To me, every frame you captured with the Hasselblad felt complete, magnificent in every aspect. If judged purely by the photos, the Hasselblad in your hands produces deep, beautifully composed, and fully finished shots that are hard to criticize. The Widelux, on the other hand, provides that ultra-wide perspective on life, which, in my opinion, makes it harder to focus on the essence of the shot by showing 'too much'.
Awww that is much too kind!! I definitely agree the xpan allows for much more intentional framing, which was an exciting thing to try with the panoramic format. The Widelux photos can definitely feel like too much info sometimes too. I appreciate your feedback, and thanks so much for watching!!
Lovely video. Thank you! I own both - Xpan II and Widelux F8, and I think of them as very different beasts. Without doubt, the Xpan is the far "better" camera, with phenomenal image quality and more finessed control, but there's something about the Widelux that's just terrific to use. It's actually fun, in an almost "toy camera" kind of way. It makes you want to play and experiment. The viewfinder doesn't really come close to showing the entire field of view, so composition requires a degree of imagination and luck, and using the arrows on top. Awaiting the results is like unwrapping a gift (sometimes it's just what you wanted, and sometimes it's just another pair of socks). The pano aspect ratios mean a compositional learning curve with both. For too long, I was shooting mostly simple planar images with the Xpan because I couldn't confidently wrangle the contents of the frame when I ventured from that. They would escape me, leading to imbalance or an excess of dead space. It took some time to embrace it and I still sometimes feel like I'm hemmed-in vertically - if I'm far enough back that I'm not cropping the top or bottom, there's a LOT of space either side. It's an eye that's still developing. The Widelux, on the other hand, never feels to me like it's cutting things off vertically, maybe because t's a 26mm lens inside that rotating turret. It's more about taming the far reaches of the frame - or not, which can be half the fun. The general key to the Widelux is to get in MUCH closer than you think you should be (look at some of Jeff Bridges' arm's-length selfies, for instance). The 26mm lens means that pretty much everything is in focus at f/11, so get in there! As Laura says in the video, the limitations require you to think ahead. For me, that means a picking a film whose speed will allow me to shoot mostly at f/ll (f/8 at a pinch). Then there's nothing to do but look for a scene. Interestingly, although the Widelux has nearly twice as wide an angle of view than the standard Xpan lens (140º vs 74º), the Xpan has a wider aspect ratio (24x65mm vs the Widelux 24x59mm).
I have the Widelux and Horizon Perfect, the Russian one's lens is sharper, and has longer exposures. As for the Xpan, Ive modified a standard Hasselblad magazine to shoot 22 wide panos, and its nice, but much heavier to carry.
I modified a Bronica GS-1 220 back (rails for film flatness), plus ordinary 120-135 adapters and two 135 cartidges for both side of film (one reverse spulled) and I can do 24x69mm panos. 🙂 I lack only a scan solution so far 😐 For Roundshot alike pictures I use a 16mm fisheye on a DSLR and the imado Hemi plugin for PS to "de-fisheye" the picture. Unfortunately the company went out of buisness. Pro: - Easy - Would work also for scans from analog. - Single shot, you could even use flash Cons: - movent style of a roundshot camera does not work. - Lower picture quality at the edges. // There is also a FISYE2PANO script for Imagemagick, and there might be more...
I have the old version of that, the Horizont with a T. I also have the Kompakt, but the Horizont is pretty cool too. It's fully metal and looks pretty dope.
@ Yeah, the Horizont isn't the sharpest when the lens is wide open, that's for sure. For that the Kompakt worked a little better for me. I'm looking to get a Horizon 202 to see if it's a good alternative to the Horizont and Kompakt.
The downside of all designs of the Hasselblad X-pan and the Widelux, Horizon, ... the Fuji GX617, Linhof Technorama and many more is that often, that they can not shift the lens up. For sure you do not need this for any kind of pictures, as Koudelka showed impressive in "Shooting Holy Land" where he used at least two Fuji GX617 (and a X-pan), but for landscape you often wish such feature. Here is a dedicated panorama camera like the Shen-Hao (see Nick Carver), an technical camera from Alvandi or similar, and back for a bellows camera, etc. of advantage. Or you simply shoot on 120 and crop the pano out of it. You can buy a lot of film until you get a dedicated camera or or just back is paid.
I think maybe the Widelux by a hair , both good cameras but I think we connect better with the mechanical side than the electronic side . Nice Video , thank you
I enjoyed the warmer Portra images from the Widelux. I do wonder how the negs would print differently in a darkroom. A few questions I looked up after was focal length differences. The Widelux looks like it's 26mm, even wider than the 30mm lens option versus for the XPAN! I was also wondering the negative size differences. I was surprised that the Widelux was less wide (24mm x 59mm) than the XPAN (24mm x 65mm). Hopefully ChatGPT was right in both these questions. If I got anything wrong, feel free to correct. :) Really enjoyed the comparison, thank you!
That is so interesting- I will definitely have to check out the negatives and get back. But I believe it though- in the comparison shots it seems like the xpan photos could be a little wider (they are a bit smaller in height since I had to reframe to match the sizes, if that makes sense). But that is correct about the lens! The Widelux is a 26mm.
I always dreamt of an X-Pan, altough I know I´ll never risk the money for a potential paperweight if it breaks. I could buy a Widelux F7 for 1750€, which now I´m considering. Bought the GFX50R to shoot in that format, but I´m tempted to switch back to film for this. I wish the old APS films were still a thing, the "half frame" brother the panorama format on 35mm.
I totally agree- I think if it were cheaper I would like the xpan more but it is just so dang expensive. And that’s great!! I truly love my F6 (as you can see haha). What did you like best about the APS films??
@@femigod I had a Pentax Efina APS point and shoot back in the late 90ies and I shot hundrets of photos in the 25x10 ratio. It was cheap and convenient and some of the photos I took back then are still some of my favorites.
The widelux definitely has a magic to it. I think the Hasselblad shots, maybe because of the longer focal lenghts, come off as cropped medium format. Like when I see an xpan shot- I just want to see beyond the edges of the frame, but every widelux shot is it's own little wrapped up world.
I love this. I think that’s what bothers me about it too- the xpan images can feel too contained and overall flatter. I think part of why I feel that way might be for the fact that its a 45mm lens, so the image is much more compressed too.
@@femigod I will say though, personally for my own photography the fixed focus would be such a source of frustration (and like as people shooting film cameras in 2025, it's not like we want it to be "mindless" but the 15ish foot focus distance at 2.8 would be so tough for someone who likes to shoot lowlight candids...which is annoying because I think the field of view could be incredible for interiors-- I do kind of wonder if shots like Jeff Bridges Big Lebowski selfy were only possible because he was on some thoroughly lit film locations. Though I have heard him on a podcast talking about his love of tmax 3200, so I do know he probably knows alot about getting every last bit of speed out of a negative- but still
Both are super cool. My own biases and familiarity with using a rangefinder, I’m gonna say *xpan* : more shutter speeds, and exposure compensation dial; aperture priority mode, self-timer. Ease of loading film. For a mental oyster like myself, these features are important to me. (Tho I’ve never loaded a widelux, but in comparison to the xpan, it looks like you need a PhD to be able to load it lol jkjk) Also, the photos make me feel like my opinion is wrong lol great shots
I totally agree- those were my favorite aspects about the xpan as well. It is truly a beautiful and high quality camera. Do you own one yourself? And hahaha- loading the widelux is confusing at first but definitely isn’t as hard as it looks!! I appreciate your feedback and I’m glad you enjoyed it!!
@ I used to, you know how photographers collect cameras over time lol I ended up selling it for a different camera and a small pallet of hp5 :) If I’m lucky, you’ll do a xpan giveaway lol Joking (..unless)
why is your XPan files scan like the 24X59 widelux and not 24x65 ? maybe your lab got confused with both format. pretty sure a real part of your XPan pics is missing ! I used both, specially XPan with 30mm and prefer XPan for his 24X65 ratio
redo with the 30 mm on the hasselblad what you have done is compare the 35mm equilvent standard frame size to a 24mm lens from the hasselblad to a 17mm on the widelux 35mm equilvent .. the 30mm xpan lens is a 16mm on 35mm. standard frame size .. Go hire one and do it again 😁.. in general your photography and videos/instragram are very good , interesting and different to others at there , keep going , keep expanding ....The Widelux is coming out well on this video, Jeff will be pleased ... they work well as pair in your videos the different focal lengths work as a set , but as a test they are not a direct comparison ..
Yes good point! The main reason I didn't use the 30mm is because I couldn't find any available to rent. And thanks so much, I appreciate your feedback!
I am biased because of how much I love the Widelux- which do you prefer and why? Let me know in the comments!!
Wow, that was such a great review. The summary at the end was spot-on.
Awww so glad you liked it!! Thank you!
To me, every frame you captured with the Hasselblad felt complete, magnificent in every aspect. If judged purely by the photos, the Hasselblad in your hands produces deep, beautifully composed, and fully finished shots that are hard to criticize. The Widelux, on the other hand, provides that ultra-wide perspective on life, which, in my opinion, makes it harder to focus on the essence of the shot by showing 'too much'.
Awww that is much too kind!! I definitely agree the xpan allows for much more intentional framing, which was an exciting thing to try with the panoramic format. The Widelux photos can definitely feel like too much info sometimes too. I appreciate your feedback, and thanks so much for watching!!
Great matchup!
Thanks so much!!
Lovely video. Thank you! I own both - Xpan II and Widelux F8, and I think of them as very different beasts. Without doubt, the Xpan is the far "better" camera, with phenomenal image quality and more finessed control, but there's something about the Widelux that's just terrific to use. It's actually fun, in an almost "toy camera" kind of way. It makes you want to play and experiment. The viewfinder doesn't really come close to showing the entire field of view, so composition requires a degree of imagination and luck, and using the arrows on top. Awaiting the results is like unwrapping a gift (sometimes it's just what you wanted, and sometimes it's just another pair of socks). The pano aspect ratios mean a compositional learning curve with both. For too long, I was shooting mostly simple planar images with the Xpan because I couldn't confidently wrangle the contents of the frame when I ventured from that. They would escape me, leading to imbalance or an excess of dead space. It took some time to embrace it and I still sometimes feel like I'm hemmed-in vertically - if I'm far enough back that I'm not cropping the top or bottom, there's a LOT of space either side. It's an eye that's still developing. The Widelux, on the other hand, never feels to me like it's cutting things off vertically, maybe because t's a 26mm lens inside that rotating turret. It's more about taming the far reaches of the frame - or not, which can be half the fun. The general key to the Widelux is to get in MUCH closer than you think you should be (look at some of Jeff Bridges' arm's-length selfies, for instance). The 26mm lens means that pretty much everything is in focus at f/11, so get in there! As Laura says in the video, the limitations require you to think ahead. For me, that means a picking a film whose speed will allow me to shoot mostly at f/ll (f/8 at a pinch). Then there's nothing to do but look for a scene. Interestingly, although the Widelux has nearly twice as wide an angle of view than the standard Xpan lens (140º vs 74º), the Xpan has a wider aspect ratio (24x65mm vs the Widelux 24x59mm).
I have the Widelux and Horizon Perfect, the Russian one's lens is sharper, and has longer exposures. As for the Xpan, Ive modified a standard Hasselblad magazine to shoot 22 wide panos, and its nice, but much heavier to carry.
Oh that's awesome- I'll have to check that one out! I've heard good things about that camera. And that's so cool!
I modified a Bronica GS-1 220 back (rails for film flatness), plus ordinary 120-135 adapters and two 135 cartidges for both side of film (one reverse spulled) and I can do 24x69mm panos. 🙂 I lack only a scan solution so far 😐
For Roundshot alike pictures I use a 16mm fisheye on a DSLR and the imado Hemi plugin for PS to "de-fisheye" the picture. Unfortunately the company went out of buisness.
Pro:
- Easy
- Would work also for scans from analog.
- Single shot, you could even use flash
Cons:
- movent style of a roundshot camera does not work.
- Lower picture quality at the edges.
// There is also a FISYE2PANO script for Imagemagick, and there might be more...
I have poor person's Widelux, a soviet machine called Horizon Kompkt. Only two speed and that's it. Took with me to Italy and it was great.
Yes I’ve heard about those cameras!! That’s awesome
I have the old version of that, the Horizont with a T. I also have the Kompakt, but the Horizont is pretty cool too. It's fully metal and looks pretty dope.
@@braccc2640 I also use a Horizont but I suspect the Widelux is a little sharper. It would be good to see a comparison.
@ Yeah, the Horizont isn't the sharpest when the lens is wide open, that's for sure. For that the Kompakt worked a little better for me. I'm looking to get a Horizon 202 to see if it's a good alternative to the Horizont and Kompakt.
The downside of all designs of the Hasselblad X-pan and the Widelux, Horizon, ... the Fuji GX617, Linhof Technorama and many more is that often, that they can not shift the lens up.
For sure you do not need this for any kind of pictures, as Koudelka showed impressive in "Shooting Holy Land" where he used at least two Fuji GX617 (and a X-pan), but for landscape you often wish such feature.
Here is a dedicated panorama camera like the Shen-Hao (see Nick Carver), an technical camera from Alvandi or similar, and back for a bellows camera, etc. of advantage.
Or you simply shoot on 120 and crop the pano out of it. You can buy a lot of film until you get a dedicated camera or or just back is paid.
That is super interesting and something I hadn't considered. Thank you for your feedback- I will have to look more into it!
Really interesting video comparing the two cameras, both have great strengths. I would give it to the widelux just.
Aww thank you so much, and I totally agree! They are truly both incredible cameras. Thank you for watching!
I think maybe the Widelux by a hair , both good cameras but I think we connect better with the mechanical side than the electronic side . Nice Video , thank you
Totally agree- glad you enjoyed it!!
Widelux 4-ever!😎
Yes!!
I enjoyed the warmer Portra images from the Widelux. I do wonder how the negs would print differently in a darkroom. A few questions I looked up after was focal length differences. The Widelux looks like it's 26mm, even wider than the 30mm lens option versus for the XPAN! I was also wondering the negative size differences. I was surprised that the Widelux was less wide (24mm x 59mm) than the XPAN (24mm x 65mm). Hopefully ChatGPT was right in both these questions. If I got anything wrong, feel free to correct. :) Really enjoyed the comparison, thank you!
That is so interesting- I will definitely have to check out the negatives and get back. But I believe it though- in the comparison shots it seems like the xpan photos could be a little wider (they are a bit smaller in height since I had to reframe to match the sizes, if that makes sense). But that is correct about the lens! The Widelux is a 26mm.
I always dreamt of an X-Pan, altough I know I´ll never risk the money for a potential paperweight if it breaks. I could buy a Widelux F7 for 1750€, which now I´m considering. Bought the GFX50R to shoot in that format, but I´m tempted to switch back to film for this.
I wish the old APS films were still a thing, the "half frame" brother the panorama format on 35mm.
I totally agree- I think if it were cheaper I would like the xpan more but it is just so dang expensive. And that’s great!! I truly love my F6 (as you can see haha). What did you like best about the APS films??
@@femigod I had a Pentax Efina APS point and shoot back in the late 90ies and I shot hundrets of photos in the 25x10 ratio. It was cheap and convenient and some of the photos I took back then are still some of my favorites.
The widelux definitely has a magic to it. I think the Hasselblad shots, maybe because of the longer focal lenghts, come off as cropped medium format. Like when I see an xpan shot- I just want to see beyond the edges of the frame, but every widelux shot is it's own little wrapped up world.
I love this. I think that’s what bothers me about it too- the xpan images can feel too contained and overall flatter. I think part of why I feel that way might be for the fact that its a 45mm lens, so the image is much more compressed too.
@@femigod I will say though, personally for my own photography the fixed focus would be such a source of frustration (and like as people shooting film cameras in 2025, it's not like we want it to be "mindless" but the 15ish foot focus distance at 2.8 would be so tough for someone who likes to shoot lowlight candids...which is annoying because I think the field of view could be incredible for interiors-- I do kind of wonder if shots like Jeff Bridges Big Lebowski selfy were only possible because he was on some thoroughly lit film locations. Though I have heard him on a podcast talking about his love of tmax 3200, so I do know he probably knows alot about getting every last bit of speed out of a negative- but still
Les 2 boitiers sont bien sympas , mais une petite préférence pour le Widelux 👍👍📷📷🎞🎞☺☺
Moi aussi!!
@@femigod 👍👍📷📷
Both are super cool. My own biases and familiarity with using a rangefinder, I’m gonna say *xpan* : more shutter speeds, and exposure compensation dial; aperture priority mode, self-timer. Ease of loading film.
For a mental oyster like myself, these features are important to me.
(Tho I’ve never loaded a widelux, but in comparison to the xpan, it looks like you need a PhD to be able to load it lol jkjk)
Also, the photos make me feel like my opinion is wrong lol great shots
I totally agree- those were my favorite aspects about the xpan as well. It is truly a beautiful and high quality camera. Do you own one yourself?
And hahaha- loading the widelux is confusing at first but definitely isn’t as hard as it looks!! I appreciate your feedback and I’m glad you enjoyed it!!
@ I used to, you know how photographers collect cameras over time lol
I ended up selling it for a different camera and a small pallet of hp5 :)
If I’m lucky, you’ll do a xpan giveaway lol
Joking (..unless)
That must be nice.
Every Widelux photo = wow 😍/ Every EXPAN photo = I'm bored 🥱
XPAN : have RF integrated with Viewfinder and A Mode.
Widelux : dont have those :)
why is your XPan files scan like the 24X59 widelux and not 24x65 ? maybe your lab got confused with both format. pretty sure a real part of your XPan pics is missing ! I used both, specially XPan with 30mm and prefer XPan for his 24X65 ratio
redo with the 30 mm on the hasselblad what you have done is compare the 35mm equilvent standard frame size to a 24mm lens from the hasselblad to a 17mm on the widelux 35mm equilvent .. the 30mm xpan lens is a 16mm on 35mm. standard frame size .. Go hire one and do it again 😁.. in general your photography and videos/instragram are very good , interesting and different to others at there , keep going , keep expanding ....The Widelux is coming out well on this video, Jeff will be pleased ... they work well as pair in your videos the different focal lengths work as a set , but as a test they are not a direct comparison ..
Yes good point! The main reason I didn't use the 30mm is because I couldn't find any available to rent. And thanks so much, I appreciate your feedback!