Xpan or Fuji TX

Discussion in 'Medium Format' started by wallacehenning, Jan 8, 2007.

  1. Hi, Im looking for some advice on the xpan, sorry if anyone see this on the leica fourm but I have read
    things on xpan in the leica fourm.

    I was thinking of getting a Fuji GSW-690 III but with some thinking on the format I want to work in and if I
    really need to shoot at that size, I think Ive decided to go for an xpan. I did some research on the xpan 1
    rather then the xpan 2 and I dont think I really need an xpan 2 so ill go for the 1 (well if I can get a xpan 2
    for cheap I will).

    But before I commit to it I was wondering what the difference is between the Hasselblad xpan and Fuji TX,
    Like lens quality, added features (less features)? Are the leses interchangeable? ect?
    (I did look for some Threads on this but couldn't find any)

    Also I was wondering if you can get a lens converter for like nikon to xpan or canon to xpan? Something
    like you can get for Hasselblad Medium Format Lenes to Canon SLR autofocus bodies. Or is this not
    possible because you cant see what your fousing like you can with an SLR?

    Any other advice on both cameras in anyway would be greatly appreciated..

    Thanks

    Wallace
     
  2. Having used both cameras (well the 67 version of the Fuji), the Xpan images I've seen are incredibly sharp. I was blown away. I did not shoot, nor have I see color images with the Xpan. The Fuji is very colorful but I don't think it's nearly the sharpness of the Xpan's 45mm.

    As for converters, I've been looking for a Leica R to Canon FD, so I've seen a lot of converters on eBay. I've never seen one for Xpan--probably because they're so rare. You could ask these guys about adapters, and whether they have access to them: http://www.fotodiox.com.
     
  3. Oh, I just realized we're talking apples and oranges here. You said a Fuji GSW, but then mention the TX. As you may know, the TX was made by Fuji. I've held one, but never shot it. It is virtually identical to the Hasselblad. I've heard the lenses are also just a re-badging between the TX and XPan, so I wouldn't expect any difference, but again, I haven't actually shot anything with the TX, plus they're somewhat rare in the USA.
     
  4. My understanding is the TX-1 is identical to the Xpan except the color of the body and name badging.
    Do not be so quick to write off the Fuji GW690III. The most amazing, sharpest glass I've ever shot and the negs/chromes will have your eyes popping out. And you could alway crop the 120 6x9 neg down to Xpan size pano and get the best of both worlds (minus the interchangeable lenses of course, but have you priced those Xpan lenses?)
    -Richard
    The Fuji Rangefinder Pages - www.fujirangefinder.com
     
  5. Hi

    The X-Pan and the TX are the same camera, it was a joint development between Fuji and Hasselblad. Sold as the Fuji in Asia and Hasselblad in Europe.

    I have a Haselbald unit and used it for the past 8 years, it is fantasic and the lens are very sharp. The only down side is that they are slow max f4 aperature, but it should not stop you doing anything wih them. They did three lenes 45mm standard, a 90mm and very expensive 30mm. No converters were made for the machines.
    One good thing is that you can swop between panoramic and 35mm size mid roll which adds to its flexability.

    Don't know about the Fuji 690 but from reading about them they have good reputations.

    Nick
     
  6. Michael, sorry for the misunderstanding, my fault! yeah the I did know the fujis are very
    good lenes and I know someone with a fuji 617, the lens is sooooooo sharp! you can
    nearly see into the future with it! haha So thats what made me think fuji could better. But
    as everyone is saying they are the same it has cleaned up that problem. Thanks for the link
    ill have to email them and see.

    Richard, I was very close to buying one on ebay, so much cheaper on the USA ebay then
    over here in the UK! So oneday I do plan on getting one. But also I would haved liked to
    use it for some street work and as it dosent have a built in meter it could get a bit of a
    pain.

    Nick, I didnt realise that it was a joint development, I just thought hasselblad sold off the
    rights for the camera or something like that. Two heads are better then one on making
    cameras!

    Thanks guys, been a big help!
     
  7. Xpan and TX are the same. The latter was the designation in Japan. One issue that may arise is that Hasselblad distributors in some (all?) countries won't work on the TX version, even if money is offered.

    At least this was the case when they were still available new. It might(should) be different know.

    They are great cameras and different to the big Fuji rangefinders. I have used a GSW690III and it is also great, but different...much bigger, much slower to use, no change of lenses, more expensive to run etc.

    BUT it does give a wonderfully big neg and it is certainly possible to crop it down. Strongly built, but noisy for a RF.

    It is a matter of working which is best suited.

    There are no adapters for to or from the Xpan as far as I know and certainly not for SLRs.

    There should be quite a few threads on both in the archives.
     
  8. Nick, thanks for your info on all, especially about about Hasselblad distributors not working
    on the TX. I was worried about what happens if either brake down! Now its pushing me
    towards the xpan.
     

Share This Page