New Widelux possibly coming

[Sirius Glass]

I certainly hope the new one is improved. Aside from the inevitable distortion from the swinging lens design, the original camera often suffered from "banding,"as the revolving lens tended to stick in spots. There was a guy who could repair them, but that was in the distant past.

Tempe Camera Repair has been maintaining my WideLux F7 for years. Look them up on the internet.

 

[WeiW]

This looks good and hopefully the widelux can be available for production

 

[mshchem]

Is this still happening? Malibu fire destroyed the Bridges family home. Lots of stuff going on.

 

[armadsen]

Yes. Charys, one of the two people behind Silvergrain Classics, and the non-Bridges half of the project, posted on Facebook today or yesterday asking for some feedback from existing Widelux owners.

I know through another source that the project is very much underway and progressing.

 

[tezzasmall]

I just don't get the fascination with Widelux cameras. Is the quality that good, like Leica's, with a price tag to match? Even second-hand ones go for £2,500 to £3,000 sterling at the moment. This is when other well known brands are also available, at sometimes lower prices?:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=35mm%20panoramic%20camera&_sacat=0&_odkw=horizon%2035mm%20panoramic%20camera&_osacat=0&_sop=16

Personally I'm not in the market for such an expensive camera, so I bought myself a NEW Horizon panoramic at a fraction of the price, and I am VERY happy with it! :

Pardon our interruption...

Terry S
UK

 

[Arthurwg]

Never really liked my Widelux. The distortion was too extreme, and you had to be very careful not to include your fingers in the frame. Many examples were plagued by "banding," caused by the skipping of the swing lens. There was a specialist repair person who could fix that, but he is long gone.

On the plus side, the camera was used with great success for at least one great book, "Inside Algeria" by Swiss photographer Michael Von Graffenried , shot secretly in the 1990s with a Widelux disguised as a pair of binoculars (!).

 

[djdister]

I have the Widelux 1500 (the 120 version) which I think is more prone to issues than the 35mm version, since its swinging lens assembly is that much larger and heavier than the 35mm.

I've also been playing with imitating the Widelux effect with a digital camera...

 

[mshchem]

Yes. Charys, one of the two people behind Silvergrain Classics, and the non-Bridges half of the project, posted on Facebook today or yesterday asking for some feedback from existing Widelux owners.

I know through another source that the project is very much underway and progressing.

I looked at the Silvergrain Facebook page couldn't find this?? Can you direct me? I hope this project is a great success!!!

 

[armadsen]

I looked at the Silvergrain Facebook page couldn't find this?? Can you direct me? I hope this project is a great success!!!

It was on the Widelux group page:

It’s a private group (anyone can join, though) so the post doesn’t show up here. Screenshot:

 

[blee1996]

I bought a Widlux F7 from a forum member last year, for much less than the price quote above. I have been using it quite a bit since, and think it is a brilliant camera. Very compact for its panoramic format, very well made, and takes very interesting photos.

I also have a regular perspective 35mm panoramic camera (home-made X-Pan knok-off), and found widelux's perspective unique and suitable for most situations. I developed a proper grip to keep my fingers away from the lens, as well as keep the camera level. The warping effect is seldomly objectionable.

In the very beginning there were occasional banding (not very severe). But after some regular use, there is no more banding.

I have taken the Widelux as the only camera for a few vacations, and the results have been quite satisfying.

If you can find one in good condition under $1000, I will highly recommend it. The new one, if it ever gets built, will certainly be much more expensive than that.

 

[reddesert]

I have a Horizon, not a Widelux. The issues of "distortion", needing to watch your fingers, level the camera, and possible banding are generic to any swing lens camera. Actually, the "distortion" (non-rectilinearity) of a swing lens camera is only really a distortion of horizontal lines. It doesn't make the egg-shaped heads at the corners of the frame that a rectilinear wide angle lens does - it might be better to call both of these effects "perspective" rather than distortion as they aren't lens faults, but intrinsic to the projection of the 3D world onto a 2D piece of film. Which of these is tolerable vs offensive also depends on your subject matter.

 

[gordrob]

I have had a Widelux 7 for the last 25 years and have put a lot of film through it, both B&W and Ektachrome. Also had a Horizon for a number of years but sold it after finding the results from it not as good as the Widelux. I dropped the camera over a 50 foot cliff face of rock and gravel. The camera survived but I ended up losing the front face portion of the case. Sturdy camera with no banding problems.

 

[Andrew Keedle]

I have a Widelux F8 and an Horizon S3 Pro. The Horizon is actually better for composing as you have a fuller view and the in viewfinder level bubble really helps. The Widelux is an absolute feast of tactile loveliness though, it's a complete joy to use. My Horizon chews Ilford film, but is fine for Kodak. The different base types are probably the reason. I got my Widelux F8 a year or so ago for ~£600 and needed a ~£125 service from Cameratik in Edinburgh. The exposure combinations are less with the Widelux but manageable. The image difference is negliable. Horizon is perfectly acceptable, I prefer the Widelux.

 

[pentaxuser]

My Horizon chews Ilford film, but is fine for Kodak. The different base types are probably the reason.

View attachment 403524

View attachment 403525

View attachment 403526

View attachment 403527

Can I ask what it is about the bases that causes the Horizon it to chew Ilford but not Kodak film? Do all Ilford films get chewed but none of the Kodak variety?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Andrew Keedle]

Can I ask what it is about the bases that causes the Horizon it to chew Ilford but not Kodak film? Do all Ilford films get chewed but none of the Kodak variety?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Generally, for 35mm I think Ilford use acetate substrates and Kodak uses Polyester. The polyester films seems to run smoother and are much more resistant to tearing/shredding.

 

[mshchem]

It was on the Widelux group page:

It’s a private group (anyone can join, though) so the post doesn’t show up here. Screenshot:

My membership request is pending. Hopefully my Fujica G617 is not cause for rejection.

 

[pentaxuser]

Generally, for 35mm I think Ilford use acetate substrates and Kodak uses Polyester. The polyester films seems to run smoother and are much more resistant to tearing/shredding.

Thanks You may be right about Ilford using acetate and Kodak Polyester. I haven't paid enough attention to bases to know If this is the case 2 questions spring to mind. 1. How long ago did Kodak change its base and does that change precede your use of Kodak films and 2. I wonder what it is about the Horizon's transmission mechanism that causes enough strain to an acetate base to cause this problem

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[reddesert]

Those are nice shots Andrew, and show some of the things a swing lens pano camera can do.

I can't recall if I had any issues with Ilford film in my Horizon (which is a 202 anyway, not an S3). The film path in these swing-lens cameras makes tight curves, by necessity, to wrap the film around the cylindrical focal plane. I don't know how much different the Widelux film transport is compared to the Horizon. It is a practical issue one will have to experiment with to see what works in any given camera, and not really accessible to speculation.

 

[Arthurwg]

Dare I say it? I much prefer the Xpan.

 

[blee1996]

Fixed lens pano and swing lens pano are just two different animals, each has its own character. Plus the X-pan is 2-3x cost of Widelux in similar condition.

 

[AnselMortensen]

I had an F6 for a while, back in the mid- 1990's.
Nice camera, worked well, no banding issues. I sold it for a profit at a point when when I needed money.
A few years later, I bought a FSU Horizont, used it for a while, occasional banding.
Being a creative type, I made a handle for the Horizont from a scrap industrial door lock lever handle to eliminate the problem of getting my fingers in the frame.
Now I use a highly-modified WWII Torpedo bomber training camera with a pinhole for 6x18 panos...being the creative masochist that I am.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Never really liked my Widelux. The distortion was too extreme, and you had to be very careful not to include your fingers in the frame. Many examples were plagued by "banding," caused by the skipping of the swing lens. There was a specialist repair person who could fix that, but he is long gone.

On the plus side, the camera was used with great success for at least one great book, "Inside Algeria" by Swiss photographer Michael Von Graffenried , shot secretly in the 1990s with a Widelux disguised as a pair of binoculars (!).

I had problems with my fingers getting in the WideLux F7 photographs until I put a handle in the tripod mount under the camera. With one hand holding the camera by the handle and the other on top for the shutter, the finger problem went away for me.

 

[mshchem]

I wonder if the new version will be under 6,000 USD? No focal plane shutter saves money, film transport is expensive, lens costs. Then of course the tariff thing