Re: More on the Xpan

[Paul Salvaire <korop@xxxxxx>]

I saw a few original slides from the Xpan. Yes, with some evident
fall-off on the sides ofthe frame and, surprisingly enough, even more
blatantly with the 90 mm lens.
So what ? It happens that this appears (at first analysis) to be plain
mechanical vignetting : small front and back glass. Stop down 2 stops
(f/8) and it's gone. Or use the "small" 24x36 format and it is not
discernable.
To avoid this, the lens designer should have overdimensioned
(overengineered...)  the front and rear  groups, to avoid the "cat's eye
vignetting". Here goes the compact, 35 mm-like RF camera. Now for good
panoramas, you'll definitely need f/8. I can do with it. Will be a break
from stopping down to f/16-22, or using a graded filter and loosing
sharpness, from the times I had to tote a 6 x 17 camera. And had to
carry a "small" 6x4,5 Fuji along with it for normal framing.
Note : compared to the 6x17 cm, any 8x10 in. camera had also an
advantage of "virtual shift", by croppping in the 8" height... :-)
The xPan is obviously perfectible. And it feels a bit... fujiish. But
it's alone. And it still costs half what I paid for, a dozen years ago,
to get a Hasselblad SWC and a 35 mm 24x56 mm special back, for the exact
same wide field.