MF / Xpan depth of field

i'm considering getting an Xpan II before they're discontinued (in

europe), but am still weighing up the pros and cons (ie, cost!)

one thing i'm unsure about, being someone more used to SLRs and 'fast'

primes, is how the 'slow' f4 lens (i'm thinking of the 45mm) would

create depth of field. I'd be using the camera mainly for travel,

architecture, and street shooting, and i currently use shallow DOF a

fair amount... f4 on 35mm, at a non-telephoto focal length, isn't

-that- shallow... but then the lens on an Xpan is really a MF lens,

even if you're shooting with a regular 24x36mm frame. So how does that

work for the Xpan? Could I expect a shallower DOF at f4/45mm than i

would with, same, my SLR's 24mm at f4, or would it be more or less the

same? How does it equate?

Hi

I do not think that the DOF @ F4 is that shallow as in 24*36 mode it will act as a normal prime lens.

However, if I remeber rightly, when the camera is in panoramic mode 65*24 then the angle of view is equivalent to a 24mm lens, but using the lens at F4 in this mode will cause you to get uneven exposure across the frame (common to all panoramic cameras unless you use a centre filter) and it then is a case of using F8 upwards to get the best results.

I have an Xpan 1 and it is great

HTH

Nick

Mark,

All the answers above are correct, essentially you will get roughly the same performance as a 50mm at f4 (not that shallow).

If you're buying an XPAN to recreate the same technical approach you're using today then I think you're missing a trick. The great thing about this camera is that it will allow you to explore an alternative technical approach to your travel and lanscape photos. When I first got mine I was really struggling to recreate my normal colour, filtered lanscape shots. I just couldn't get on with the camera in the same way as my 500cm. Then I changed strategies, deciding use this camera to create a completely different sytle of print. Instead of colour film I chose B&W (XP2), instead of square I obviously had the panorama, instead of tripod=mounted I often use it hand-held etc.......I couldn't be more pleased with the results. A tiny amount of the work is shown on my website under the B&W gallery at www.tonyestcourt.co.uk

The XPAN's a great camera if you can afford it. If you use it for 6 months and dont like it I dont think you'll lose too much money.

Just in case your'e tempted, my local shop has an E++ mk2 for just over ﾣ1000, thats a big discount off the new price. The're a registered blad dealer.

http://www.westcliffphoto.com

Depth of field does not change based on format, only based on aperture and the focal

length

of the lens. For example, the Xpan 45mm lens at f/5.6 will have very similar depth of field

to

a 50mm lens at f/5.6 on your SLR, or to the Mamiya 7II 43mm lens at f/5.6. So while a

45mm

lens on a medium format camera may cover a very wide angle, it will have the same depth

of

field as it would on any format. That is why large format photographers have to stop down

the lens a great deal and resort to camera movements -- their standard lens is a 210mm

and to get adequate depth of field, you need f/22 or smaller. <P>So, the 24mm SLR wide

angle will have much more depth of field than your Xpan lens, but if you like that, then it

should be fine. <P>This was taken around f/4, and as you can see there is not a huge

amount of DOF given the distant background: <P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/courthouse-pole-xpan.jpg">

I have had my XPan II with the 45mm and 90mm lenses for 9 months now and adore it. I became captivated by the XPan when I borrowed one for 3 weeks and could not put it down. Camera and lenses are superb.

But, I learned quickly that it is a mistake to see the XPan as a 35mm rangefinder capable of 1.8x 35mm frames panorama images (50% horizontal 6x7 frames). It is more correctly seen as an MF camera using 35mm film and enabling 35mm frames. Then I really understood it.

So, in that light f4 is NOT slow. I only shoot panorama images with it and have never found any problem with the range of DOF available using all apertures. Of course the 90mm enables greater OOF than does the 45mm - simply because one is a 90mm focal length and the other is a wider 45mm focal length. But, others will have views on the range of DOF and degree of OOF at f4 available when shooting in 35mm mode.

For me when I want to shoot 35mm and have the advantage of more extreme DOF I use my Leica M7. The XPan is no substitute for a "dedicated" 35mm rangefinder - nor does it try to be.

thanks for all the answers; i'm not really looking to recreate what i currently do, but with an xpan (what would be the point?), but i know that if i used it while travelling, it would be the only camera i'd have with me, and i wouldn't want to use panoramas all the time. i'm also just trying to understand what the camera is all about before taking the plunge - i know if i do get one, i'll probably end up adapting my style somewhat, but that would only happen after the fact... it doesn't help me decide to spend money on it!

what do you all think is going to happen to prices now that it's discontinued in europe? most film cameras are going down in price, but the xpan is a little different in that it fills it's own niche, and is something of a 'luxury' item in camera terms (at least, to many amateurs).

Mark, no one can tell you if any camera is for you. But your research should give you a better understanding of what this wonderful and unique camera actually is; its good and bad points. Also the saying that there are different horses for different courses is so VERY TRUE and especially applies to the XPan.

Can I suggest some ways you can decide if the XPan is worth getting into:

1. decide if you like rangefinder photography and the benefits and limitations rangefinder cameras offer. If not, then just move on. You MUST connect with rangefinder photography.

2. closely examine the specs and features - it has great build quality and features but it does have its own Achilles heal. Decide if those factors really matter at all to you.

3. Look at the specific enhancements on the XPan II over the I. Decide if htey are "must haves" for you. Then you will know at what cost you can enter and if that itself is a hurdle. For me having the shutter speed shown in the viewfinder and not just on the LCD was a must.

4. Consider if 45mm 30mm 90mm are sufficient foal length options in both panorama and 35mm modes - if you feel that is limiting then again move on.

If you can trial any XPan (does not matter if a I or a II) by loan or rent, do so for a few days of shooting - get to know and UNDERSTAND what it really is. That for me was so compelling (after years of me bagging the XPan I became adoring of it!).

I have written a full essay as a full review of the XPan and with add ons after longer term use. If you like you can email me off-line and I will email the PDF to you by return.

By the way, I have converesed with many Xpan I owners and not one is compelled to trade up to the II - they would love the new features, but see no need to spend the extra money.

I also know guys who like me bagged it as a weird silly idea who now own one and are even planning to add the 30mm (expensive stuff) to their 45mm and 90mm kits.

And like you say it is a sensationally convenient compact kit for a travel trip. With great 800asa and 1600asa films about I have never found f4 a concern in lower light.

I own a Leica M7 and 35, 50, 90, 135mm Leica lenses which are magnificent. But it is so soooooooo hard to see any optical quality difference between the Fujinon and Leica (latest editions) lenses.