Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi John, I know Nathan ALMOST got an XPan partially because of me, and Vick got an XPan partially because of me, so that makes me feel good to be such a good enabler :-) Yes, cropping is not quite the way to go since you lose so much. If you do that, you may as well get one of the Panny m4/3 that can do 16:9 natively - they have a 4/3 sensor such that it can do different ratio natively without cropping down from the 16 MP, and while 16:9 is not true pano, it's not bad either. Anyway, I can say for sure that a cropped M9 image does not have as much <whatever> as a native XPan frame. As for XPan, yes, I mostly shoot Tri-X/Acros 100 now and sometimes Neopan 1600. I develop my film using a 2-bath Pyrocat which is excellent in handling different contrast frames in the same roll - everything is flatten and you adjust the curve at post processing. Works wonder (for me). I did a whole pano book on mainly Japan with Provia and Astia. You can find it on Blurb searching for my name and "Full Circle." You should be able to preview the whole book. I shoot mainly with the 45 but also the 30 and 90mm. May be something like 50% 45 and the 25% each of 30 and 90. The 30mm is for the true ultra wide angle fan while the 90mm is for the true "I see everything in pano" fan :-) The best thing is I can put a 3 lens kit for the XPan AND a 3 lens set (heck 5 lens kit) for the M9 and put in a bag normally for a big dSLR with one big zoom lens :-) Well, I don't take telephoto or macro anyway :-) On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:14 PM, John Beal <johnbeal2 at gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback, folks. All great points to consider. > > Richard, I recall viewing your "Occupy" series several months ago and it > was one of the reasons I was considering something analog like a Widelux as > it was capable of capturing a panoramic image in one decisive sweep. > Several of your subjects, I'm guessing, would blur or move out of the > frame with a snap-n-stitch approach. I've also thought of using my > Voightlander 15mm and just masking the top and bottom thirds to create a > poor man's XPan, but that leaves a small negative (on my M6) if I wish to > enlarge. > > All of your panos are in black and white. Do you develop your own film? > Also, is the lens on your XPan the 30mm or 45mm? > > Thanks, John > > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Richard Man > <richard at richardmanphoto.com>wrote: > > > They are Infidels~! :-) > > > > No seriously, here's the deal: if you want "convenience" (as using > > Photoshop or other stitching software is convenient), digital is the way > to > > go. Check out the archive for some posting from Howard Cummer - he has > made > > hand swift pano stitching into an art. Basically, if you sweep steadily > and > > time it right, you don't even need a tripod and get quite excellent > > results. > > > > For landscape and even some moving objects, that's probably the way to > go. > > > > For some jaw dropping A+++++ fine art hand sweep and focus stacked stuff, > > search for the posting from Paul Roark. With stitched M9 or other digital > > panos, he get 30-100 megapixel images. > > > > However, a pano camera is a lot of fun. I have an XPan II and a TX-2 > (same > > thing) and I use them as much as my Leica. I started with doing mostly > > landscapes with them, but honestly, to do landscapes well, you need huge > > pixels nowadays, and that means digital back. So now I use the XPan also > > for street. Check out some of the portfolios: > > http://www.richardmanphoto.com/Portfolio/CalloftheOcean.pdf <-- > entirely > > XPan > > http://www.richardmanphoto.com/Portfolio/Yosemite2011.pdf <-- mostly > XPan > > http://richardmanphoto.com//Portfolio/Chinatown_web.pdf <-- XPan and M9 > > http://www.richardmanphoto.com/Portfolio/Vot99.pdf <-- XPan and M9 > > > > With XPan, I have printed up to 50+ inches long and the image looks good. > > > > The downside is... unless you print in darkroom (then you need a 6x7 > > capable enlarger), you will need to scan. You can get acceptable results > > using one of the new flatbed like the V500 or V750, but the best is the > > medium format film scanner. Unfortunately since Nikon terminated the > > product line, their LS-9000 is now typically goes for $3000 and up. > > > > As for XPan vs. Widelux. With XPan, you will get distortion on the edges > > just like a wide angle lens. With Widelux and other swing lens pano > camera, > > all objects appear "normal," regardless their position on the image. > > However, lines are curves and this may bother you, or not. > > > > Keep in mind that some people LOVE pano and you will get praises just for > > using a pano camera but other do not get pano and they think that part of > > the picture is missing. > > > > Hope this helps. Any more question, feel free to ask it here or email me > > off list. > > > > -- > > // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>