Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/31
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I really like the Xpan, but I sold my version one and kept the version 2, which is much more sophisticated. The real issue is what to do with the resultant negatives: they are hard to scan, and the devil to print in the darkroom. Ideally you need a MF scanner, and would print on roll paper to make wonderful format prints. My largest prints are on 20 x 24 paper halved and they are OK, but the images could be so much more stunning if they were a little bit larger Cheers > Henning > The XPan is certainly a good choice for handheld panorama photography - > but who makes that without tripod? The XPan format is finally quite > smaller than with 6x9 and upward. Another option between XPan and 4"x5" > would be a Brooks or Plaubel Verwide - 6x9 format, 47mm Angulon, "compact" > body, "affordable" price (Brooks around $1k, Plaubel a bit more, usually). > Didier > > > > >>>The Xpan works just like a slower Hexar RF. It's main downside are the >>> slow lenses, especially the 30 which needs the center filter, and then >>> has an effective aperture of f/9.5. The Cambos or 6x17s of course also >>> need center filters, but on a tripod that doesn't matter so much. I >>> usually shoot the 35 on the Cambo at f/11 and the others at f/16, and >>> then there is the center filter factor. At effective apertures of f/22 >>> and f/32, hand holding gets problematic. > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >