wider horizons - making panoramic images
All images in this article were taken by the author, with camera and lens metadata marked in the lower-right corner. Film photographs were scanned on a Noritsu LS-600 as 8-bit JPEGs under the “HIGH” preset and were exported after editing at 2000px on the long axis. Sample photographs were edited to taste and are not reflective of variables like vignetting or color rendition.
Manual screenshots kindly provided by Mike Butkus.
When photographers talk about “going wide”, the typical assumption is that they are referring to using lenses with shorter focal lengths.
Yet many pictures that “feel” wide– such as pictures of grand, sweeping landscapes– are taken with the long lenses associated with portraiture or wildlife photography.
These images– and many others– are accomplished by pushing against the boundaries of the frame itself, reshaping the perception of “wide” by altering an image’s aspect ratio. This is not a trick or hack; instead, it is a tool that opens up combinations of equipment and composition that are otherwise impossible.
Today, it is trivial to digitally crop an image, allowing any photographer to produce panoramic results with any setup and of any scene. Nevertheless, there are benefits to being able to get a shot in-camera (or close to it) that are difficult to ignore– and this does require gear.
Oftentimes, this gear is old.
Finicky.
Expensive.
All of the above.
Given this, I wanted to put together some comprehensive thoughts on three paths to small-format in-camera panoramic photography (meaning using 135 cameras). In no particular order, these are:
- swing lens (KMZ Horizont, Panon Widelux F6, KWD Noblex 135S)
- crop frame (Minolta P’s, Ricoh R1)
- extended frame (Fujifilm TX-1)
Between these six cameras, I have shot (and scanned) at least 2,780 photos since 2016; while the vast majority of these were taken on the TX-1, I have spent many months working with the other cameras in order to familiarize myself with their artistic and operational strengths and weaknesses.
I hope that these observations can help convert potential interest into real experience for readers (including those who may have given up on in-camera panoramas due to cost or other considerations).
Note that this is not an exhaustive gear review, which would take a lot more time and space than would be reasonable for this article. Instead, I will focus on points of comparison that illustrate the pros and cons of the three approaches.
definitions
While art is a deeply personal and subjective subject, I am using the following definitions in this article to keep things as clear and concise as possible.
- A “panorama” is an image with an aspect ratio of at least 2:1 regardless of its orientation.
- A “wide” lens is a lens with a focal length less than the diagonal dimension of the image format it was designed for.
- A “long” lens is a lens with a focal length longer than the diagonal dimension of the image format it was designed for.
- A “crop” is a mechanism (either in-camera or in post) that removes sections of an image that would otherwise be a part of the final result.
- The “pipeline” is the sequence of steps that link the “original” moment of capture to the final product.
- “In-camera” refers to the ability to influence an image using the settings and setup of a camera prior to and during capture.
- “Post” refers to changes made to the “raw” product of the prior step in an imaging pipeline.
part one: on panoramic pictures
Many photographers will be familiar with the 3:2 ratio most commonly associated with 135 (still) film and “full frame” digital cameras. It is often used as something of a de facto reference point for other formats, which generally trend more towards (and ultimately become) square.
Panoramic pictures go the other way, lengthening the long axis to the point where it becomes visually dominant. These images can leverage their inherent imbalance in dimensions to produce a unique sense of space– one that can simultaneously focus the eye on a subject and still contextualize it.
This is important, as much of art is about managing the audience’s expectations and “path” through a work. Unconventional and/or unfamiliar formats offer a lot of room for creativity as well as error; trying to directly map experience from one format to another is essentially like attempting to secure a screw with a hammer.
Below are some observations I have made over the years about composing panoramas. Note that this is a non-exhaustive list of topics, is very much to taste, and should only be taken as a guide/starting point rather than any kind of canon.
long lines
Panoramas inherently offer more space (relative to squarer formats) for lines to traverse through; making use of that expanded area emphasizes scale and orientation.
leading lines
In a similar vein, longer leading lines help the eye track through wide frames; this can help build anticipation if an object of interest is positioned at or near an appropriate nexus.
depth
The short axis is still relevant to producing a compelling sense of depth to an image. While there is less relative room to draw a viewer from “bottom/close” to “top/far”, the overall size of every “layer” feels larger and can hold a great deal of context at any given distance.
patterns
A long frame gives plenty of room for patterns to iterate and repeat, making it easier to establish a sense of rhythm. This does require scenes to have a larger number of similar “pieces”, as there is less ability to imply “more” repetition than actually exists. In this regard, the format’s width is a double-edged sword as it can both strengthen a pattern’s affect or show its limits/borders too readily.
internal frames
Subdivisions (using patterns or more ad-hoc lines) can produce internal frames of different shapes and sizes, some of which can approximate other aspect ratios within the wider overall photo.
tilt and perspective
Although panoramic aspect ratios are disproportionately affected by tilt and skew, both can be deliberately leveraged to great effect. Managing lines is crucial to producing an intentional and desirable effect rather than a sense of error.
balanced subjects
One of the simpler “split” compositions, balancing subjects on opposite sides of the frame primes the viewer to “expect” a counterpart to whichever subject their eye falls on first, pulling attention through the frame towards the anticipated spot. The subjects do not themselves need to be the same so long as they have the same conceptual presence.
unbalanced subjects
“Lateral” division remains compelling with an off-center “balance” point; this enables the cohesive juxtaposition of differently-sized subjects. While the frame division can be explicit or implicit, subjects with more differences benefit from clearer frame indications to help viewers associate them as intended.
unbalanced subjects (around center)
Contrast is one of the central tools of composition and design, and leveraging aesthetic contrasts (like size, shape, and direction) can strengthen impressions of two or more individual subjects. Orienting the frame around an off-center balance point or line preserves a strong subject link without making the overall image feel too askew.
unbalanced composition with forwards motion
There is no strict requirement to balance or otherwise offset a subject if the composition generates a sense of movement that leads a viewer from one end of the frame to another. Here, imbalance can create a clear starting point that guides a viewer along an intended path.
unbalanced composition with backwards motion
Implied motion does not always need to move “forwards” through a frame; it is just as valid to make the eye sweep “backwards” from a starting point into a scene’s broader context.
vertical compositions
While perhaps less common than horizontal compositions, vertical opportunities also benefit from the directional focus provided by a narrow frame. Note that in many cases, it may be difficult to correct for perspective unless camera position is ideal from the jump.
centered compositions
While often decried as amateurish or boring, centered compositions can be used to great effect. Subjects can either be isolated in the middle of a vast expanse of negative space or situated squarely amidst crucial context.
halving the frame
Panoramic images lend themselves to a variant of centered composition where a line or point of symmetry is placed in the middle of the frame. Regardless of which axis or angle the image “folds” along, the resulting photo highlights thematic and/or geometric similarities.
spot the difference
A focal point of “difference” between two generally-symmetrical halves of a frame can implicitly and explicitly highlight a subject. While the resulting composition may be inherently unbalanced, the final image may be distinctly more interesting than “just” a split frame.
part two: on panoramic cameras
Panoramic photography has a long and rich history– far too much to attempt to cover in a single article. Instead, I have picked six specific cameras to compare and contrast. Released from 1967 all the way through 1998, they represent a wide range of design and engineering sensibilities that have substantial impacts on their handling and results.
Even then, it would be a massive undertaking to try and comprehensively review all six model lines. The Widelux alone went through seven incarnations over its lifetime (along with a 120 model and a modern revival); in total, there are at least 25 variants between them all.
Additionally, there are far too many crop-frame cameras to list, even discounting ones that have faded into obscurity.
Consequently, the final scope of my analysis is limited to the following cameras that I own and use:
- KMZ Horizont (1967)
- Panon Widelux F6 (1970)
- Minolta P’s (1991)
- KWD Noblex 135S (1992)
- Ricoh R1 (1994)
- Fujifilm TX-1 (1998)
physical characteristics
| camera | length | width | height | mass |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont | 140mm | 33mm (66mm)* | 81mm (96mm)* | 922g |
| Panon Widelux F6 | 165mm | 34mm (55mm)* | 90mm | 854g |
| Minolta P’s | 110mm | 25mm | 60mm | 185g |
| KWD Noblex 135S | 169mm | 65mm | 133mm | 848g |
| Ricoh R1 | 117mm | 25mm | 61mm | 148g |
| Fujifilm TX-1 | 166mm | 51mm | 82mm | 720g |
| - 30/5.6 | 52mm | 63mm | x | 298g |
| - 45/4 | 47mm | 55mm | x | 222g |
| - 90/4 | 79mm | 55mm | x | 333g |
Measurements taken with consumer-grade equipment and may be subject to sample variance
* Parenthetical measurements taken at widest/tallest point
basic features
| camera | lens | power | focus | meter | level | advance/rewind | transport direction | flash | shoe | cable release | filters |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont | fixed | mechanical | fixed | x | in-finder | dial | normal | x | x | ✓ | ✓** |
| Panon Widelux F6 | fixed | mechanical | fixed | x | top-mounted | dial | normal | x | x | ✓ | ✓** |
| Minolta P’s | fixed | 1 x CR123A (3V) | autofocus | ✓ | x | motor | normal | ✓ | x | x | x |
| KWD Noblex 135S | fixed | 4 x AAA (1.5V)* | fixed | accessory | in-finder | dial | normal | x | accessory shoe | ✓ | ✓** |
| Ricoh R1 | fixed (two-stage) | 1 x CR123A (3V) | autofocus | ✓ | x | motor | reverse | ✓ | x | x | x |
| Fujifilm TX-1 | interchangeable | 2 x CR2 (3V) | rangefinder | ✓ | x | motor | reverse | hotshoe | hotshoe | ✓ | ✓ |
* The Noblex manual specifically states that the camera requires alkaline batteries and that rechargeable batteries should not be used under any circumstances.
** Specialized proprietary filters only
exposure parameters
| camera | aperture | shutter speeds |
|---|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont* | f/2.8 - f/16 | 1/30s - 1/250s |
| Panon Widelux F6* | f/2.8 - f/11 | 1/15s, 1/125s, 1/250s |
| Minolta P’s | f/4.5 | 1/4s - 1/200s |
| KWD Noblex 135S* | f/4.5 - f/16 | 1/30s - 1/500s |
| Ricoh R1 | f/3.5** | 2s - 1/400s |
| Fujifilm TX-1 | f/4† - f/22 | 8s - 1/1000s + bulb |
* The listed shutter speeds reflect the amount of time any given area of film is exposed, not the time taken for the turret to complete its rotation.
** The R1’s lens drops to f/8 when in “super panoramic mode”.
† The 30/5.6 has a maximum aperture of f/5.6.
image characteristics
| camera | type | frame size | aspect ratio | lens | FOV (horizontal) | FOV (vertical) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont | swing lens | 58x24mm | 2.42:1 | 28/2.8 | 120° | 45° |
| Panon Widelux F6 | swing lens | 59x24mm | 2.46:1 | 26/2.8 | 126° | 49.6° |
| Minolta P’s | crop frame | 36x13.29mm | 2.71:1 | 24/4.5 | 73.74° | 30.95° |
| KWD Noblex 135S | swing lens | 66x24mm | 2.75:1 | 29/4.5 | 127° | 44° |
| Ricoh R1 | crop frame | 36x15.93mm | 2.26x1 | 30/3.5 | 61.93° | 29.74° |
| 24/8 | 73.74° | 36.72° | ||||
| Fujifilm TX-1 | extended frame | 65x24mm | 2.71:1 | 30/5.6 | 94.6° | 43.6° |
| 45/4 | 71.7° | 29.9° | ||||
| 90/4 | 39.7° | 15.2° |
film economy
| camera | stated per 36 exp roll |
|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont | 21 exp |
| Panon Widelux F6 | 21 exp |
| Minolta P’s | 36 exp |
| KWD Noblex 135S | 19 exp |
| Ricoh R1* | variable |
| Fujifilm TX-1 | 21 exp |
Figures taken from reference material and do not reflect “extra” shots obtainable in practice
* The R1 manual does not indicate an “actual” nominal frame count due to its reverse film transport system, which calculates total available exposures after the camera is loaded.
field of view comparison
As a general observation, the lateral spread of the swing lens models separate them into their own class. The Horizont, with a 120° horizontal field of view (the narrowest of these cameras) is still around 27% wider than the TX-1 with the 30/5.6 mounted.
The figures converge when considering the cameras’ vertical fields of view, with the results falling into two clusters. One is made of the swing lens cameras and the TX-1’s 30/5.6, which share very similar focal lengths and aspect ratios. The second comprises of the point and shoots and the TX-1’s 45/4.
The TX-1’s 90/4 is the only long lens here, unsurprisingly making it an outlier.
in brief
With the specifications covered, it is time to look at the cameras in a more holistic manner. These impressions are based off of my own personal use and ownership, and may not be generalizable to your needs.
Consider in particular that my primary interest is in street photography, which prioritizes quick handheld operation over precision.
KMZ Horizont (1967)
The Horizont family has had a somewhat unusual trajectory through the years. The original Horizont (and its for-military predecessors) were metal-bodied and fully mechanical cameras using detachable viewfinders. Subsequent models swapped to plastic shells with integrated finders and were aimed at a more casual consumer audience.
Though many have developed mechanical faults over time, a working copy handles smartly enough to use off of a tripod (provided care with hand positioning if not using the somewhat odd accessory grip). Loading film feels surprisingly modern, though unloading it on the original Horizont is, to put it mildly, a chore.
Panon Widelux F6 (1970)
While swing lens cameras occupy something of a niche in the film photography world, the Widelux line has a leg up when it comes to name recognition as the favored camera of actor Jeff Bridges. As of the time of writing, Bridges’ collaborative project to produce a modern revival of the Widelux line appears close to fruition; with any luck, the increased tide of and parts* will be helpful to Widelux owners everywhere.
Like the Horizont, the Widelux is a fully mechanical camera that transports film around two pressure rollers to achieve the needed film plane curvature. While most Widelux models have essentially the same shutter speeds, the F6 was the first to use the more “modern” timings of 1/15s, 1/125s, and 1/250s (prior models used 1/5s, 1/50s, and 1/200s).
* According to press releases, some of the components of Bridges’ WideluxX will be compatible with the Widelux F7 and F8 models.
Minolta P’s (1991)
The Minolta P’s (also sold as the Freedom Vista and Riva Panorama) is a purpose-built crop-frame panoramic point and shoot. The camera handles both focus and exposure, leaving composition and timing to the photographer. To that end, the P’s boasts a stellar panoramic viewfinder that is surprisingly large, bright, and clear– a far cry from what is available on most point and shoots of the era.
Although the camera is simple and generally handles well, the unfortunate decision to require that a button be held down to disable the flash in even moderately adverse lighting is a painful stumbling block.
KWD Noblex 135S (1992)
The Noblex is the most recently-introduced swing lens family on this list, and that shows in its electromechanical design and modern controls. This lineup hosts a number of variants that includes several 120 models; all of these have shutter speeds suitable for handheld use.
With an excellent viewfinder boasting an integrated level and a film transport system practically identical to a “normal” 135 camera, the Noblex is the easiest of the swing lens cameras to field. In regular use, the only sour note comes from having to flip the camera completely around in order to see and access the aperture controls built into the lens turret.
Over the long term, the inevitable decay of the wax guides on the rotating drum leads to banding; this defect will eventually surface on any Noblex, though some repair options are available.
Ricoh R1 (1994)
Unlike the Minolta P’s, which fully commits to the crop-frame panoramic approach, the Ricoh R1 is ostensibly a “multi-format” point and shoot in the tradition of many ’90s cameras. The internal film gates adjust to mask off the top and bottom of a standard exposure when the camera is set to either panoramic or panoramic (wide) modes.
The R1 has a notable trick where its lens elements can shift in panoramic (wide) mode to ostensibly provide a 24mm field of view (cropped to a panoramic aspect ratio). This feature was removed with the R1s and subsequent model iterations. Between this and a number of creative controls, the R1 still acquits itself well despite being less powerful than the venerable GR1 line.
Many of the camera’s functions and readouts are clustered on its top LCD, which is extremely prone to failure. This is problematic, as setting certain modes requires cycling through numerous button presses. If the wrong part of the screen is out, it may be impossible to determine the set mode without resetting the camera and manually counting inputs. This vulnerability extends to the viewfinder, which also makes use of an unreliable LCD to project framelines into view.
Fujifilm TX-1 (1998)
The Fujifilm TX-1 (marketed outside of Japan as the Hasselblad XPan) is positioned– and priced– as the pinnacle of small format panoramic photography. Resembling a slightly-stretched 135 rangefinder, the TX-1 uses lenses that cover a nearly 6x7 frame to expose a 65x24mm area of film with one actuation of the shutter.
While the system lenses are somewhat slow, the tradeoff is a compact package that wastes nothing in mass and size while still producing unique, high-quality results. Triple dials allow for full control over exposure parameters, and a long rangefinder base length makes it easier to make full use of the superlative glass.
Both “normal” and panoramic exposures are possible, and can be mixed and matched on the same roll; however, most scanners cannot cleanly accommodate this as frame spacing is no longer uniform.
part three: in practice
It is unfortunately common for photographers (both hobbyist and professional) to get hung up on discussing equipment in the abstract. While there is value to understanding the paper specifications of gear, academic discussion is useless if the cameras cannot perform in the field.
composing
As photography begins with the various stages of composition, the way that these cameras handle at this crucial introductory step has a major impact on their overall usability.
viewfinder
The presence or lack of a viewfinder is fundamentally shapes how photographers hold, handle, and use a camera. Although there are some basic similarities between these six cameras’ implementations, all reflect differing priorities and choices.
Note that the following images come from my personal cameras. Without exception these were all used when I procured them and show signs of wear; however, all remain fit for use.
KMZ Horizont
The Horizont is simultaneously at the leading and lagging edges in this regard. It is the only model without an integrated viewfinder; the accessory finder slots into a vertically-oriented cold shoe attached to the camera’s front plate.
Although the view is very approximate and suffers from distortion at the edges and corners, it is more than enough to get a sense of the final framing.
Panon Widelux F6
The Widelux’s barebones finder has less in the way of distortion compared to the Horizont’s, but also lacks anything in the way of compositional aids. It presents a much tighter view than what is actually captured, but is ultimately adequate.
Minolta P’s
Note that due to technical difficulties I was unable to get a close-up in-focus image of the P’s viewfinder; it is substantially brighter and more expansive in person, and the framelines appear yellow rather than black.
Most of the point and shoot cameras of the ’90s had serviceable viewfinders at best. Knowing that this was to be a dedicated panoramic camera, Minolta’s engineers produced not just a good viewfinder but an excellent wide one that feels like it belongs on a much larger camera.
While the finder itself has nothing in the way of active indicators, the hash marks around the frame perimeter and autofocus spot help with left/right leveling of the camera.
KWD Noblex 135S
While it has a similar level of distortion to the Horizont, the Noblex’s modern viewfinder is bright, clear, and only partially occluded by a spirit level to help orient the camera. The small notch cut into the top of the view shows the extent of the lens’ vertical shift capability.
Ricoh R1
The R1 makes use of an integrated LCD panel to project format-appropriate guide marks into view. Depending on the condition of the associated electronics, the viewfinder can range from excellent to almost unusable.
Glasses wearers should expect the usual pain points, with all edges of the frame being difficult to see in regular shooting and the left and right extremes being out of view in panoramic mode.
Fujifilm TX-1
Between the nature of my photography and the enormous expense of procurement, I have never used either variant of the accessory viewfinder for the 30/5.6 lens and cannot offer any firsthand insights on them..
The TX-1’s viewfinder can switch between two magnifications depending on which lens is attached. The 45/4 (and 30/5.6) lenses activate a wider field of view while mounted, with the 45mm framelines offering a generous amount of breathing room on all sides for shooters with good eyesight. The actual image area of the 30/5.6 is larger than the entire viewfinder can show.
Poor eye relief means that bespectacled photographers will lose almost all of the left/right margins.
Viewfinder magnification is increased when the 90/4 is mounted, and the smaller framelines leave more room for out-of-frame objects. A major oddity is the placement of the rangefinder patch, which drifts up and to the left from center.
This deviation can cause any number of headaches, even for experienced users; not all subjects afford enough time to recompose after focusing. This is particularly the case with panoramic images, which can change dramatically with only minor adjustments in perspective and benefit from more precision at time of capture.
The rangefinder patch is not exceptionally bright, but it is clear and accurate enough to work in most conditions.
A non-coupled hotshoe-mounted accessory viewfinder is available for the 30/5.6 in two variants: Fujifilm’s, which mounts directly above the hotshoe, and Hasselblad’s, which sits on an arm that positions it above the camera’s coupled viewfinder. Both carry the colors and finishes of their respective brand models, but outside of parallax are essentially the same.
Framelines switch automatically between the set image format when the panoramic switch is rotated.
leveling
Panoramic cameras are very sensitive to leveling on two fronts.
First, the extreme aspect ratios mean that any attempts to correct for angle in post rapidly reduces available image resolution and space. Having anything in the borders or corners can make it almost impossible to cleanly rotate even a slightly tilted frame.
Second, perspective distortion is exaggerated with both rectilinear and swing lens panoramic images. Post-processing solutions (where possible) are again expensive in terms of lost resolution and area, which can lead to unpleasant tradeoffs.
When it comes to getting in-camera assistance with leveling:
- Only the Horizont and Noblex have in-finder spirit levels to clearly show left/right and up/down tilt.
- The P’s has horizon hash marks on either side of the center spot and on the outsides of the frame to assist with left/right tilt.
- The Widelux has a top-mounted spirit level that is completely out of view when using the viewfinder.
- The R1 and TX-1 lack any kind of level assistance.
The lack of at least a left/right level is a significant shortcoming of the TX-1. While a shoe-mounted spirit level or waist level finder can help, both are slower (and more error-prone) to use than a native solution.
Although the optics used to project the spirit levels in the Horizont and Noblex can be a little unintuitive, it is still vastly preferable to have an in-finder aid over nothing at all. Getting two dimensions of information instead of one is n appreciable bonus.
The hash marks in the P’s are small, positioned smartly, and are sufficient to get at least an approximate left/right level; up/down pitch is left to the eye.
restricted focal lengths
With the exception of the TX-1, 135 panoramic cameras tend to be fixed-lens affairs (whereas many 120 options feature interchangeable lenses). Outside of the 90/4 (itself a relatively “normal” lens on the camera), these lenses all trend wide.
This is an important technical consideration; while it is possible to capture landscapes with wide lenses, their tendency to diminish the size of distant points of interest causes many features to become lost or difficult to make out at typical viewing distances.
Consequently, when shooting landscapes it may be best to use a “regular” camera with a longer lens and crop in post. There is a time and place for all gear– it is on the photographer to be conscious of the suitability of their equipment for any given purpose.
off-center shooting with swing lens cameras
Swing lens images place emphasis on the original center and borders of the taken exposure, where the perspective distortions caused by cylindrical projection are strongest. For all practical intents and purposes, the impact of these distortions is baked into the final image at the moment the shutter is tripped.
As a result, simply recomposing so that a subject is off-center may lead to undesirable outcomes where what was intended to be front and center becomes small and off-axis instead. In some cases, it is better to rely on the cameras’ wide fields of view to provide the space needed to crop into the intended framing later.
operation
The cameras discussed here are 135 cameras that take standard cassettes and can be used with and without a tripod. These commonalities give rise to a number of similarities in paper and in practice.
At the same time, differences in design priorities and decisions create important distinctions that may make or break the experience with any given camera for any given photographer.
handling
Avoiding getting fingers in the frame is often difficult with panoramic cameras due to their generally wide fields of view and short (measured) length lenses. This combination means that the edges of a photographer’s fingers are rarely far from the “start” of the lenses’ vision during handheld use.
As the swing lens cameras and TX-1 are both larger and heavier than the point and shoots, they generally require two hands to handle off of a tripod.
The right hand provides primary support and shutter control; the Noblex and TX-1 both have shaped frames that provide a place to grip for stability. By contrast, the largely-symmetrical and flat-fronted Horizont and Widelux require a tighter hold and/or curled fingers beneath the bottom of the camera for security.
With the TX-1, setting focus and aperture is most easily done with the left hand cupping the bottom of the lens barrel. This generally keeps it out of the way unless the front-mounted aperture rings are being adjusted right at the moment of capture. Fitting the matched hoods essentially eliminates this issue, though they are rare and expensive (3D-printed alternatives are available for much less).
When using the fixed-focus swing lens cameras, the left hand is only for support while shooting (as there are no lens-mounted controls) and can be tucked further back to ensure that the image remains clear.
Though both point and shoots can be used one-handed, they still benefit from being steadied from the opposite side of their shutter releases to avoid tilting when fired. As their integrated lenses are close to the bodies’ fronts and have wide fields of view, it is easy to accidentally end up with fingers in frame.
focusing
The three swing lens cameras are fixed focus, with subject and background sharpness variable only by controlling depth of field via the set aperture. Since usable exposure solutions can vary depending on lighting conditions, learning to estimate the relevant in-focus regions is extremely beneficial (particularly with the Horizont and Widelux, which have low top shutter speeds and limited overall range).
With this in mind, the relevant focus “guidelines” at smaller apertures are described below.
| camera | aperture | approximate in-focus range |
|---|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont* | f/16 | 1m - ∞ |
| Panon Widelux F6** | f/11 | 0.91m - ∞ |
| KWD Noblex 135S* | f/16 | 1.4m - ∞ |
* Taken from manufacturer reference figures
** Calculated using a presumed fixed focal distance of 2.4m; estimates for this number vary from source to source. A purported Panon document used by the US importer suggests focus is actually set to approximately 1.37m; however, this does not fit stated or calculated depth of field figures.
The remaining three cameras are all capable of variable focus. The TX-1 is a classic manual-focus coupled rangefinder; its long base length offers accurate focus with all three lenses, though both the 45/4 and 30/5.6 are easily zone focused. Depth of field scales are printed on the top of the lens barrels, with the 30/5.6 and 45/4 marked from f/5.6-f/22 and the 90/4 marked only at f/16 and f/22.
The table below describes the calculated hyperfocal values at f/16 for the TX-1.
| lens | hyperfocal distance | approximate in-focus range |
|---|---|---|
| 30/5.6 | 1.13m | 0.57m - ∞ |
| 45/4 | 2.52m | 1.26m - ∞ |
| 90/4 | 9.98m | 4.99m - ∞ |
Assuming a .03mm circle of confusion (CoC)
Taken together, the “hyperfocal” approximations for these camera and lens combinations look something like this.
Both the P’s and R1 are autofocus cameras, with the former using an infrared rangefinder and the latter contrast detection. The P’s always autofocuses on whatever is in its central target spot, while the R1 will measure seven zones across its three sensors (arranged in a centered horizontal line) to identify the closest in-focus object.
Additionally, the R1 has a special infinity mode to force focus to accommodate distant, low-contrast subjects.
Focus hold is available on both cameras and is activated by half-pressing, then holding the shutter button until recomposition is complete. Depressing the release all the way will then fire the camera.
The R1 will lock the shutter if the autofocus solution is within 0.35m of the camera to prevent blurred images. If no focus lock is found, the camera can be made to fire with focus fixed at 2.5m. By contrast, P’s will fire when the shutter release is pressed regardless of what is in front of it.
metering
None of the three swing lens cameras offer native metering. Some variants of the Noblex are able to accept an external shoe-mounted meter (which also enables autoexposure), but no information is communicated to the viewfinder.
The P’s and R1 both use front-facing meter cells external to the lens.
Frustratingly, the P’s’ baked-in programming has a propensity to fire the flash in even modest lighting– and does so without giving any advance indication*. There is also no warning of under/overexposure or confirmation of a suitable exposure combination– one way or another, when the shutter release is depressed, the camera is going to fire.
* Strictly speaking, the ready lamp to the right of the viewfinder will not light if flash is needed but not charged. As this can also mean that autofocus has failed, the signal is often too ambiguous to be meaningful.
A classic center-weighted meter and three-segment in-finder display (- ● +) make the TX-1 a clear standout. During manual operation, the -/+ indicators will light by themselves to show one stop over/under, light with the center ● to show a half-stop over/under, and will blink for readings outside of range. If the camera believes the set exposure is correct, only the ● will be lit.
In aperture-priority mode, the - indicator will come on if the calculated exposure time is greater than 2s, and the + symbol if it is below 1/1000s (the maximum shutter speed of the camera). Either blinking means that the scene is outside the meter’s range.
The meter activates with a half-press of the shutter release. Holding the button in this position locks the meter reading.
Exposure compensation is available from -2 to +2.
exposure parameters
Neither the P’s or R1 offer direct control over exposure parameters. Both cameras lack physical inputs for aperture and shutter speed and are essentially dependent on DX codes to set ISO (the P’s will only select ISO100 or ISO400; the R1 will set ISO50 - ISO3200). In the event that no DX code is found, both cameras default to ISO100.
The P’s can be made to select a slower shutter speed than its (ambiguous) flash sync speed if the dedicated flash-cancel button is held down. The R1 can be set to fire the flash automatically, or to always on/off; this has the expected effect on the selected shutter speed (the specifics depend on if other creative modes, like Super Night Mode, are engaged).
The other listed cameras offer full manual control. Each of the swing lens models handle their controls differently:
The Horizont uses two concentric dials mounted on the top deck to control aperture and shutter speed. Because this dial also rotates with the lens turret as it is primed, the “selected” position moves depending on whether or not the shutter is cocked. Neither dial uses even spacing between full-stop positions, and the shutter speed dial has detents in some unexpected places between the slower speeds.
The Widelux has separated dials for aperture and shutter speed. The shutter speed dial clicks into place*, and is ordered with the fastest speed at the center, flanked by the slower ones to either side. The aperture dial is not uniformly spaced and rotates smoothly; the set aperture labels appear upside-down when viewed from above and behind (as is natural when holding the camera).
It is stressed by multiple sources, including the manual, to never force the Widelux’s shutter dial due to the probability of damaging or destroying the camera’s timing mechanisms. The shutter should always be primed prior to attempting to manipulate this control.
The Noblex uses a modern electronic control dial on the top-right shoulder to select shutter speed. This dial has uniform spacing and firm clicks at full-stop values. Aperture is set on the lens itself by flipping the camera around and rotating a vertical dial recessed into the turret slot between different positions.
As a fully-manual camera, the Widelux’s film speed dial is purely for reference.
The TX-1 has two modern, uniformly stepped and spaced dials for controlling shutter speed and ISO, with the former on the top deck and the latter on the camera’s front. Shutter speed can be set at full stops and will lock when the dial is rotated to the autoexposure ([A]) position; similarly, the ISO dial catches if the DX setting is engaged. In both cases, the lock is disengaged by pressing and holding a centered button.
The system lenses have aperture rings mounted at their leading edge, with clicks at half stops.
exposure
Each swing lens exposure requires the lens turret to rotate through a wide arc at a constant speed; the time to complete this motion depends on the specific set “shutter speed”. This means that both the “instantaneous” and “total” shutter speeds are relevant when taking a photo of moving subjects.
| shutter speed | Horizont | Widelux F6 | Noblex 135S |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1s | x | x | 128s |
| 1/2s | x | x | 64s |
| 1/4s | x | x | 32s |
| 1/8s | x | x | 16s |
| 1/15s | 8s | 8.4s | 8s |
| 1/30s | 4s | x | 4s |
| 1/60s | 2s | x | 2s |
| 1/125s | 0.96s | 1.01s | 1s |
| 1/250s | 0.48s | 0.5s | 0.5s |
| 1/500s | x | x | 0.25s |
Horizont and Widelux times calculated, Noblex times taken from manufacturer figures
Failure to keep these cameras steady (particularly around their center axis), will resort in large and uncorrectable distortions in the final image.
shutter release
The fully-mechanical and meterless Horizont and Widelux have single-stage shutter releases, as does the Noblex, which typically is manual exposure only. The remaining cameras have dual-stage buttons that activate the camera meters at the halfway point. Both the P’s and R1 have fairly mushy releases, but the TX-1 has a clear middle detent.
When set to continuous drive, the TX-1 will fire at approximately 2fps while the shutter release is depressed in panoramic mode (3fps in standard mode).
The Horizont, Widelux, and Noblex all have threaded shutter releases that can accept a cable release. The TX-1 has a dedicated port to enable the same functionality on its left side.
Ricoh made a dedicated remote to trip the R1’s shutter via a front-mounted sensor.
A 10s self-timer function is available on the P’s, R1, and TX-1.
winding
The lack of an advance lever is a keen annoyance on the swing lens cameras, all of which take time to reset via rotary dials on the right side of their top decks. This more or less eliminates the possibility of sequential photos, particularly as winding must be done carefully to avoid ripping loaded film.
Because of the in-and-out traversal path required for the turret lenses to work, there is more resistance on the advance knobs than the cameras’ sizes would suggest. The Horizont requires one-and-a-half rotations to rearm, the Widelux two, and the Noblex one.
There is a dedicated multiexposure function on the Noblex, activated by throwing a top-mounted switch to the [M] position. Once set the film winder is disengaged, with rotating the dial only serving to prime the turret.
The remaining cameras (the P’s, R1, and TX-1) are autowind cameras. Both the R1 and TX-1 use reverse film transports and wind each exposed frame back into the loaded cassette with every shot.
flash
The moving-slit design of swing lens cameras makes them fundamentally incompatible with flash photography. Although the Noblex has an accessory shoe, it is explicitly for the optional meter and cannot trigger a flash.
Both point and shoot cameras feature integrated flash with no means (outside of optical slaving) of triggering an external unit. Flash settings are broadly controlled by the camera, though the R1 offers a few additional settings (such as red-eye reduction and slow sync).
If the flash is deemed necessary but is not ready to fire, the P’s ready light will not come on until it is charged. The R1 has a separate indicator that will blink until ready (and the shutter will lock will prevent premature firing), or blink rapidly to indicate a subject is outside of flash range.
The R1’s meter will attempt to compensate if a backlit subject is detected within flash range with the flash.
A hotshoe and PC port on the TX-1 facilitate the use of a strobe or radio trigger at a maximum sync speed of 1/125s; more options (such as curtain sync selection) were added to the later TX-2.
noise
The graphs below show the waveforms of each camera’s shutter actuation at 1/125s, as well as the subsequent autowind for the P’s, R1, and TX-1.
Measured noise levels for each camera are described in the following table.
| camera | shutter @ 1/125s |
|---|---|
| KMZ Horizont | 94.2dB |
| Panon Widelux F6 | 82.6dB |
| Minolta P’s* | 77.0dB |
| Ricoh R1* | 75.5dB |
| KWD Noblex 135S | 84.0dB |
| Fujifilm TX-1 | 80.8dB |
Figures were measured using a smartphone in a room with some ambient noise (~54dB) as the average of three measurements, using the peak noise level during each iteration. While the autowinding mechanisms produced similar amounts of noise, these were always slightly below the sound of the shutters themselves.
* A scene was selected and metered to attempt to produce an equivalent shutter speed for both point and shoots; however, the precise speeds used was not confirmed.
Sample shutter sound recordings are available here in a compressed archive.Placed together in an audio editing program and trimmed such that all shutter releases were pressed at the “same” time, the relative durations of the shutter firing (and subsequent autowind if applicable) are described in the screenshot below.
maintenance & miscellaneous
loading film
The Horizont and Widelux both use a pair of pressure rollers positioned on opposite ends of the lens turret’s interior to keep film tensioned in place. Loading both cameras involves threading the film behind both rollers, then around the back side of the take-up spool before folding the tip of the leader back to engage with a slot cut into the spool.
Because the second rollers have teeth to guide film past them, the leader needs to be pressed against the very back of the film chamber so that the film slides around the second rollers without catching. Once fixed to the take-up spool, using the advance knobs will flatten the film against the rollers as required.
The angle at which the film leader must be folded back is sharp, and the Widelux needs a particularly secure fix to avoid losing the leader once the camera back is closed. In comparison to the Horizont’s fairly modern swing-back design, the Widelux’s back is held to the camera by a central tensioned dial and detaches completely while the camera is being loaded and unloaded; it must then be pressed against the body and then tightened into place afterwards.
Loading the P’s, R1, and TX-1 is similar due to their autoloading design. After the cassette is placed opposite the take-up spool, the leader is pulled across until it reaches a calibration mark, at which point the camera back can be closed. This brings the film into contact with rollers and teethed advance gears that complete the process.
The R1 and TX-1 are both prewind cameras, meaning that upon being successfully loaded the cameras immediately draw all film out of the cassette onto the take-up spool. This process can take several seconds, depending on the length of the inserted roll; the P’s instead only winds to the first expected frame position and is ready almost immediately.
By design, the Noblex loads like most manual wind 135 cameras, with film being drawn across the curved film gate, then looped behind and then onto the take-up spool. The tension rollers on the Noblex are attached to the camera back, and only shape the film once the back is swung closed.
Field loading the P’s, Noblex, R1, and TX-1 is quick and can be done with the camera freehanded. The Horizont and Widelux are more difficult to handle and benefit from having a surface to lay the camera on.
Neither loading nor reloading the Horizont resets the frame counter. Instead, once the film is loaded, the advance dial must be pulled up until it disengages from the winding mechanism, then rotated until the inset window reads “21”, at which point the dial can be pressed back down. The other cameras all reset their counters while being unloaded and do not require this step.
All three autoloading cameras position the first frame automatically. The manual-wind cameras must be advanced (generally twice) before reaching their first indicated photo.
unloading film
Whether by engineering necessity or lack of thought, the Horizont’s rewind dial actually sits under the detachable viewfinder when it is in use. Once the viewfinder is removed, the process is the same as rewinding almost any other manual film camera.
Unfortunately, the Horizont and Widelux both sport rewind knobs, and while the Noblex has a small fold-out crank (which provides little in the way of extra leverage) to assist, all three swing lens cameras are slow to rewind. The increased resistance caused by the curved film path and internal rollers makes the process simultaneously tedious and harrowing; it is very easy to tear film while it is being rewound, either out of the cassette or in the middle of the roll itself.
Worse, the take-up spools do not cleanly separate from the film on these cameras, and the release buttons on the bottom only disengage the teethed internal components while being held down. This makes unloading in the field extremely ungainly at best and impossible at worst.
The P’s automatically rewinds once it detects enough tension on the film to indicate that the end of the roll has been reached; the reverse-transport R1 and TX-1 simply release the leader once all usable film is wound back into the cassette.
All three autowind models feature a recessed button to trigger an early rewind. If pressed, the R1 will leave the leader out at the end of the rewind; this is not the case if the camera detects it has reached the end of the loaded roll. The P’s always leaves out the leader, while only the later TX-2 can be configured to handle the leader either way.
filters
Specialized manufacturer filters were produced for the Horizont, Widelux, and Noblex that were installed via the slotted openings in the lens turrets. These tend to be expensive, hard to find, or both on the secondary market.
Neither point and shoot model have filter threads.
All three of the TX-1 system lenses are threaded to accept standard filters.
| Lens | Filter size |
|---|---|
| 30/5.6 | 58mm |
| 45/4 | 49mm |
| 90/4 | 49mm |
Dedicated center-ND filters were produced for the 45/4 and 30/5.6 lenses to compensate for the natural vignetting of both lenses, and reduce effective light by one stop in the middle of the frame. In practice, falloff can be corrected easily in digital post.
Note that the sample images provided for the TX-1 are not straight out of camera or scanner and often have had vignetting adjusted (both increased and decreased) according to taste; they are not representative of “actual” performance.
batteries
The P’s and R1 have plastic hinged doors covering their battery compartments that must be pried up and open for access. The TX-1 uses a slotted circular cover that typically requires a coin or other narrow object to unscrew, at which point the cover and batteries drop out of the body.
While the P’s requires that the battery be levered out, the R1 uses a black plastic strip that sits between the battery and compartment wall to pop a used battery out of position.
environmental factors
None of the discussed cameras were designed with weather resistance or environmental hardiness as priorities. Without any form of weather sealing, any wet environments or precipitation pose a potential risk (particularly true for the swing lens cameras, which have large and exposed moving parts).
While the non-swing lens cameras can tolerate light rain and snow, this should not be taken as a given and extreme caution should be exercised when shooting in such conditions.
Both the P’s and TX-1 are specified to work reliably at temperatures between -10°C and 40°C.
carry
This cohort of cameras is strikingly portable compared to their larger-format counterparts, with most coming out ahead in both weight and size. When compared against each other, form factor becomes the chief driver of overall handling.
In general, the two point and shoot cameras (the P’s and the R1) are the easiest to stow and carry. Crucially, neither camera has significant protrusions when powered off, which allows them to be slipped into a jacket pocket without worrying about snags or impact damage. The slimmer profile of the P’s makes it a hair better in this regard, though in exchange it weighs marginally more than the R1.
The swing lens cameras come next, as their turret-mounted lenses do not extend far from their bodies’ centers and are somewhat shielded by design. The unavoidable central bulge does alter their weight distribution and increases total volume, but they largely fit the profile of a small 135 SLR or rangefinder with a pancake lens (the Noblex is notably taller than its fellows due to its viewfinder hump).
While the TX-1 system lenses are compact, they are rectilinear designs that must simultaneously cover a large image circle without any kind of assistance. This puts a minimum lower bound on their size and results in a combined T-shaped profile that requires comparatively more room to simply exist. Additionally, even the lightest such setup (the TX-1 + 45/4) still weighs more than any of the other considered cameras.
This being the case, it is only comparatively less portable; the TX-1 system is otherwise in the same size class as many other 135 interchangable-lens ecosystems.
Most medium-sized messenger-style bags will be able to accommodate the larger cameras so long as there is enough room to draw a box around the largest dimensions of each body and lens. While the swing lens cameras will fit into smaller bags if there is sufficient sidewall flexibility, doing so exposes more of the delicate and complex lens turrets to shock.
The unavoidably T-shaped TX-1 is subject to the same considerations, exacerbated by the significantly longer lens lengths at play. The shortest of the three lenses (the 30/5.6, at 52mm) protrudes more than twice as far as the largest of the swing lens bumps (belonging to the Widelux F6 at 21mm), with the 45/4 and 90/4 being even longer.
straps
The Horizont, Widelux, and TX-1 all have dual strap lugs mounted on opposite sides of their bodies which allow the use of wrist and neck straps. By contrast, the P’s, Noblex, and R1 only have a single attachment point. This means that only wrist straps will work out of the box; ftripod mount-based anchor is needed to enable the use of a neck strap.
All of the larger cameras are somewhat front-heavy given their designs. Given too much slack, the will tip forwards at an awkward angle (this effect is most pronounced with the TX-1 + 30/5.6 combination), though a small amount of tension will keep the Horizont and Widelux relatively level.
The cameras do not become so heavy as to preclude shooting from the hip with a neck strap for support; however, due to the force required to maintain a flat position, it is easy to tilt the cameras while doing so. The external, top-mounted level on the Widelux is useful in this scenario.
Threading quick-release anchors is somewhat difficult on the point and shoot cameras, which have integrated strap slots that offer little room to maneuver.
part four: results and post
Regardless of how well the cameras perform in the field, many photographers will want to make edits to their images to best align the results with their creative intent. While panoramic images handle the same as any others for the most part, they also pose certain additional challenges.
The comments below predominantly assume a digital pipeline. This is due to my relative levels of experience with wet/dry darkrooms and is not any kind of statement of objective artistic value or merit.
general considerations
While not an issue specific to panoramic cameras, it is worth a reminder that none of the considered models feature through-the-lens views; all will lose accuracy at closer distances due to parallax and the presented frames will not precisely line up with the actual exposures.
With this in mind, it is crucial to avoid putting important compositional elements right against the borders of what can be seen in the viewfinder; a small amount of wiggle room can make all the difference between having and losing valuable context.
swing lens considerations
Unlike standard rectilinear camera designs (here the P’s, R1, and TX-1), the swing lens cameras (the Horizont, Widelux, and Noblex) project a cylindrical image onto a 2D plane. The physical lens movement has a number of effects on the final image.
proportional accuracy
Object proportions are more accurate between different parts of the frame relative to a rectilinear projection, which exaggerate the dimensions of features that are near the frame edges and corners. This effect is most pronounced with very wide lenses; a swing lens camera achieves its broad field of view using its sweeping motion and is less affected by this tendency.
In the above images, the bollards in the corners of the Widelux shot retain their shapes; in the TX-1 image, the person entering the frame in the lower left corner is slightly stretched due to perspective distortion.
bending lines
Parallel lines will bend apart, particularly in the center of the frame, even when physically perfectly straight. This is an unavoidable outcome of using a cylindrical projection.
receding borders
The relative distance between the lens and objects in front of the camera changes as the lens rotates through its range of motion, resulting in “receding” along the sides.
edge sharpness
Since a swing lens camera exposes film through its lens’ optical center at all times, there are minimal reductions in edge sharpness along the frame borders. The result is near-uniform levels of captured detail over the entire image.
perspective correction software
Despite the central “bulge”, perspective control software (such as the “Upright” tool in Adobe Lightroom) can still offer some value. “Auto” and “Full” may fail to find a workable solution as they can become confused by distortion, with “Level” and “Vertical” generally being more consistent.
Careful manual inspection and adjustments may be required to ensure that transformation tools have not picked bad reference points and lines.
distortion correction
While it may technically be possible to “undo” the cylindrical distortion of a swing lens photo using transformation tools, in practice it is difficult without fine-grained control over the underlying parameters.
With no guarantees as to the usability of a “corrected” image, it is more realistic to accept the inherent characteristics of a swing lens camera for what they are rather than hoping to counter their nature in post.
cropping
When cropping a swing lens photo, it is important to consider how the original center of the image moves relative to the “new” center. While certain compositions and crops can largely mitigate distortion, it will often not be possible to hide that a cropped image is “off center”.
While this does not foreclose getting a good image out of a crop, the changes in the apparent direction and source of distortion need to be accounted for as they can produce an unintentional sense of motion and/or imbalance.
Some scenes can be cropped in such a way as to minimize apparent distortion, but this often requires discarding most of the original image.
lateral motion
Because of the traversal time required to take a swing lens exposure, objects that were moving in the same left-to-right direction as the lens turret during exposure become stretched, while those traveling “against” the lens’ appear compressed along the long axis.
banding
The rotating turrets of swing lens cameras function differently from focal plane and leaf shutters, leading to different failure modes. One common issue (particularly with older cameras that have not been serviced) is vertical banding of alternating lighter and darker stripes.
This is caused by the turret having inconsistent angular velocity, which results in slightly different exposure times across different slices of the frame.
crop camera considerations
Crop-frame cameras face the unavoidable issue of reduced resolution.
This is simply a fundamental function of how these cameras work. Even if they were to mount superlative optics, the reduced image area takes a toll on the amount of captured detail. While there are systems that attempt to squeeze as much image quality as possible out of smaller formats, crop-frame cameras are not so lucky.
Commodity point and shoot cameras have a lot to recommend them, but their lenses tend to be serviceable rather than exceptional. While a narrow crop will naturally take advantage of (typically better) center performance, this is still a fairly weak starting point with most cameras.
The combination of their lenses’ short focal lengths and slow speeds makes for deep depths of field that render focus-based subject isolation difficult, if not impossible.
While these factors do not mean that crop-frame cameras cannot yield excellent photos, it is important to be realistic about what subjects and conditions they are suitable for. Images that rely on fine detail and uniform sharpness across the frame are generally outside of these cameras’ performance envelopes.
It is up to each photographer to decide where the line is between acceptable and unusable.
thoughts and reflections
getting it right in-camera
I strongly believe that a lot of what people deem to be “bad” gear is simply inappropriate for their expectations and purposes. People often take objective image quality to be the beginning and end of the discussion, but ergonomics and ancillary capabilities play a large role in getting from idea to image.
To that end, I generally prefer to use a setup that gets me as close to my final result from the jump as possible, even if other approaches might yield a technically better image– all else being equal.
This is actually making a huge assumption– that you can expect to take (or arrive at) the same picture under the same circumstances with different equipment. For example, photographing a subject with the intent of cropping later may weaken the final result if you are not extremely disciplined about ignoring how the “unnecessary” parts of the frame look in the viewfinder; failure to do so may mean you have not fully accounted for issues of perspective or timing.
The more intent that you can bring to your process, the tighter your workflow will be. For some people, the prospect of spending less time in post is enough on its own to justify getting a panoramic camera. For others, the ability to focus more in the moment on what the final results will look like is what will tip the scales.
speed vs. precision
Landscape pictures are often associated with deliberation and precision, and panoramas are often associated with landscapes. It is somewhat humorous, then, that this collection of panoramic cameras are all inherently imprecise in their basic operation.
Parallax viewfinders offer a number of advantages over through-the-lens ones, but they are always going to show approximations of what will be in the final shot. While framelines are generally designed to err on the conservative side when it comes to showing what will be captured, there will always considerable room for error.
There is something funny about pursuing a format that rewards precision (in leveling, perspective, and so on) with framing aids that aim for “good enough”. Personally, I believe it speaks to the proportional importance of content compared to technical details.
You always need to get enough right for your art to come across at all. That is a given; here, the point is that your equipment needs to be physically capable of yielding your desired results and needs to be usable enough for you to execute.
These six cameras all represent differing levels of control and capability, but they all share a common element: they are handholdable cameras that need not live in a studio. When a photographer lacks complete ability to arrange and frame a scene at their leisure, time (and thus speed of operation) can become the difference between having any shot and none at all.
And so, I believe that despite their shortcomings, these cameras were designed to have “it” where it counts.
“the best camera is the one you have on you”
It is common to quibble about what size marks the cutoff point between a large bag and a portable one, but the crucial differentiation is often between fitting in a bag and a coat pocket.
These cameras are all pretty small in the grand scheme of things, but the (relatively) fine details matter.
The image above was taken while I was running to meet a friend for dinner. I had not wanted to bring a bag at all since it would have taken up space at the restaurant, and the low angle of the shot would have made aiming and focusing any of my larger cameras difficult anyway. Having the P’s on my person made it the only camera for the job, certainly, but it was only there in the first place because of its compact design (and because I did not own the R1 at the time).
Even if it is only a matter of degrees, portability/pocketability should be a real consideration when looking at these (or any) cameras. Again, it is somewhere where you have to be really honest about what you are likely to actually use versus leave on the shelf at home.
on “image quality”
If “image quality” translated directly to “quality image”, the world of photography would look very different.
All six of these cameras make compromises: slow lenses that make low-light shooting difficult, distortion that renders some compositions unusable, crops that discard huge amounts of image area and resolution– and so on.
But they are all capable of the basic, critical function of a camera: to frame and capture a scene in space and time.
Cameras and gear exist to enable photographers, but it is usually their physical capabilities that receive the lion’s share of attention. Just as important are the ways in which these cameras shape and prime the mind to both conceptualize and then execute a different kind of vision.
If you never even think to take the shot, there is no alternate composition to interrogate or image to technically evaluate. Taken a step further: the worst camera that gets you to shoot an image is, as far as that shot is concerned, better than the best camera in the world that sat unused in that moment.
predictability
When it comes to equipment, I prize predictability. For me, the world itself is an ample source of randomness and serendipity, and I want to be able to navigate it with tools that behave how I expect them to. As the number of variables increases, my input and control over my results diminishes.
This philosophy is not meaningful or agreeable for everyone, nor is it any kind of ironclad ticket to artistic success.
It is a framework that you should reflect on when making gear choices.
It would be easy to say that the TX-1 system has the best optics and handling of these cameras and call it a day, but I believe that to be extremely reductive. As noted earlier, there are measurable ways in which the swing lens cameras provide superior results in a smaller (and less expensive) package. The point and shoots look a lot less on paper, but the combination of autofocus and autoexposure enables flexibility (such as shooting from overhead or low to the ground) that the TX-1 lacks.
What draws me to the TX-1 in particular is its consistency. Some of that comes from years of handling it– I have had mine for nearly a decade at time of writing– but most of it is baked into its very design. Distortion is broadly controlled, the shutter is a straightforward focal-plane type, and full control over focus and exposure make previsualization relatively straightforward.
That matters to me since street photography generally rewards quick eyes and hands. As my reflexes are already somewhat poor, taking additional time to try and consider how cylindrical distortion will impact my image or if backlighting will fool my meter means risking getting a shot off at all.
This is much less true of other disciplines, and even for some photographers’ approaches to street. Again, some prefer to embrace variance as a part of the creative process; this is a completely valid approach to the arts in general.
Just make sure you are honest with yourself before purchasing any kit– if everything else sounds right except for whether or not you will get predictable results, I would strongly encourage you to pause and take stock.
learning to see
In my opinion, the biggest overall hurdle to panoramic photography has little to do with the gear itself– though having purpose-built equipment does help.
It comes down to learning to see the world with both eyes open.
This phrase has not gotten less corny since I used it in my TX-1 review, but it remains the most succinct way I can think of to convey this idea. After photographing almost exclusively in panoramic aspect ratios for a decade, trying to shoot any other format feels like squinting at a subject through just one eye.
This goes to show the problems that come with presuming any given format is the most “natural”. Still photography itself has some intrinsically artificial properties, and a two-dimensional image will never be a “true” representation of a three-dimensional scene. To that end, deviations from reality are to be expected– and even encouraged as choices capable of strengthening a work.
3:2 and 4:3 are not especially close to “native” human vision, but they are familiar by conventional design (as is 16:9); going wider strains many compositional “rules” that are well-suited to squarer formats. Adapting what works and leaving what does not is what turns a new set of constraints into a new set of tools.
That is something that can only happen through execution and repetition. A panoramic-only (or at least panoramic-forward) camera is a valuable learning tool because the way they behave before, during, and after taking a photo challenges the comfortable defaults that tend to take hold in both new and experienced photographers.
Rather than thinking “how do I make this 3:2 image into a panorama”, you get “how do I make this frame work”; a distinction that can make a world of difference.
conclusion
Changing something as deceptively simple as an image’s aspect ratio turns out to have a lot of implications for both the practical and aesthetic sides of photography; even if you walk away with no interest in going wide, perhaps you can still make use of the idea of framing a composition just a little bit differently.
A lot was said (and hopefully shown) in this piece, and I sincerely hope that it served both to motivate people already interested in panoramic work and to entice newcomers into the space.
Regardless of your disposition, I thank you for your time and attention, and wish you the best in your future photography.