View Full Version : A Digital Xpan? Would you buy it?
Just curious..It seems that anyone who shoots an Xpan, also loves it very much and I imagine its the panoramic format that is so seductive....so If a digital Xpan came out would you go for it? Or do all us Xpanners just love our film....??
Guy Bennett
05-03-2006, 21:57
I wouldn't buy one. I'm not interested in shooting pictures with a digital camera, Xpan or otherwise.
yup. Same feelings on my part. No digital for me. My film scanner is pushing it.
Yeah..I wouldn't buy it either because I am sure the price would be astronomical...Anyway I only shoot BW so I think film has a better look although on the computer screen it's hard to tell some time if its film or digital. I think you'll be able to tell if you look at a print though...
I guess it would have to feature two APS-C sensors ganged side-by-side to get the equivalent configuration and the pano proportions. That would certainly keep the price up there where XPan users expect it... :) The camera might be made a little smaller, would need shorter focal length lenses. And, hey, thought triggered by the Horseman stereo XPan, this dual-sensor setup might be just the ticket for the first digital stereo camera!
No interest in digital what so ever.
Not a very useful camera for the price it would command, I suspect. Panoramic stitching is so easy in the digital world.
Hey you APUG members up there;) Did you ever realise that the only truly digital medium is film? A silver crystal is either black or absent, no in-between, but a pixel is an analog device, as the output varies with the light intensity....:D
Hey Doug, what happened to your account? you suddenly turned into a newbie :confused:
Looks like I'm a minority here. For street shooting, makes no difference digital or film. Nevertheless I do enjoy shooting digital with monoblocs. For tweaking the light setup, it saves time compared to using Polaroids.
It also allows me to further refine a shot that works. Tiny bits of changes like moving chin up a bit or twisting shoulder a bit makes a difference for me. It's between "Yeah! I like the shot!" or "Hmm I like this one but if only ...."
Now if only digital response to light is logarithmic so highlights do not look strangely white...
No, I don't think you're a minority here :) I'd guess over sixty percent of posters on this forum use both film and digital, and some RD-1's exclusively digital. Imho the best way, the image counts and it seems to be a bit biased to blame the result on the method used.Anyway for panoramic single shots you are still stuck with film, which makes the digital X-pan probably not a bad idea after all.
Hey Doug, what happened to your account? you suddenly turned into a newbie :confused:And here I was trying to be incognito! Actually, the change was an egalitarian move in reaction to the flashy rotating diamond icon, and continued to avoid the triple gold stars. ;)
And here I was trying to be incognito! Actually, the change was an egalitarian move in reaction to the flashy rotating diamond icon, and continued to avoid the triple gold stars. ;)
And there I was thinking we in Europe were the real socialists..... *sigh*
I think the special aspect of the Xpan is looking through the viewfinder and seeing the framlines, then composing..I believe taking two pictures and stitching can be nice but a different experience...
JeffGreene
05-04-2006, 08:59
Hopefully I won't be too badly flamed, but the Dlux 2 has a "semi-panoramic" 16:9 mode, that some panoramaphiles have found attractive, at least in my local club. It, of course, is not a true rangefinder, but it is a neat little camera although noisy at the higher ISO's.
Actually, I would probably buy one as long as the cost wasn't stratospheric. Even if it didn't have interchangeable lenses, I think a panoramic digital camera would be fun to shoot. I hate messing with stitching multiple photos/scans together even though it's not that difficult and I'd love to be able to see the panorama at the time I shoot it.
I'd buy one. Digital or film - it's just a means to an end. The photo on the wall is what matters, not how you made it.
Guy Bennett
05-04-2006, 21:13
Digital or film - it's just a means to an end. The photo on the wall is what matters, not how you made it.
No doubt, but different tools *are* different, though they may be used to the same end. And I know that for me, I am much more interested in working with certain tools rather than others. Though I haven't shot extensively with digital cameras, I have used them enough to know that I do not enjoy taking pictures with them and thus tend to shoot less, in which case there may not be a photo on the wall at all. Basically, I don't like the plasticky feel of those I've tried out (and I'm certainly not interested in spending $3,000. or more to get a "substantial feeling" one, which would only last a couple of years anyway), I don't care for the digital interface I have to navigate through just to be able to set exposure manually, nor the fact that, in the end, I wind up with an image file that I have to access on a computer in order to have a print. I haven't yet been able to check out really high end digital prints, and therefore can't say how I feel about them or how they stack up against silver prints, but given my feelings about those digital cameras I've worked with, well, as long as there is an analogue tool, I'll stick with that.
I would prefer to avoid stitching not just for convenience but to better handle moving objects in the scene. I have done it for static scenes a couple of times, and it's fun... But I just ordered a mask & adaptor kit for pano 35mm in one of my medium format cameras, so it'll be interesting to see how that works out.
Hard to believe the panorama proportions won't be well-addressed by some digicam maker to fill this niche. Jeff, with the DLux 16:9, does that result in fewer pixels in the captured image? The Pano option on APS cameras effectively reduces resolution by instructing the printer to crop off the top and bottom of each frame... That approach would be a bit hard to take with an Epson R-D1, for instance, as it would turn the 6mp rig into about a 3mp one.
It would be very expensive to make a new panoramic format CCD. Then there is the added problem of the cosine 4th law with CCDs which can be a greater challenge than with film (but some compensation can be made with the firmware). I doubt the demand considering the much higher price would be finacially feasible. But they would be able to save a bit on the rangefinder mechanism - simply frame and shoot from the newly developed and very expensive panoramic format LCD monitor.
Just curious..It seems that anyone who shoots an Xpan, also loves it very much and I imagine its the panoramic format that is so seductive....so If a digital Xpan came out would you go for it? Or do all us Xpanners just love our film....??
I unfortunately doubt this camera will ever be produced. And as said previously mentioned, price would be astronomical for such a speciality digital camera.
Scotsnapper
05-05-2006, 14:14
Well I primarily use a digital SLR in my job and have been working with pro digital cameras for the last 4 years now. Having just bought an xpan i find it a delight using film again, and the xpan really is a format i enjoy using. However, being used to the "convenience" of using digital I would certainly snap up a digi xpan or equivalent if I could afford it. I have taken stitched pano's on my Nikon D2x and providing its done using a tripod, I have had good results, although it can be a pain stitching them together. now i have my xpan, i will shoot my pano's on that.
There are things a panoramic camera can do that we sometimes cannot acheive with post process stitching... For example if one is shooting a daylight architecture shot with people walking or vehicles moving in the foreground, stitching becomes much more tedious if not impossible.
Imagine if the assignment requires a series of panos! Ouch!
Since the digital imaging workflow is now an inevitable part of any professional photography, I imagine a digital panoramic camera is also inevitable at some point in time...
The Hasselblad / Fuji platform is as good as any for conversion to digital... Prohibitive prices for such gear? Professionals bill their clients equipment rental fees all the time. (Ideally of course! Clients are known to haggle too!)
Kev
A Digital Xpan? Would you buy it?
No.
GrahamWelland
05-05-2006, 15:40
:bang: Ok, I'll poke my head up above the trench and say YES!
I really enjoy using my XPan (although not the scanning & clean up) and the glass is second to none. Like another poster here, I've been using the Panosonic LX1 (Leica folks call it DLux 2 and pay extra for the priviledge), and it's a great digital pocket camera with 16:9 panoramic native capture mode with composition gridlines on the LCD etc. It takes nice shots and I never, ever, use it in standard 4:3 mode (in much the same way as I never use 35mm with the XPan).
I would be one of the few who'd welcome a digital XPan so long as it had a true optical viewfinder, the same level of Fuji glass and a superb sensor performance. Pixel counts I'm less bothered about so long as the colour capture was up to D2X/1DsII type of level and could take advantage of the glass.
I guess I'm one of those shooters who's also only happy shooting square images (6x6 equivalent) or panoramics. Generally I find standard format 35mm or digital equivalent a lot less satisfying that either a wider or square composition. Do some of us think 'square / wide' vs std. film ratio? Should I see a therapist?? :cool:
p.s. ... yes, I know I can crop etc, etc.... but it's not the same thing at all as composing in the camera.
Scotsnapper
05-05-2006, 23:29
A Digital Xpan? Would you buy it?
No.
Yes, but you know you like to have a Maccy D's now and again!
Yes, but you know you like to have a Maccy D's now and again!
Wouldn't be caught dead eating that c**p! If I do eat fast food I go to Subway. ;)
Scotsnapper
05-06-2006, 12:36
Wouldn't be caught dead eating that c**p! If I do eat fast food I go to Subway. ;)
Well good for you Andy, I prefer fish and chips myself! :p
Wouldn't be caught dead eating that c**p! If I do eat fast food I go to Subway. ;)
Very true, a Big King however is something I like to have every now and then, miles better than the c**p they sell at Mac D
JeffGreene
05-07-2006, 08:26
Hard to believe the panorama proportions won't be well-addressed by some digicam maker to fill this niche. Jeff, with the DLux 16:9, does that result in fewer pixels in the captured image? The Pano option on APS cameras effectively reduces resolution by instructing the printer to crop off the top and bottom of each frame... That approach would be a bit hard to take with an Epson R-D1, for instance, as it would turn the 6mp rig into about a 3mp one.
Actually, the native format for the LX1 is the 8.4 MP 16:9. With respect to pixels we are talking 16:9 (3840 X 2160, 8MP), 3:2 (3248 X 2160, 7MP), and finally the Panasonic/Samsung/Leica 4:3 (2880 X 2160, 6MP). The really neat thing about the camera that I like is its flexibility. The noise issue at the higher ISO's is a non-starter with neat image or noise ninja.
Jeff
The noise issue at the higher ISO's is a non-starter with neat image or noise ninja.
Jeff
While noise reduction software is useful (I use Neat Imege myself) high noise is always an issue since a too aggressive reduction tends to wipe out details as well and make the image look "plastiky".
That said I am a happy owner of the LX1 since I shoot RAW where noise is better dealt with, and image stablization helps using low shutter speed thus reducing the need of high iso.
Terence T
05-08-2006, 10:26
I'll gladly pick up a Digital Xpan if it were ever made though I doubt it will come at a sensible price.
On another note, it might be more useful if a MF Xpan were ever developed. The GX617 comes close but its bulkiness, the lack of an onboard meter, and other modern conveniences does not make it a worthy candidate for street photography.
RichardK01
05-10-2006, 18:52
I was at Hasselblad just today and asked about an Xpan digital back. H has not intention to make one and the person with whom I spoke ( a Hasselblad technician) indicated that he was unaware that anyone else was developing a back. He indicated that this was because of economic considerations - too expensive.
Just curious..It seems that anyone who shoots an Xpan, also loves it very much and I imagine its the panoramic format that is so seductive....so If a digital Xpan came out would you go for it? Or do all us Xpanners just love our film....??
I would get one if it could be made for a reasonable price (< $4K or so). Highly unlikely, of course.
On the other hand, it should be possible to build a digital Noblex/Widelux/Cirkut with a linear CCD like that used in scanners. Indeed, there is already a panoramic digital camera, the panoscan (http://www.panoscan.com/).
Stitching is not a substitute for a true panoramic camera. The thing I like most about my XPanII is that it can capture spontaneous scenes, unlike my Fuji G617. I have thought of making a special bracket to take 3 simultaneous pictures with 3 Canon Digital Rebels arranged in a circle around the nodal points of 35mm f/2 primes (Matrix style), but the combination would be incredibly heavy and unwieldy, and you would need lenses with a nodal point sufficiently ahead of the front lens element.
mikealex
05-27-2006, 18:08
I'd be the first in line for one.
You can play with the KODAK V570 as well. Good idea with 2 lenses and built-in stitching but the quality is far off. CRAP !
I still prefer the xpan i got last week :cool:
I guess I'm one of those shooters who's also only happy shooting square images (6x6 equivalent) or panoramics. Generally I find standard format 35mm or digital equivalent a lot less satisfying that either a wider or square composition. composing in the camera.
I wonder why no manufacturer tried to create a square format digi cam ?
cheers
I think the love for an XPAN has nothing to do with digital or analog.
There are a lot of handheld cameras that can shoot panorama, whether full time such as Noblex or Horizon, or those with an adapter such as M7II or Bronica MF.
What is intriguing about the XPAN is its ability to switch from one to another on the same roll of film. By far this is the only one available in the market and that was exactly the reason I talked myself into it at the start. It is the concept that I bought.
With other digital or analog cameras, one can crop whichever way he / she likes, using PS or darkroom development, since we all have that invisible frameline in mind after shooting panorama for a while.
If XPAAN were to go digital, that convenience about having both formats on the same roll no longer exists, and it certainly is not worth it anymore.
Hasselblad should be smart enough to understand this, since it is the designer of this concept, hence advantage in the first place.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.