PDA

View Full Version : inexpensive entry into panoramic photography



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

thegman
07-03-2011, 05:37 AM
Horizon Perfekt is a nice camera, better built than you'd expect, and the lens is remarkably sharp. Being a swing lens camera, you can get wonky horizons if you don't hold level, but it has a built in bubble level to help with this. I really like mine.

If I felt like spending a bit more money, I'd probably take a look at Gaoersi cameras.

Dan Fromm
07-03-2011, 10:14 AM
Darin, it took me a while to find this link -- too many bookmarks and this one not well identified -- but here's a maker of quite inexpensive rotational panoramic cameras. Their site is up but I'm not sure they're still making and selling cameras.

http://www.horsleycamera.com/

Inexpensive because not motorized. Hand cranked, I expect using one well takes practice.

mhcfires
07-03-2011, 11:08 AM
Darin, it took me a while to find this link -- too many bookmarks and this one not well identified -- but here's a maker of quite inexpensive rotational panoramic cameras. Their site is up but I'm not sure they're still making and selling cameras.

http://www.horsleycamera.com/

Inexpensive because not motorized. Hand cranked, I expect using one well takes practice.

Are you sure this was not posted on April 1?

I have a simple Panoramic camera, a Kodak Panoram 1. It works. :)

Steve Smith
07-03-2011, 12:07 PM
Horsley Camera is real. One of their cameras was featured in Amateur Photographer (UK magazine) a few years ago.


Steve.

somak
07-03-2011, 12:17 PM
Horsley cameras are for real. They used to sell their cameras in Ebay at one times( I got outbid every time :( ). Here's a flickr link.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/photowannabe/tags/horsleycameracom/

Vermeer, apart from making pinhole panoramics, used to sell 6x12 with angulon/rodenstock lenses. However they are not cheap. The link to that particular site is not functional anymore.

http://www.vermeer.viphost.pl/vermeer_to_order.html

piu58
07-04-2011, 12:58 AM
The Horizon(t)s have the advantage over the Horsleys that you can use a normal medium format enlarger. Most of the Horsley use medium format film which gives a better quality, of course.

Mustafa Umut Sarac
07-04-2011, 04:06 PM
I am not sure about Horsley Quality and they are basic as barn door but prices are more than mamiya deal.
Holga uses medium format film but it does not make it better than Horizon.
And white horizons , never used , in box comes for 170 dollars and its glass and optical tecnology cant be find at many cameras. White ones are better because their finish looks thick , black ones are matte and dont give the user to trust it to an impact , so if you dont trust a camera , you dont take picture with it.

Newt_on_Swings
07-04-2011, 10:33 PM
Problem with these cool cameras is how does one find an inexpensive enlarger to print these with. I would assume the only method would be to cut and scan these, and stitch them together then send it out for a digital print.

Making the pinhole camera with enlarging paper would be the cheapest way, with copies made from contact printing.

BetterSense
07-04-2011, 10:53 PM
I have/had a 360 degree 35mm camera. I almost made it 120, but with 35mm you can print over 180 degrees in a 4x5 enlarger.

chriscrawfordphoto
07-05-2011, 12:47 AM
How about a cheap medium format camera and crop the negative?

Works great. I've done it with my Mamiya 645.

http://chriscrawfordphoto.com/cw3/assets/product_full/s-countyline-farm.jpg


http://chriscrawfordphoto.com/cw3/assets/product_full/branstrator-fog5.jpg

Much cheaper than an Xpan, similar neg size when cropped. Actually, I think my crops are a bit bigger than an Xpan neg.

Craig Swensson
07-10-2011, 04:53 AM
I would get a Holga 6x12 pinhole camera, cut off the front and fit a lens at hyperfocal distance for f16.

Actually, that's what I was going to do, to see what I did instead, click on the 6x12 camera link below!


Steve.

Well i clicked on the link..and i am impressed, very cool.
regards

dwebb99
07-27-2011, 05:19 PM
Very Cool Steve.....you got me very interested indeed....great work my friend!

Steve Smith
07-27-2011, 05:51 PM
Very Cool Steve.....you got me very interested indeed....great work my friend!

Thanks. Some results here: http://jalbum.net/en/browse/user/album/979137/


Steve.

DBP
07-27-2011, 07:24 PM
Horizon or Horizon in 35mm. Panoram Kodak in 120. Old, big enlargers are cheap if you are patient.

Chipmonk
12-07-2011, 04:52 PM
Use Microsoft ICE (free) to stitch together individual frames taken from same location. Works quite well

jbbooks
12-15-2011, 07:58 PM
Is there an inexpensive entry into panoramic photography? Something that provides decent results?

Much as I like my XPan, they are not cheap and you are limited in the size of the print. On the other hand, the XPan cannot be beat for color slides that can be projected. More to your question, I would suggest starting with a 4x5 camera, either a press camera or a view camera for more movements.

For the least expensive, get a beater 4x5 Crown Graphic with a 127 lens and cut down a dark slide to mask the negative so that you only expose the upper or lower half, giving four exposures for each film holder in, approximately, a format of 2.83 to 1. Gives the same ratio as the XPan, but the larger negative can make a considerably larger print than what you can get with an XPan negative.

For more movements to give more perspective control, get a view camera and a lens with more coverage in 90mm or 120mm. This may require a graduated ND filter to eliminate excessive exposure fall off in the corners, depending on the lens. Get an even larger negative by acquiring a Da Yi style 6x17 roll film back. Do not bother with the 6x12, the extra size and versatility of the 6x17 is worth the difference in cost; just be sure your camera has a Graflex style back for it.

nsurit
12-19-2011, 08:33 AM
The choice really depends on what your definition of inexpensive happens to be. I would think it would also have something to do with how you plan to print/manage your output. For 6X17 images, my assumption is one would need an enlarger which would take 5X7 negatives. I have both a 6X17 back and a Sprocket Rocket. I've had a good bit of fun working with the Sprocket Rocket, shooting without the mask and printing with alternative processes. The Sprocket Rocket runs about $100. Either of the two choices I've suggested can give you material to print analog or digital. Bill Barber

Steve Smith
12-19-2011, 09:49 AM
Use Microsoft ICE (free) to stitch together individual frames taken from same location. Works quite well

With film?!!!


Steve.

c.d.ewen
12-19-2011, 11:44 AM
I'll give a fast shout-out to the Brooks Veriwide with 47mm Super Angulon. If I remember correctly, they covered 120, using 120/220. I can't speak to the price of the things now. I only scanned and stitched the negatives, but they didn't really need any correction to be joined. Masking and printing them would be beyond my meager capabilities, though. Any body ever try it?

Charley

EASmithV
12-29-2011, 03:41 AM
http://diyphotography.net/build-a-35mm-panoramic-pinhole-camera