That's a little trickier and there is more than one kind of panorama. I'm not trying to discourage you, I've done this same thing with 35mm film in a MF back, with a Sprocket Rocket, and it could also be done with something like 4x10 sheets of film in a modified 8x10 holder (of if I had a bad 8x10 slide by shooting two images per sheet with a modified 8x10 darkslide). Lots of fun but maybe not "true" panorama. Some thoughts:
- A panorama should have a wider angle and a wider field of view than a photo taken with a normal lens. If you were to make a long thin print from a "normal" lens, the "crop factor" actually makes the effective focal length longer not shorter. (For the sake of my argument if an 8x10 camera has a nominal normal focal length of 12.8 inches, the nominal normal focal length of a 4x10 format is 10.77 inches. Taking the photo with a 12 inch lens does not qualify.)
- Some folks will argue that true panoramic aspect ratios start at about twice the normal aspect ratio for that format . By that criteria a 4x10 is panoramic on 4x5, so that one is good.
- Panoramic images should revolve around the "nodal point" of the camera. This can be accomplished by a curved film plane, a swing lens, or a spin camera. It can also be accomplished by cropping a fisheye image if the film plane is flat. In addition to my Sprocket Rocket I have a Lomo camera that spins the camera body and another, a Horizon, that swings the lens. None are "high fidelity" but all are fun to use.