if you're stuck doing the whole roll on the same setting, it's still better than only doing 360.
the cam must take up 70mm cartridges filled with 120 film-no 70mm or maybe yes. option for both with different spool. 70mm spools with 120-stoppers added. xkaes can deliver cutters. it is easy to virtual cut the film at the right position during shooting and cut it there in the darkroom. adox pls listen. it is easy to find the beginning and cut the right lenght/220 to develop eighter normal or 70mm film. ok 70mm film is no good options since their is only expensive ilford around. If 70mm cartridges then 70mm film option is up to us. it is easily doable. see here how to load in paterson tank. the same is possible with jobo 2500. i would not use 1500 system due to narrower reels.The German manufacturer of panoramic camera systems MK and ADOX are evaluating the possibility of producing a new analog medium format 360° panoramic camera.
Currently we are evaluating the price point. This thread is to get feedback if you think there is a need for such a camera in new condition or if you think the used market serves everyone perfectly.
Obviously it will not be cheap but on the other hand Leicas have their prices as well.
I know I should tell you the exact price but we need to wait a little for this information.
Mirko
dont mention this name again. Da kommt mir die galle hoch. they sold me widelux 1500, they didnt want to send me testimages because they knew it was a bad construction. panon made huge mistakes we had to rebuild it, newer constrution rebuilt after our drawings i was told. That was the reason electropan/noblex(inventor kornelius schorle) was born and widepan(widelux-copy). later also eyescan 624/schorlex by a new company. thats why i opened a rotating panoramic cameras-forum at delphi forums. also due to the endless horizon/horizont-problems. informations are also stored in panorama-yahoo-techgroup.What I find even more interesting than the panoramic camera idea on its own is that Adox is considering to offer a own camera "again".
If I'm right those Adox apparatus offered currently are re-branded. A propriatory camera would be a far different step.
Edit:
Were it not already given ADORAMA would be a nice name...
as the one seitz/roundshot really delivered. one would need also an automatic developping machine.Mirko, you are not only a film-, but also a paper-manufacturer:
What about a panoramic slit printing device? As the one Noblex once showed.
Contax/yashica-mount-120/220 option. pls offer adox-bulkfilm plus paper so we can add.There have been so many posts that I hope to catch all questions with this answer:
1) The camera does not exist yet, the next step will be to build a prototype.
2) The price depends on the current cost for materials and quantities. We target a price below 3.000 EUR without tax.
3) 35mm lenses are fine to use because of the slot image (you don´t need an image circle with full coverage). Other mounts than Nikon are possible but will be a custom modification with a price tag to it.
4) The format is ADJUSTABLE in about 5° increments. We might even allow self-programming via a PC. This all depends on the cameras success. This is a 2014 technology product.
Depending on the settings formats of e.g. 6x9, 6x12, 6x17, 6x24 etc. can be achived.
5) The times are adjustable as well
Mirko
wrong, roundshot 65/70/220 could shoot in 90 degr. steps others are more precise. its is a completely different shooting world. other things must be taken into consideration. when quick-shooting is done one must calculate also stopping way öarge images will or must be covered. so lets add at least 220 option. is roundshot 28/220 outdoors really that sharp with 28mm only lens? my rs 65/70/220 with grandagon and 26mm shift upwards only(due to construction limits) produces very sharp but not ultrasharp images like in linhof 70. rs 220vr is not that expensive used but much larger. without tripod i can hardly see the new cam can work. are the lelostec cams working without tripod like the 220 or 220 outdoors? thomas b.kunz(knuzen)of berlin-the one which had a panorama-site-has a 50mm cam.Mirko, do you have any sample images, I assume there's a prototype.
There is a small demand for Roundshot style cameras shooting 360º but it really is small, if the actual º that's exposed could be chosen maybe demand might be higher.
Panoramics or rather how do I shoot some of the very wide landscapes I've been working in, has been a dilemma to me for around 25 years. Rotating cameras, Noblex, Horizont etc, produce a unique signature which really didn't suit my work, and 360º cameras just shoot the same but over the full circle.
In the end I chose to buy a 6x17 camera, if I had had the cash at the time I'd have bought a 6x24 (it was the cost of a WA lens for 6x24 that was the issue). While I shoot film for all my own ork I also stitch large panoramas from digital imgaes for commercial work but I prefer the straight images, there's the strange perspective when cameras (or lenses) are rotated whether motorised or stitched image.
Maybe I should add that I'd shoot HD video now to cover some of the wide panoramas
It's a very specialist market and so probably few of us here would be potential customers however there is a sector of the market that use and need cameras with that kind of capability, creating Virtual Reality images. As most will be used/shown digital formats then there's the issue of should the capture be digital or on film.
Ian
superwideangle is not rotapanorama, with altostorms panorama-corrector-plugin or inside panoramafactory-stitcher one could adjust up to 160° with no distortions at the edges compared to superwideangles/fisheyes.There are plenty, plenty of analogue 6x12, 6x17 and 6x24 cameras about serving both amateur and professional markets, both new and second hand (even home made ones, like mine!), and these do the job extremely well. What is trying to be achieved with a camera offering such an extreme field of view (e.g. 'fisheye')? I suspect the appeal of this mooted camera would be just a costly novelty up against established, proven and respected format cameras.
with roundshot 220vr one could measure light with camerarotation and correct exposure. the same was true with the roundshot enlarger.I've done more than enough digital stitching to know how much I hate it, there's a lot of pain when stitching the photos together, especially in trying to calculate the exact nodal-point to swing around (and then getting your tripod and head to actually swing around the correct point). Enough of a headache that I haven't really bothered much after testing and I'll probably sell my Nodal Ninja one day.
DIY digital (using a dslr) has the advantage that all the test shots needed are free and immediate, film SLRs can't do it cheaply or quickly (at least, not enough for me to bother).
Pre-built (film or digital) have the advantage that all the nodal point stuff has been figured out in design, all you have to do is mount it level and press the button and you're done.
There's the half pre-built and half-diy automated solutions like GigaPan, but how expensive are they?
Having an all-in-one shot film camera removes all the headaches of stitching, but then you need a huge scanner/enlarger anyway. Depends on the vertical angle of view. If you can get a 360-round-trip in, say, a 6x24cm bit of 120-film with a wide-angle lens then you can at least use an 8x10 enlarger or flatbed scanner. If your lens is narrower and you need a full 2-feet of film to get 360-degrees then there are not many enlargers or scanners on the planet that can handle that without cutting and stitching later.
The biggest annoyance when making 360-degree panos, whether film or digital, is getting the exposure right. Unless you've got a completely soft-box-cloudy sun-free day, then you're going to have major spot blown out and major spots black, even with B+W or C41 film.
Hence I'd definitely prefer a user-selectable model, at least 90/180/270/360 degrees, like a DaYi 67/69/612/617 selectable-back. Even if you're stuck doing the whole roll on the same setting, it's still better than only doing 360.
lomo really?look at the limited spinner 360. i have read about problems with the slomo rotation motor.it should have been an "improved" spinshot (invented by dead rick corrales. lets end the poor chapter of no-properly-working rotapancameras. seitz roundshot not in this group. or the limited horizon compact where only panoramist know that speed-limits and aperture limits are disastrous for shooting.I think the biggest issue is the few people who would use this and for what application?
Only a few would buy it, perhaps 10 in the world who could afford and justify the need for such a camera. There's no practical application, so the only use is either fun, or to be "different" but it would only be good for one project and then you would be repetitive using the same 360 for everything you shoot.
So I don't personally see there being much of a market, not enough to justify creating it.
The ONLY market, would be the Lomo crowd, I would contact Lomography and suggest a partnership with them for sales of such a camera, it would be more popular as a cheaper plastic unit than as a professional well built camera.
My opinion.
forget adapters. it must be very precise. schneider 28mm pc-lens had adapters but very stable ones built by schneider. they said not use additonal one. wobbling aorund would kill the quality.Just a suggestion, maybe put a Canon EF mount on it by default? EF is an almost 'universal acceptor', then you can mount any of Nikon, Pentax, M42, Leica R lenses. The more available lenses the more popular it might be. With a Nikon mount you can only really mount Nikon lenses (and MF goes with everything of course).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?