MirkoBoeddecker
MK Panorama Systems and ADOX are exploring the feasibility of producing a new panoramic camera for roll film in small batches.
To this end, we are keen to know whether there would be a market for such a product at all.
The advantages of analogue technology are obvious when it comes to the panorama format: unlike a sensor, the film can be curved and thus, theoretically without distortion, capture a super-panorama.
Of course, a camera like this, handmade in Germany in a very small batch, is no cheaper than a Russian finger-clamp camera from eBay.
On the other hand, however, there are also jobs where quality is still valued (yes, really – I’ve heard such things :-) and there the investment could pay for itself with just one commission.
…
In any case, we are supporting MK to the best of our ability and look forward to your feedback!
…
Best regards,
…
Mirko
…
Click here to visit the manufacturer’s website.
Photux
Even though my student budget would probably stand in the way of such a purchase for the time being: it’s a brilliant idea! And if I had to choose, I’d rather save up for a quality product with the right settings than buy overpriced plastic. (I like plastic cameras, but the ones without fancy names that cost €2.50. :D)
€
The resolution achievable with a good roll film is surely fantastic and needn’t shy away from (unnecessary) comparison with digital technology.
AchimBauer
Hi Mirko,
Don’t take this personally, but doesn’t Adox / Impex have enough irons in the fire already? And of all things, roll film – which is currently being somewhat neglected at Adox.
If we write off the Agfa / Adox Pan 400 (which never actually came out) as a lost cause, that leaves
Polywarmtone
?
CHS 100 II as roll film
?
A possible reissue of the Silvermax/Scala, if at all possible
?
A new Pan 25
?
And last but not least, there was speculation in another forum that Ilfochrome will continue to be produced, but only for finishers and as roll film, with chemicals in bulk packs, though ADOX could package it.
?
Nothing against the new camera, which I’ll probably never be able to afford. Nothing against new ideas, visions and dreams.
But every now and then, a few tangible results would be nice too.
?
My personal preference would be the CHS 100 II roll film.
?
Regards, Achim
ThomasPauly
What negative format does this result in?
?
If a large-format enlarger is required for processing (which is likely to be the case), the user base will be limited from the outset.
?
Commercial users will mostly work digitally. In any case, anyone can now take decent panoramic shots with little effort by stitching images together or simply panning the camera.
?
The remaining target group of film-based photographic artists and enthusiasts with a particular interest in panoramas is likely to be minuscule.
?
Conclusion: big idea, small market niche.
?
tepe
jochen53
Hello,
I find the idea of curved roll film fascinating in principle. One potential problem is getting today’s standard rigid polyester base to adopt a defined curvature (vacuum suction?). But where I have certain reservations – and thus also raise the question of the proposed negative format – is how are the negatives (perhaps 6 x 18 or 6 x 24 or even longer???) to be transferred to paper? Very few will be able to do this using traditional methods, unless as contact copying. With enlargement, the aforementioned problem of film flatness and the dust issue with glass stages become even more acute, requiring a special negative stage for glass-frame enlargers. The only alternative would then be digital processing. Is the image circle of a Nikon E-series 1:2.8/28 mm lens sufficient for this? I used it for a few months for 35mm and wasn’t exactly impressed by its performance.
Photux
A large-format enlarger isn’t a bad idea; you could knock together a makeshift negative stage out of cardboard. Or some sheet metal, provided you have the means to process it.
Paper would be a bit of a problem – with standard sheets, you could only enlarge a section (which defeats the purpose), or you’d end up with loads of waste. Cut-to-size paper by the metre could help here. All that’s missing are large trays for further processing.
€
I usually scan anyway, and my scanner should be able to handle anything up to 6x22.
Urnes
Hi Mirko,
The price would be in the same range as Noblex, wouldn’t it? 6x18 format? In that case, a 13x18 enlarger would be sufficient. However, suitable scanner masks should also be available.
Regards, Sven.
MirkoBoeddecker
What negative format does this produce?
Both the format and the slit width (time) are variable.
The exact increments haven’t been finalised yet. But 180° and 360° are definitely included.
€
@Achim
: Wrong! The camera helps. We’ve had to earn our living doing other things for years, money which we then plough back into our favourite hobby (film-making).
And this project is a building block :-)
TiMo
That’s certainly an exciting prospect, and if the camera supports a format that I can still use in my 4x5 enlarger, it’s definitely going on my wish list (whether I can actually afford it is another matter).
€
It’s a real shame about the PAN 400. It would be brilliant to have something like that available as 35mm, roll and sheet film.
€
Cheers, Tim
hallertauBW
Hello,
I’m also rather sceptical about the final format. I have a 6x6 enlarger and would most likely have to upgrade. <-Extra costs
It’s also worth noting that second-hand Hasselblad X-Pan cameras are currently priced at around €800.
Personally, I wouldn’t buy the camera even if it cost less than €1,000.
Best regards,
Guido
europanorama
The camera really ought to be able to take 220 film as well. I’m familiar with this issue with the Roundshot 65/70/220. 120 film is borderline as it’s too short at 85 cm.
Why not start offering 220 film as well? Or better still, 30-metre rolls.
There is a supplier of affordable film cutters. All variants for cutting from 35mm to 70mm.
Cutting 70mm film down to size (before or after exposure) is tedious, but feasible, e.g. if special films are not available in 120/220.
Cut 70mm perforated film using the cutter, which only removes the entire perforation on one side. Otherwise, it could block developing machines if there are perforation remnants on it.
€
The design idea comes from Gildas Lelostec: he is also behind the Panomachine from MK-Systeme (found some really great new products there).
Thomas B. Kunz/Knuzen from Berlin has the 50mm camera.
http://panorama.pagesperso-orange.fr/camera/voya_ca_e.html
28/50mm/120 Voyageur camera
Perhaps the new 28, 35, 50 models are based on this new version with a shutter speed range of 4 seconds to 1/125.
http://panorama.pagesperso-orange.fr/camera/voya_gdnew_e2.htm
ADOX/MK-Systeme – take note
KMZ-Zenit (Horizon panoramic cameras, etc.) is upgrading, including its quality management. The Digital-Horizont might yet come with a sensor larger than 5MP (x3) and 28mm equivalent. A model with shift capability, if priced at no more than 2,500 euros/USD, could have great potential.
mattes
Generally speaking, panoramas are an interesting prospect, and the fact that a new analogue camera is due to be released is very important and worthy of support. Admittedly, a new limited-edition camera is probably out of my reach, but perhaps some future owners will quickly lose interest and then part with their little treasure. If I want panoramas, I either take a picture with a GF and sacrifice everything superfluous, or I insert a 35mm cassette into a roll film chamber (a) in the 220 position. Admittedly, the flatness is rather Lomographic, but it works.
That brings me to my wishes. A curved film path is fine. No moving optics, but a magazine for swapping between 120 and 35mm film, and a focusing screen (which can be curved) for precise composition. A simple viewfinder with a spirit level is enough for me. If one could then use existing manual focus and autofocus lenses, that would be the icing on the cake.
Let’s move on to processing. There’s a lot of discussion here about the necessary enlargers – why not scan? The negatives/slides should fit on a scanner like the Epson 4990. With a suitable scanner, film lengths over 30cm could also be processed easily.
mattes?
Wolf_XL
...220 film has the disadvantage that it lacks a backing paper. This means that the mechanically straightforward method of advancing to the next frame via a ‘peephole’ on the reverse side is no longer viable – designing a transport mechanism that ensures consistent frame spacing regardless of the number of exposures already taken is anything but straightforward and cost-effective to manufacture...
