Lachlan.
You miss 100% of the shots you never take. -- Wayne Gretzky
Again, in the interest of full information for the OP, 220 film is now very thin on the ground for options.
I also neglected to add the 2 Fuji Panoramic cameras to the options I listed.
The G617 and GX617 will shoot 220.
I also believe that the Horseman 617 shoots 220.
But, do your research. Do the films you intend to use come in 220? Do you switch film types often so don't need 220's added frames? Do you even want to shoot handheld?
Lachlan.
You miss 100% of the shots you never take. -- Wayne Gretzky
Your points are well taken. Using software to created panoramas does dictate being cautious in rapidly changing light, moving subjects and exposure times, not to mention close attention to a horizontal fixing of the camera AND a horizontal plane of rotation for the tripod head or camera base if handholding. I have hand held and successfully stitched up to three shots of 6X9 for close to 6X24.
But some examples that may get tricky are, for instance:
1) A marina full of power boats
2) A marina full of sail boats with tall masts
3) A marina full of sail boats with wind and rolling waves...
If you can image. The still marina with power boats will be easy at the stitches, but one must take care on directional change of sunlight reflecting on the water for exposure values. Taking those things into consideration, this shot should be easy to put together.
Second example will be the care taken to make sure the masts on the sail boats are fairly steady, as they will be an issue in the stitch areas of the panorama if moving much at all.
Third example, the rolling of sailboats and mast movement would like blow the image out at the stitch points, precluding any workable images.
So, yes, there are considerations and potential issues with stitched panoramas. However, knowing and working around these issues, I've still gotten more keeper than not, and found out my feelings about panoramic image production. I like it, and I have not spent any money on equipment to find that out. It remains to be seen whether I like it enough to purchase hundreds of dollars of equipment to continue, or plug along with my panoramic workaround.
I'm pretty sure that if I go with dedicated equipment, it will be a 6X17 Fuji, rather than a panoramic back for a large format camera.
I have used the cut down dark slide method on 4X5, achieving close to 6X12, and getting four pano's to a double film holder.
It just seems to me that packing a dedicated camera and using roll film is easier in getting around and setting up than any of the large format add_ons.
My only advice here is, if you already have lens/lenses mounted on Linhof-style boards, consider a camera that accepts these (whether this is a 4x5/5x7 with film back or something like the Shen Hao cameras is something you'll decide). Having access to multiple lenses at short notice is a very important criteria for me. It might/might not be for you.
Lachlan.
You miss 100% of the shots you never take. -- Wayne Gretzky
I have in the past, every now and then, used the dark slide mask to divide 13x18 (5x7), and even 8x10" transparencies in two panoramic images. Gorgeous!
Nowadays, the prohibitive color film prices and development are less than encouraging to follow that route. Not to mention that such films are getting rare...
For simplicity's and price sake, I went panoramic with 120: with a Horseman 6x12 back for the 4x5" cameras, and with a Horseman SW612Pro. Both ways allow for movements and interchangeability of lenses with the ease of use of roll film. If I had the funds for it, I would like to try the Horseman 617 (I find the Horseman models much more interesting than the Fuji, or even the Linhofs, because of the shift capabilities, ease of use of ground glass, etc. The Rodenstock lenses are GREAT!).
Another consideration is the 6x17 backs for 4x5 cameras, but I haven't made up my mind yet. That's probably the cheapest way to go, although you need a tripod (I always use one with such equipment anyway!).
If perspective correction is important for you, you should not buy something that doesn't allow for movements, no matter how nice and good it is. That's my modest opinion.
Greetings,
Rui
AL-MOST-LY PHOTOGRAPHY
There is, of course, the Glide 617 that nobody ever seems to mention.
Mind you, for the price, you could get a 2 lens Linhof system...
Lachlan.
You miss 100% of the shots you never take. -- Wayne Gretzky
None of these cameras have a Grafloc back -- is one of those a prerequisite? What are my options, or where can I go to learn about this stuff? My Google-fu seems to be weak today...
Yes, there were times that I dreamt about a Dr. Gilde camera...
But if some of the cameras that we've been discussing here are expensive, the Gilde ones are REALLY so.
220 film capability is, in my opinion, more and more irrelevant, as the market schrinks and shrinks. We can be happy that we still have something to shoot in 120! For how long?
As a matter of fact, I can't remember shooting any 220 film for the last 25 or so years. I also don't own any more a camera that can use it, I guess. I also don't miss it!
Greetings,
Rui
Bookmarks