Re: XPan? Are you kidding?

[cmiller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Curt Miller,EMW)]

>--- Clyde Soles <csoles@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>From what I've gathered off this list, the
>Noblex and Roundshot are nice cameras but not suitable
>for rugged travel. The Xpan seems to have advantages
>for my purposes...
>
>--- Bob's answer:
>
>X-Pan advantage????!!!!! What freaking advantage are
>you talking about? Is this a joke?
>
>The X-Pan the worst damn excuse for a panorama camera
>ever! Nothing but a under achieving, over rated,
>grossly over priced, point and shoot.

I don't think this is an accurate observation.  In a very loosely defined
way, panoramic is, to a good segment of the population, an image that takes
a large swath of view and is much wider than it is high.

As far as quality is concerned, the Xpan is a very well engineered, solid
body with lenses that image exquisitely.  For the build quality, design,
etc., the Xpan is very well priced indeed.  Do you have any idea of what a
Leica costs?  Perhaps you don't like them either.

>The degrees of view coverage is pathetic, the worst of any "so
>called" professional panorama camera.

Again, this gets back to a definitional issue: "what is a panorama."  It
sounds like you have made the decision for everyone just what that's
supposed to mean.

>You would be better off with an any old 120/220 format camera, a
>wide angle lens and a pair of scissors.

Nope...not even close.  With a Hasselblad (or pick whichever other MF camera
you want to) I would need a 40mm lens to give me the same aov as with the
Xpan.  Forget about the body, do you have a clue about what a used 40mm
Hasselblad lens sells for?  Then, add a body and back...  And, mind you,
we're talking used.  Actually, you are really building a strong case for the
Xpan's reason for being.

>Both the Noblex and Roundshot are proven dependable
>cameras that are vastly superior in panoramic coverage.

So.  I expect the Xpan will also turn out to be proven and dependable, too.

>The Xpan is a medium format camera that only
>uses 35mm film. You get LESS of the view than you do
>with a regular Hassy, NOT MORE!

You don't get less, you get rectangular...and at a great price...with
interchangeable lenses, format change to 24x36 on-the-fly, TTL metering,
flash synch, no "smiles" or "frowns" and as wide a field of view as many
want...all at the price of the middle of the road Noblex 35mm.

>If I had the money for an Xpan I would buy both a
>Roundshot AND a Noblex.

You couldn't buy the Noblex and the Roundshot for the price of the Xpan,
unless you are talking about "strippers."

Having been around photography and cameras for more than 40 years, I have
come to learn that there are unique qualities to them all.  It isn't usually
as simple as saying this one's *better* than that one.  I don't own an Xpan
(though I would be tempted to buy one after this rousing dialogue).  I do
own Leicas and every once in a while someone will say something totally
stupid like "well, Nikons are better than Leicas...and Leicas are so way
overpriced and the quality is not worth it...", etc., etc., ad nauseum.  I
also own Nikons.  Leica and Nikon have totally different uses for me.  It's
sort of like saying "my toaster is better than my washing machine."

So, I'll end this note by saying "my toaster is better than my washing
machine"...and I dare anyone prove me wrong!

Merry Christmas to all,
Curt
=========================================================================
                       Curt Miller, M.P.A.
                  Classic Photography by Miller
              B&W Fine Art Photography and Printing
                       Using Minox to 4X5
              Co-founder of "The Berkshire Archive"

                       Elizabeth Mei Wong
   Birding with Women Outdoors at http://www.women-outdoors.org/
           or with Berkshire County's Hoffman Bird Club

          Pittsfield, Massachusetts - In the Berkshires
=========================================================================