Both Eyes Open – Fujifilm TX-1 Long Term Review

Both Eyes Open – Fujifilm TX-1 Long Term Review

2200 1122 Guest Author

A lot can change in eight years. I moved from one coast to the other, and back again; the pandemic hit, and lockdown came and went; I started playing Dungeons & Dragons and bought far too many dice. It was also during this time that a vast number of cameras passed through my hands— medium-format SLRs (like the Bronica SQ-A), compact point-and-shoots (such as the Minolta TC-1), and several rangefinders (a Leica M6 TTL and a Canon P among them). One of the few that’s stayed with me is the Fujifilm TX-1.

The Fujifilm TX-1 (also known as the Hasselblad XPan) is a camera defined by a single design directive: take true panoramic images using 35mm film without wasting a millimeter of material, and everything about it— from its design to its physical engineering— flows from that goal. The TX-1 is not a perfectly executed concept, and its deficiencies are hard to ignore, but it is fully deserving of its reputation as a unique and wonderful creative tool.

Sometimes the TX-1’s near-mythical status makes it hard to discuss objectively. It’s all good to wax poetic about the artistic merits of panoramas, but at the time of writing, obtaining a TX-1 can cost north of $3,000 USD. It’s a camera system that costs an enormous amount of money to get into, and one with a finite lifespan as spare parts disappear and electronics degrade.

Since 2016, I’ve shot approximately 1,589 frames through my TX-1. After many years, cameras, and rolls of film, the TX-1 has come out on top as my favorite creative tool. Shooting with this camera feels like looking at the world with both eyes open, to the point where using a ‘regular’ aspect ratio (such as 3:2 or 4:3) feels unnatural. What follows are my thoughts on this unusual device.

“Eye Contact” – 30/5.6

A 3:2 crop of the TX-1’s native 2.7:1 image area.

In Theory

Format

Blurring the line between medium format and 35mm, the Fujifilm TX-1 shoots 65x24mm images on 35mm film. The resulting images have an aspect ratio of approximately 2.7:1, making 16:9 (1.77:1) and even 6×12 (2:1) look tame by comparison. The TX-1 uses an extra-wide internal mask that allows it to expose an entire panoramic frame in one take, rather than cropping in from a standard 35mm frame or swinging a lens from one side to the other, as do some other panoramic cameras.

In order to achieve this feat, the TX-1’s three lenses— the Super-EBC Fujinon 45/4, 90/4, and 30/5.6— are designed to throw an image circle just a hair smaller than those used by 6×7 cameras (56x67mm). A rotary switch next to the viewfinder can be used to swap the camera to a standard 35mm framing mode, which can be mixed-and-matched with panoramic images as the user sees fit.

Physical

At first glance, the TX-1 looks like a slightly-stretched 35mm rangefinder. It’s large for a camera that uses 35mm film, yet more compact than most medium-format cameras. It boasts a handsome titanium/champagne finish and a rubberized black grip, making for a smart two-tone look (one variant has a wooden grip instead).

A standard 35mm film cassette measures roughly 32mm in diameter and 50.8 millimeters in height. By comparison, the TX-1’s body measures 51mm (L) x 166mm (W) x 82mm (H).

Your typical canned drink has a mass of around ~380g (give or take some for the specific ingredients involved, and based on North American cans); the TX-1 has a mass of ~720g (not counting batteries, accessories, or variances due to material finishes).

While compact for medium format glass, the lenses have some heft to them. Weighed without caps and hoods, the lenses clock in at:

  • 30/5.6 – 298g
  • 45/4 – 222g
  • 90/4 – 333g

The 30/5.6 and 90/4 both move the camera’s center of gravity forward considerably when mounted. The TX-1 with the 45/4 attached is surprisingly compact considering the camera’s capabilities. Even the 30/5.6 doesn’t add too much in the way of bulk (although attaching the lens hood increases the camera’s bulk by a fair amount). The 90/4, on the other hand, dramatically increases the overall amount of space the camera occupies, which can make it somewhat ungainly to stow in a bag or carry.

Controls

Although basic, the TX-1’s controls are more than adequate for a wide variety of shooting conditions. Most of the camera’s inputs are situated along the top deck, with some auxiliary functions accessed using the LCD panel and buttons on the back. The ISO selector dial is the sole exception, and is located on the front panel near the hand grip. This dial locks when set to DX, and is released by pressing in on the center button.

Aperture settings are controlled using a ring on the front of the mounted lens, with half-stop detents (there is no difference in feeling between changing from a half- to a full- stop). Shutter speed, power/drive mode, shutter release, and exposure compensation are all clustered on the right-hand side of the top deck. The shutter dial locks when set to [A] (aperture-priority), and is released by pressing the silver button in the center. Speeds can be set in full stops from 8 seconds through 1/1000th of a second (and a Bulb setting). The shutter release has a halfway detent that activates the meter. Drive mode (and the self-timer, which is fixed at 10s) are set by flicking a rotary switch that surrounds the back portion of the exposure compensation controls.

Exposure compensation is set (from -2 to +2) by twisting the top of the raised dial.

When the camera is powered on, a small LCD shows the number of shots remaining based on the current film format. The display updates when the mode is switched.

The back of the camera features a locking rotary switch that toggles the camera between image formats (panoramic or standard 35mm), as well as a small LCD that reads out basic information and rough battery status. Beneath the LCD are buttons for AEB, illumination, and manual rewind. A cutout window on the left-hand side shows the label of the currently loaded film cassette.

Viewfinder

The TX-1 has a panoramic viewfinder in the classical rangefinder style. Framelines are illuminated using a frosted window so that they remain bright and visible under most lighting conditions, and are keyed to the 45/4 and 90/4 lenses. Only one set of framelines is visible at any given time. The rangefinder patch is bright and clear, shaped like a rectangular oval and roughly in the center of view. The meter display is centered near the bottom of the viewfinder, with fairly typical – ● + lights that illuminate to indicate underexposure (-), correct exposure (●), and overexposure (+).  The +/- lights will flash if the center-weighted meter detects that you are significantly over/underexposing.

The 45/4 framelines come close to the edge of the frame, and are only slightly occluded by the lens itself. The 90/4 framelines are much smaller, and remain unobstructed despite the lens’ much larger visual footprint. The 30/5.6 lens is designed for use with an external viewfinder, and key up the 45/4 framelines in-camera. Its field of view is wider than the internal viewfinder, even with your eye pressed right against the plastic eyepiece.

In Practice

Composing

Composing the frame and subject is the start of the creative process. The TX-1’s extreme aspect ratio can make this very challenging at first; many compositions that would work in 3:2, 4:3, or 1:1 are very lopsided in 2.7:1. The wide fields of view also means that every shot has the potential to include a lot of extraneous detail and clutter. An additional challenge is that the extreme aspect ratio means that tilting and perspective are exaggerated. While software can correct for these to some extent, it usually does so via cropping/geometric distortion— both of which rapidly chew up valuable space.

In general, I find that the TX-1’s viewfinder is more than up to the task. Bright, clear, and expansive, there’s enough room outside both the 45mm and 90mm framelines to keep up awareness of what’s just out-of-frame and work accordingly (though wearing glasses will limit your peripheral view with the 45mm framelines). The parallax effect is only pronounced at close focus; in most cases, it’s not something I worry about.

With that being said, in my opinion there are two notable omissions.  The first is that there is no readout of the selected shutter speed. If you predominantly shoot using Sunny 16 or using an incident meter, you can keep your current settings in mind, but if you’re using aperture priority, you simply have to guess as to what shutter speed has been selected (the TX-2/XPAN II remedy this deficiency). The other ‘missing’ feature is a horizon guide. Because of the camera’s proclivity towards distortion, a horizontal guideline (or better, a level) would have been deeply helpful. I use a hotshoe mounted bubble level when shooting from the waist, but it’s something you really have to watch when shooting at eye level.

Generally, I find shots that involve long, sweeping lines or repeating patterns work very nicely with the panoramic format. When used deliberately, tilts and perspective shifts can be quite dramatic. Leading lines through and across the frame also work well, as does balancing subjects on opposite sides of the frame to ‘weight’ it evenly. This works both with wider and closer framing. Centered compositions can be used to considerable effect, despite being often derided as boring, and while rare, there is the occasional vertical subject that lends itself to a shot.

It can be a lot of work to learn to ‘see’ the world through this camera, but I think the results are worth it. For me, shooting with the TX-1 is like looking at the world with both eyes open— “regular” cameras feel very limiting by comparison. This is a camera where persistence and practice pay off. Once you get used to it, you’ll see wide frames everywhere.

Even a slight rotation in edit cuts out a substantial amount of image area.

“Horizons” – 45/4

Operation

Deciding on a composition is only part of the process. Actually executing it is just as important. A camera needs to be ‘good’ enough to allow its operator to take the desired picture, be it a portrait or a freeze-frame action shot. I’ve heard it said that the most boring thing you can do with a TX-1 is to take landscape photos with it. I don’t think that’s entirely fair, but it’s certainly true that this camera is quick and responsive enough to use in a variety of other circumstances.

The aperture rings and shutter speed dials in this system are quick to manipulate and have clear detents that make it easy to feel when you’re changing settings. The lack of in-finder displays for aperture and shutter speed mean that you have to keep these details in your head, but that’s true of many cameras. Your skill with a rangefinder is going to be the limiting factor in most circumstances.  The rangefinder in the TX-1 is quite accurate, and you can nail focus even with the long 90/4 lens quite consistently. When shooting with the wider lenses (particularly the 30/5.6), the high quality optics and deep depth of field enable similarly excellent results.

Both rangefinder- and zone-focusing are completely viable options. With the 45/4 and 90/4, I prefer using the rangefinder. With the 30/5.6, I often hang the camera near my waist using a neck strap and just make sure that the depth of field is where I want it to be. When doing this, I also tend to glance down at the bubble level right before firing the shutter to prevent accidental tilt.

If you prefer to go without a lens hood, be very wary when using the 45/4 and 30/5.6, as both lenses have a wide horizontal FOV (~72° for the 45/5, ~95° for the 30/5.6) and will easily catch stray fingers. While you can sometimes correct for this in a black and white image, it’s a much tougher mistake to fix when using color film. The 90/4 is substantially longer (with a narrower, ~40° FOV), and consequently less prone to this.

The shutter release is tactile and has two clearly-defined stages, making it easy to take a meter reading without firing a shot. As it’s not a threaded release, there’s no way to use this with a standard cable release for tripod shooting, but I don’t know that I have ever attached my TX-1 to a tripod, so that’s about the extent of my knowledge.

The shutter itself is not particularly noisy, but it’s a far cry from silent. The film wind is surprisingly quick considering how much film has to be transported with each shot; again, while I wouldn’t say it’s noisy, it’s not the most discreet either. People will definitely hear the camera in a quiet room; outside, it’s much less noticeable. The shutter fires quickly enough that you can capture moving subjects without much trouble.

Loading the camera is simple: you open the back by flipping up a small latch and pushing it upwards, swing the back door open, then slot in your cassette. Pull the leader over to the take-up spool such that the tip is just against the right-hand side of the chamber, then close the back. The camera will then wind the full roll onto the take-up spool, show the number of shots you have, and you’re ready to roll. The camera prewinds film so that it knows how many shots you have left no matter what combination of panoramic and standard frames you take. If you mix-and-match your frames, be aware that you may have made a real headache for yourself if you ever need to scan them. A standard 36exp roll of film will give you around 20 shots, and a 24exp somewhere around 12. I tend to bulk roll around 20 “regular” frames to give myself around 10 shots, which is my personal sweet spot if I’m aiming to finish a roll or two in any given outing.

Two CR2 batteries power the camera, and are installed via a screw-in cover on the bottom plate. I use rechargeable batteries, and find that they last for a very long time— both with the camera off and in use (the camera will go into standby fairly quickly, but wakes almost instantly with a half-press of the shutter release).

When out and about, the entire system fits into my ONA Prince Street bag very comfortably, with any combination of camera and lens fitting into the wider space I leave on one side. If I am only taking one other lens or a compact camera on the side, the ONA Bond Street works just as well. If I’m primarily shooting with the 45/4 or 90/4, I prefer to use a wrist strap and let the camera generally stay at my side. Neither of these lenses are my favorite to try and zone focus as I’m a poor judge of distance (at f/16, the hyperfocal setting on the 45/4 is good for subjects from 2m – infinity; on the 90/4, you get from 10m – infinity). With the 30/5.6, I usually wear the camera around my neck such that it hangs a little above my waist.  From this position, I can see the bubble level I’ve slotted into the hotshoe and easily fire the camera at a broad spread of what’s in front of me, without worrying too much about focus (at f/16, the hyperfocal setting catches subjects from just under 1m – infinity). A level is huge for this type of shooting, which helps you avoid “six-foot syndrome” (having too many shots come out from a bland eye-level view).

Thoughts

The highest praise I can afford the TX-1 is that I feel I have almost never missed a shot due to the camera. Opportunities lost have been due to operator error, a failure to prepare for the shot, to prefocus, to compose in time, to remain aware of my surroundings. In the field, the camera has always gotten out of my way and let me focus on photography.

To be fair, with a camera like this, the equipment generally has less input on the results than with more modern devices. There’s no autofocus system to fail, the meter is a simple center-weighted design, the autoexposure system is very basic— in sum, most of the shooting process falls on the photographer. You really do get the sense that the system was designed to really execute a specific function and nothing more.

Personally, I prefer this no-frills approach to shooting. When I first got started, I had Nikon SLRs with all the bells and whistles, but ultimately had to leave the system because the weight was not kind to my back. None of the mirrorless alternatives I’ve tried have felt nearly as accurate or quick in operation, and I found myself missing shots because the equipment didn’t keep up with my expectations. I would far rather lose an image due to my own failings. At least there, I know that I can work on getting better.

Every so often, I wish for a longer lens than the 90/4, but the system covers its bases very well between its three lenses. It would be hard to go longer or wider without compromising the compact designs that make this camera far more portable than alternatives, such as they are. Even still, it’s worth noting that the 30/5.6 and 90/4 tip the camera’s center of gravity forwards, and the physical length of the 90/4 can make the camera harder to stuff in a bag if your compartments are only big enough to accommodate the 45/4 or 30/5.6 (the latter of which gets much larger with the [rare] hood attached).

I predominantly use the TX-1 in NYC (I’ve never been a huge landscape enthusiast), and so a lot of my experiences with the camera focus on its handling and speed of operation rather than its absolute image quality. You will get excellent results from the glass, but the camera still can’t keep up with “true” medium format images from a pure resolution standpoint, to say nothing of even larger formats. Still, for a camera that uses regular 35mm film that I can bulk roll at my leisure and to my desired lengths and that produces results that I can scan one whole roll at a time on my Noritsu, I get more than enough to be satisfied. I’ve also long maintained that many of history’s most iconic images are far from technically perfect. The obsession with squeezing every last drop of “IQ” from your gear just feels like it misses the point for me.

Since I run a “dry” darkroom, I have no experience trying to do wet prints of panoramic negatives. I’d imagine it might be a bit trickier than using a more traditional aspect ratio, but I’ve unfortunately really no idea. I do want to try it at some point, though.

Rationale

I wanted to take a moment to address one of the most common comments I see regarding the TX-1: “why do it this way?”

It’s a valid question. There are a variety of ways to get to a panoramic image, the most obvious of which is to simply crop in post. There are also a number of cameras that achieve the effect in-camera using either a swing lens (like the Noblex or Widelux), or that mask the top and bottom of their usual frames (either via variable film gates or by running a smaller-format film through a carrier). My answer comes in two parts.

For me, getting as close as possible to the final crop in-camera matters a lot. You can work some real magic with editing (both in the darkroom and digitally), but the more you get right from the get-go, the easier and more natural your workflow will be. Being able to see how the frame will truly look, to see the world as the camera does, is perhaps the most basic way of achieving this. Otherwise, why use a viewfinder at all? A sufficiently wide lens and high-resolution medium could let you extract any number of possible frames and subjects from the world in front of you. But you’d lose something in doing this (nor would you be able to fix issues of perspective, etc.). When you’re looking for the world with a particular frame in mind, and have the ability to visualize it on the spot appropriately, I personally find you get better images.

Second, while absolute image quality is not a priority for me, I want enough to get the job done, and I want it without having to carry more than what’s strictly necessary. As mentioned earlier, the TX-1 is specifically engineered to accomplish a singular goal, and it does so with as little glass, metal, and rubber as it can get away with. You absolutely can use a medium format camera that supports using a panoramic 35mm back, but now you’re left with far more camera and lens than is needed. Bulk can be a barrier. If your camera’s left behind, it will take no images at all.

At the time of writing, I will note that I’ve just taken delivery of a Minolta P’s, which addresses the first issue (as it has a dedicated bright panoramic viewfinder) and half of the second issue (while it is a crop-frame panoramic camera, it is also quite compact compared to the TX-1). I look forward to seeing what this alternative has to offer, and perhaps will write more thoughts on that once I’ve had a chance to put it through its paces.

Conclusion

The TX-1 is ultimately an eccentric, niche camera that is even more limited by its high price and aging internals. There aren’t many ways to trial shooting with this system outside of seeing if you crop a lot of your images in post to a panoramic aspect ratio. Even then, restricting yourself to only being able to shoot these wide, sweeping shots in the field is another matter entirely. But to my mind, the ability to see and shoot in this beautiful format using a device that fits in a manageable bag— that is quick in the hand and sharp as a tack— has become completely indispensable.

It’s absolutely not a camera for everyone, and many people will never even get a chance to try it. But if you do, you might find yourself feeling the same way as I do; that at the end of the day, this is the camera that clicks.

Get your own Fujifilm TX-1 on eBay here

Shop for camera gear at our store F Stop Cameras


In addition to our staff writers, we accept articles from passionate and knowledgeable photo people. If you have an article idea that you’d like to publish on Casual Photophile, please submit it to our email address for articles – Casualphotophilearticles@gmail.com

Gale Lee is a hobbyist photographer who lives in NYC and primarily works with bulk-rolled black and white film.  Most new work is posted on their Mastodon (https://mastodon.social/@elengale), while older photos (and some new ones) are available on Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/elengale/).


Follow Casual Photophile on Youtube, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram

[Some of the links in this article will direct users to our affiliates at B&H Photo, Amazon, and eBay. By purchasing anything using these links, Casual Photophile may receive a small commission at no additional charge to you. This helps Casual Photophile produce the content we produce. Many thanks for your support.]

Guest Author

In addition to our staff writers, we accept articles from passionate and knowledgeable photo people. If you have an article idea that you'd like to publish on Casual Photophile, please submit it to our email address for articles - Casualphotophilearticles@gmail.com

All stories by:Guest Author
15 comments
  • Nice review, nice photos.

    I ran one roll of film through a loaner XPan back in 2002 and decided it wasn’t for me…but somehow I’ve never quite managed to lose my fascination with this camera system.

    • Hey Colin,

      Thanks for the compliment. It’s hard to blame you for the lingering interest– for many people who brush against the system it’ll leave them with a long-lasting “what if”. It’s just that kind of thing.

      In the meantime, I hope you’ve been enjoying shooting!

  • I also used one “back in the day” when they were new and regarded as the bee’s knees, so to say. In fact I’ve used both the ‘blad and the Fuji. Both were owned by friends who used them professionally, in the film era, and loved them to bits.

    I too have to say I was less than enthused with either. Lovely cameras, beautifully made and functioning, excellent results. But not quite for me.

    I can say the same for the classic Hasselblads. I’ve owned several, all bought secondhand as used models were inexpensive even at the usual crazily-expensive for everything Australian prices. And found them too bulky for me, plus the ergonomics clashed with my well-upholstered (back then anyway) midriff. Ramming a 501 into my belly never did suit me. Nor the way I had to hold the camera to photograph architecture or landscapes. But I prefer the 16 on 120 format, and the ’16 backs were ideal for my needs.

    Offhand all that really put me off the TX1 was the cost. Camera and lenses would have meant more than my credit rating even as a practicing architect could handle at the time (I never did have the money to pay cash for this kit).

    even today the used prices are silly ridiculous. One shop in Melbourne has/had a kit going for AUD $10,000+. At 65 US cents to our dollar that may not be wildly expensive to Americans or Europeans, but we here down under have to pay with $1 dollars. And the usual shop markups average 100%.

    All that, and then the cost of film. Nowadays buying a five-pack of 120 is more an investment than a purchase.

    However, I look at the scanned images of the several rolls of color I took with the two cameras, and I marvel at how good they are.The author’s posted images are also exceptional. Very much a camera for the ‘elite’ (other terms did come to mind, but being polite I opted not to go there) who can afford the indulgence. Which is what much film photography has now become.

    In every way, a great article, OP. May your TX-1 go on TX-1’ing for a very long time. Spare parts and all that, you know. Maybe buy a second non-operational body to cannibalise for parts, or is this feasible?

    Best from DANN

    • Howdy DANN,

      If I didn’t bulk-roll and already own my own scanner, I’d shoot far less than I do. I did some back-of-the-napkin math and my costs are in the range of ~$6.00/36exp (standard frames), which is around 21% of what I’d pay if I used a lab to develop and scan in the area– which is wild. I get that labs have got to keep the lights on, but it’s a major contributor to the expenses of shooting film today.

      As for the camera cost itself– I omitted this from the article, but I was incredibly fortunate in 2016 to acquire the camera, 45/4, and 90/4 in one go (plus accessories) for around ~$2,400. At the time, I was working in the securities sector and had just gotten paid out my first bonus. I left the industry not long after (I was getting pressured to be more lax in my oversight and resigned rather than compromise), but I certainly kept the camera I’d worked hard to obtain.

      The 30/5.6 I acquired many years later for about the same cost as the entire rest of the system. That lens is probably the least important for most people, but boy would you not know it from the price.

      I very much am not rich, but I was lucky to be able to save enough to pick up this camera and hold onto it. I’d love a second functional body so that I could keep one loaded with high-speed film for night shooting, but that’s a pipe dream right now. If my current one fails, though…well, I guess I’ll be going hungry for a while until I can pay off a new one.

      • Around 2004, B&H had the 3 lenses listed at:
        30/5.6: $2849.95
        45/4: $569.95
        90/4: $689.95

        The 30mm was always significantly more than the others – so I’m not surprised to see it still more expensive on the secondhand market. When the system was first introduced in 1998, the 30mm wasn’t even offered – it came later – I have an original XPan sales brochure which doesn’t have any mention of the 30mm lens.

  • A few things worth mentioning from my experience….

    –“The 30/5.6 and 90/4 both move the camera’s center of gravity forward considerably when mounted.”
    To frame such an enormous scene properly, the 30mm benefits greatly from the external finder, which oddly enough is radically different on the Fujifilm than the Hasselblad iteration. These shift the weight back to the camera’s center of mass.

    –Mention should be made of the central ND filter, absolutely needed for the 30, much less so for the 45 and not much at all on the 90. With the 30, vignetting becomes severe without it. Downside of course is that it turns a dim ƒ/5.6 lens, dimmer still.

    –The lenses have a native adapter made by Hasselblad for its XD cameras, so if the TX/XPan body does give up the ghost, new digital Hassys will happily host them, albeit on a smaller format.

    –The ability to switch format from 56 x 24 to standard 35 is a feature that shouldn’t be overlooked. Scenes that lend themselves to cinematic perspective aren’t the norm, particularly when traveling, so being able to switch on the fly adds great flexibility, precluding the need for an accompanying full frame camera.

    • Good points. One small typo – the panoramic negatives are 65mm wide, not 56mm.

    • Hi Ed,

      Thanks for your thoughts! I noticed the odd differentiation between the Fujifilm and Hasselblad iterations of the external finder; it seems like it would have needlessly overcomplicated an already-niche supply chain to have two separate manufacturing lines for an identical part. Just doing different finishes would have been enough to make it clear which one was to go with which camera.

      As to your second and third points: the 90/4 is still left literally hanging out front without something else on the camera, though it’s not unmanageable (neither is the 30/5.6), though it’s definitely noticeable. With regards to the central ND filter– I have never once felt I needed it (particularly with modern film latitude and vignetting correction being readily available in post), and so I have never used mine. The camera drinks enough light as-is; I don’t want to give up any scrap of it that I can avoid when shooting in less-favorable conditions.

      I believe I’ve also seen an adapter for Fujifilm’s GFX cameras, which also to my understanding carry a built-in crop mode for the viewfinder and image that matches the 65×24 format. This will probably be my preferred route in the event that my film TX-1 dies, though there’s still a crop factor to be contended with with the GFX sensor.

      Since I scan on a Noritsu LS-600 which demands equal frame spacing, alternating between modes is not a practical option for me. I do appreciate that the functionality is there though for photographers who want to be able to switch it up, though– it’s a smart bit of design that costs really nothing if you don’t use it.

      Cheers!

  • Hi,
    The cable release socket is on the left just above the back release latch, takes any standard old school cable release.
    Great review, Mark

  • Great write up! Truly a beautiful piece of kit and some wonderful results. I am glad that Fuji has allowed the design philosophy that brought about this monster to continue to influence its digital line. I love my tiny X-E3 and loved my old X-Pro1 (RIP), and they feel like the great grandchildren of this legendary performer. Thanks for sharing your long term thoughts!

  • Great review. One small point, there is a cable release socket on the left end above the door latch. Takes any old cable release.
    All the best, Mark

  • Nice review, and love the photo of the helicopter!
    I noticed in the comments you mentioned the ND filter but it would have been cool to mention it in the article. The 45 does vignette heavily w/o it and many of your pics show that. You can only lift underexposure so much w software – the dynamic range is nothing like digital.
    I swapped out my TX-1 for the TX-2 as the achilles heel on the TX-1 is the switch that turns the camera on. That will become notchy until it fails with no replacement parts available. It’s why Fuji redesigned it – as well as other features – on the TX-2/Xpan 2.

    I also use other p&s cameras that have the pano setting – where it masks off the frame. While initially one could say why not just crop in post?, the thing is by shooting in the pano mode you are committing to the image with no going back. This adds discipline to your compositions and really does make a difference. The better p&s that have the pano mode will also physically mask off the viewfinder – the lesser ones just have permanently marked dotted lines to let you know what the pano setting would look like.
    My Fuji Work Record and Pentax Espio 24EW mask the VF off, my Nikon LiteTouch AF600 has the lamer dotted lines.

    Report back when you get your Minolta P! I’ve always been interested in that one and I think Hamish once tested it.

  • Hi Gale,

    I enjoyed your article very much.
    I have been a Leica shooter for years on. Going through different models of Leica film and digital cameras, I can say that the M6 and M9 have consistently been by my side, always paired with a good 35mm.
    I have the opportunity to acquire to acquire the XPAN a little over a year ago, complete with the 45mm and the 90mm.
    Since then, I have to confess I have consistently cheated on my Leicas, which are now left taking dust.

    While I still love the cameras and the format, they have been time and again losing the battle when it’s time for me to pick a camera to use for the day.

    To your article I’ll only add a few words of joy to the 30mm finder (I finally got the 30mm with its finder a couple of months ago). The 30mm lens itself is an awesome lens to shoot with. Love the character of it. But the finder is glory!
    Like waking up in the morning and opening wide the windows in your room just to enjoy the mornings first light of the day.

    I guess the XPAN (and the TX’s) is one of those love or hate things. In my case it was love, so I quite get you. It can be seen on your great pictures. Thanks for sharing,

  • I think they point is lost on many why an X pan or panoramic format is a good idea.

    The camera allows you to use a 45mm lens which is a normal perspective equivalent to your eyesight and capture a wide-angle image equivalent to a 28mm lens without (about 60% of 45mm) without the distortion of a 28mm lens. It’s a medium format lens on a 35mm body capturing the width of a medium format film using a 35mm roll of film. Ordinarily 28mm lenses in 35mm format distortion the edges and depth of an image. For example taking a portrait with a 28mm lens can distort the length of the arms or may the face look more like an oblong rather than a circle.

    Using a 28mm in a land scape image can make the trees on the edge or the image curve inwards. It also exaggerates how far away the scenery is relative to where the camera is.

    Notice hat the corners of the image above are not distorted in the X pan images. If you tried to take the same image with a 28mm, then the outer areas of the image would have small curve in them or be elongated and stretched.

    The X pan has none of the distortion that you would experience with a 28mm lens but it allows you to include all of the area around the central subject that you would have captured with the 28mm without the distortion and keep a normal perspective that you would see with your eyes.

    Modern computer algorithms in Lightroom can simulate a 45mm or eliminate the distortion but nothing does it better than a panoramic lens.

Leave a Reply

Guest Author

In addition to our staff writers, we accept articles from passionate and knowledgeable photo people. If you have an article idea that you'd like to publish on Casual Photophile, please submit it to our email address for articles - Casualphotophilearticles@gmail.com

All stories by:Guest Author