Why would anyone spend big $$'s on an XPan?

[Tom Kershaw]

Ian,

Do you have any experience with the Shen Hao 6x17 cameras?

http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/product.asp?P_ID=2337&PT_ID=437

Tom

 

[Sirius Glass]

In the past, I have thought long and hard about getting an XPAN. After getting the 903 SWC, I decided that the XPAN was too much of a specialty camera and that I could crop one of the 120 negatives from one of the Hasselblad lenses in my stable, 38mm, 50mm, 80mm, 150mm and 250mm and get just about the same thing. I am much more likely to search out a 350mm or 500mm lens instead.

Then again if I became wealthy I would consider the Flexbody before the XPAN if I wanted to play with perspective.

Note: My 4,444th post on APUG.

Steve

 

[Eric Rose]

.

Note: My 4,444th post on APUG.

Steve

Now who's the one that should get out more and shoot some film LOL.

 

[Q.G.]

You can't get what you get using an XPan and a 30 mm lens by cropping an image produced by any lens available for the 6x6 Hasselblads.
But that may not be important to you. For people to who it is, the XPan is a fine thing to have.

 

[Sirius Glass]

You can't get what you get using an XPan and a 30 mm lens by cropping an image produced by any lens available for the 6x6 Hasselblads.
But that may not be important to you. For people to who it is, the XPan is a fine thing to have.

Yes, but I would not use it enough to make it worth buying. If I was a collector who would like to have it on display in a glass cabinet, then that would be something different. .

Steve

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I suspect that the need for a 30mm lens on 35mm accounts for a small percentage of Xpan users, though that is an interesting option. Considering Xpan shooters whom I know, I think it's more of a desire for a handheld 35mm rangefinder with a high quality panoramic option (as opposed, say, to APS camera with a panoramic setting that is just a crop from full frame), sort of the way Sylvia Plachy uses it, basically extending the range of what she normally does with a 35mm rangefinder.

Here's a good Tyler Hicks presentation shot with the Xpan--

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/07/06/weekinreview/kabul-multimedia/index.html

 

[bill schwab]

Excellent link David. Thanks.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian,
Do you have any experience with the Shen Hao 6x17 cameras? http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/product.asp?P_ID=2337&PT_ID=437
Tom

No Tom, no experience of that particular camera, it was an option that I looked at before buying my 617, but like the point David's making above I wanted to be able to work hand-held, I also looked at the Chinese extension backs. It came down to practicalities, I often carry the 617 and a 5x4 camera or even a 10x8.

I think if I hadn't almost completely stopped using 35mm I'd have bought an Xpan, and the wide lens, there's a lot to be said for the increased flexibility and shot's per roll of film

Ian

 

[Steve Smith]

When they can pick up a used Blad really cheap and just crop.

Another value for money option would be a Bronica ETRS with the wide format 35mm back and a 40mm lens.

This would be similar to the standard Xpan and 45mm lens setup.


Steve.

 

[Q.G.]

I suspect that the need for a 30mm lens on 35mm accounts for a small percentage of Xpan users, though that is an interesting option. Considering Xpan shooters whom I know, I think it's more of a desire for a handheld 35mm rangefinder with a high quality panoramic option [...]

Of course, yes.
The 30 mm on 65 mm wide film thing was pointed out in reply to the suggestion that you might as well crop 6x6.
Would it be the only consideration, there are quite a few better options still.

 

[lxdude]

Another value for money option would be a Bronica ETRS with the wide format 35mm back and a 40mm lens.

This would be similar to the standard Xpan and 45mm lens setup.


Steve.

Obviously cropping would accomplish the same thing thing, if the film is available in 120/220. I'm going to try just what you suggest with a roll of Kodachrome and a 40mm PE lens, which is supposed to be the best 40mm Bronica E-series lens. From what I understand, the XPan lenses are excellent across the frame, as they're designed for pano's, and of course the image is wider.

 

[epavelin]

Personally I found the XPan 45mm lens to be much sharper than equivalent medium format wideangles at the edges (I have tried the Bronica PS 50mm, Pentax 67 45mm and 55mm and Zeiss Distagon 50mm). It is incredibly sharp from edge to edge, presumably because it is a non-retrofocus design. For that reason I have always been disappointed with cropped MF frames compared with XPan panos, and the excellent lens quality is the main selling point of the XPan for me. You might get similar performance from the Mamiya 7 43mm lens, which is also a non-retrofocus design (also the 6x7 frame width is the same as an XPan).

 

[mhanc]

For me, speculation on spending BIG $$'s on a panoramic camera always turns to the Linhoff Technorama 6x12 or maybe even the 6x17. They have the desirable characteristics of being handheld and using 120 roll film. I must say that I really like the 1:2 aspect ratio and, like others posting here, also compose to the screen/ground-glass.

Anyone have any experience or thoughts on this camera system?

 

[Mike1234]

I bought a nice lightweight 4x5 and a Horseman 6x12 RFH. If I wanted 6x17 I would have kept my Canham MQC57 (I'd still have it had I not needed the cash) and bought the Canham 617 RFH. This works against the portability factor... unless one wants several lenses which means sveral bulky cones. It also works against the speed of use. However, it's strong points are use of all Scheimpflug movements and extreme bellows focusing ability.... wider use of focal lengths... closer shooting... lenger/shorter lenses, etc.

 

[Vincent Brady]

I just love my XPAN and find that it has changed my approach to composition and even to what I photograph. I have the 45mm & 90mm lens for it but find the I use the 45 mm most often. Because I use Delta 400 film I have no problem handholding it but I generally use my tripod. I changed my negative carrier to accomadate the longer neg. and find the resulting prints very satisifying. I don't accept Hasslebade's explaination about the EU's regulation putting an end to its production, but think rather that digital camera sales proved too much competition for it to survive.

 

[Steve Smith]

I don't accept Hasslebade's explaination about the EU's regulation putting an end to its production, but think rather that digital camera sales proved too much competition for it to survive.

Everyone else who makes electronic parts has adapted to using lead free solder (which I think was the main 'problem') so I don't think that was a legitamate excuse.


Steve.

 

[Ian Grant]

As the camera was made by Fuji it wasn'tnecessarily a Hassleblad decision.

Some other cameras disappeared for the same reasons notably the Pentax 67, mainly due to the investment needed to redesign and manufacture the new circuit boards and relatively low sales of the camera.

Ian

 

[elekm]

It's possible that between the onslaught digital, burdensome regulations regarding lead in solder and paint and declining sales, some camera makers figured, "Why bother?"

While you can take 6x6 or 6x9, if you want something really wide, and turn it into a panoramic image, the ability to do it easily was a big plus in favor of the Xpan. You get the result without having to take the first photo, crop it and then create a second image.