Help me: Xpan or VC 15mm

[francisco_fernandez_diez]

<p>Hello. I have a good deal with a Xpan plus 45 mm and as well a VC 15 mm plus v finder. (I own a bessa L)<br>

I,m asking for a advice.<br>

I know the price is very different but ,<br>

Don,t you think that the wide picture taken with a 15 mm allows a selection and make a panoramic format with a good quality?<br>

Xpan gives nearly double 35 mm format but the 15 Vc gives wider view.<br>

I love xpan, for me is the perfect 35 mm body, but the 45 mm lens....... It seems not wide enough.<br>

If you understand my point of view, please, give an advice.</p>

[SCL]

<p>I disagree...the 15 gives a wide view, but a much better alternative would be to use the Xpan 45mm and stitch the shots for a much higher detail panorama.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>"Wide" is an opinion thing, so I can't really help you there. But I will say that the xpan is one of my favorite film cameras ever. It's just really really neat to use.</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>"...15 mm allows a selection and make a panoramic format with a good quality."<br>

Negative area is a good deal smaller, is it not?</p>

[georg_s1]

<p>Francisco, <br>

the Xpan is a fantastic camera and a joy to use, but the 45mm is not very wide.<br>

Have you thought about a swing-lens-camera (Noblex 135, Widelux, Horizon)?<br>

They are cumbersome to use, but the resulting images are really wide.</p>

[SCL]

<p>The Xpan panoramic format is double the width of a standard 35mm negative if I recall correctly.</p>

[francisco_fernandez_diez]

<p>Sorry but I don,t like the cameras with giratory lens. I used a Noblex 120 and I didn,t like it.<br>

The negative of a Xpan is longer but the high is 24 mm acording with the 45 mm lens meanwhile the 15 mm gives "more things" .<br>

I dont say that Xpan is bad, not, it is beautiful but perhaphs comparing both lens, in a panoramic picture, is possible get the same field with both lenses.</p>

[Edwin Barkdoll]

The two options are really rather different and I think it really depends what you will use the camera for most.

 

If you like super wide shots I think the xpan and 45 combo will not satisfy you. I like the wider view and find myself using

the 30mm much more often although it is very expensive now.

 

On the other hand the extra bit of film real estate with the xpan may be important if you want to print large.

[philip_wilson]

<p>As Edwin says they are actually quite different. The XPAN will give a very different image from the 15mm. Even when you crop the 15mm to the same shape. Extreme wide angle lenses tend to have a significant impact on the image.. This is usually noticeable in the skies where the clouds tend to have a streaky pattern. The foreground also shows a different effect that that of a panoramic camera. here is an image i posted on last week's images to show what i mean. This is the 12mm CV on an M8 so effectively about 16mm</p><div></div>

[ilkka]

<p>Quite different animals, I'm afraid. I have them both. The 45 on XPan is like 24 on normal 35mm film, but of course in panorama format. So the 15 is quite a lot wider. If you crop the 15 you get a very small negative that does not produce a good image. You can easily print 1m long (3ft) from the XPan. If you need a wider lens for that, there is of course the very expensive 30. If you print big, you need medium format, and that is what the XPan essentially is. So very much depends on what you want to do with your images.</p>

[woolly1]

<p>Ok, just to throw another option into the mix.... how about a Fuji GSW690 with it's 65mm lens equivalent to 28mm FL and ability to crop whatever height you want. Cheaper too with a lot of emulsion acreage.<br>

Or stitching with a shift lens.</p>

<p>Just saying :)</p>

[fototheque]

<p>Get both.<br>

<a href="

[bms]

<p>Haven't shot the 15mm or XPan but plenty of 14 mm on full frame digital. Listen to the above, 15 mm is VERY wide. Matthew's link above says it all, really. 15mm on 35 mm film "cropped" to panorama format will give you a marginal quality IMO.</p>

[pc_b]

<p>Ilkka et al. are right: a 15mm is a superwideangle, the 45mm on the xpan simply a 25mm wideangle. Totally different imaging effects even if you crop your 15mm shots to 13.3x36mm in order to mimic the xpan ratio. Only special b+w films in special developers can be blown up to sizes 'normal' for xpan/mf panoramas.</p>

<p>p.s.: I own a Mamiya 7 system but rarely bother to use the adaptor for 135mm films. I just crop when I need it. In my experience, xpan panos don't stand up to Mamiya 7 panos so I never thought of investing into yet another system. The xpan 28mm lens (possiblities!) was tempting, though.</p>

[francisco_fernandez_diez]

<p>After listen your dicussions I,m convinced that Xpan is better, the best, option. best regards. friends</p>

[Rob F.]

<blockquote>

<p>The Xpan panoramic format is double the width of a standard 35mm negative if I recall correctly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not quite. The XPan produces a 65mm negative to the 36mm width of the 135 format. So: 65mm/36mm = 1.8. Close, but not double.</p>

[bill_pearce2]

<p>I own both an Xpan with all three lenses and a VC 15 in M mount for my M9. I will tell you that there is no comparison between the two, it's like comparing an M3 and a doorknob. In my experience, the 30 is the least useful of the Xpan lenses. The panos with the 45 are NO PROBLEM. It's more than wide enough for all normal uses, and frequently the 30 gives sterile lifeless photos, as it's just TOO wide.</p>

[didjiman]

<p>I use a Leica M9, I use an XPan (actually I have two XPan II), I think I know something about these cameras. Cropping M9 images to XPan ratio does not equal to even Tri-X film from the XPan. All 3 XPan lens are superb and I use them all. 30mm is not too wide if you have a use for it:</p>

<p><img src="http://richardmanphoto.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/9-20120504-Scanned-6.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="487" /></p>