The main reason why I purchased a Fujifilm GFX100S II camera a couple of weeks ago was for XPan photography. For those who don’t know, XPan cameras were a joint venture between Hasselblad and Fujifilm in the late-1990’s through the mid-2000’s, right at the pinnacle of film. XPan models were interchangeable-lens rangefinder cameras that used approximately two frames of 35mm film to capture panoramic pictures in a 65:24 aspect ratio.
You can crop images from any model to the XPan ratio without much trouble, but composing it in-camera is different than doing it after-the-fact because you can better visualize the outcome. Also, I prefer straight-out-of-camera photography over sitting at a computer editing, but that’s just me. All GFX models, including the GFX100S II, have the 65:24 aspect ratio built-in; however, X-series cameras do not (in my opinion, Fujifilm should add the XPan ratio to all of their 40mp cameras via a firmware update). If you are serious about XPan photography and you use Fujifilm cameras, GFX is the preferable route.
Since the 65:24 aspect ratio cuts out about half of the resolution, having a high-megapixel sensor is important. With that said, you can’t truly appreciate XPan when viewing on a computer or your phone. XPan from a GFX100S II isn’t going to look any more impressive than (for example) an XPan crop from a Fujifilm X-T10. These pictures need to be printed to be appreciated, and that’s my goal. I plan to print a couple of these to see what they look like, and if I create any in the future that are worthy, I hope to make some really large prints that are two-feet tall by five-feet-five-inches wide. For that, the 100mp sensor of the GFX100S II is essential.
All of these photographs, which were captured yesterday and the day before in New Mexico, were made using a Fujifilm GFX100S II camera with a Fujinon 80mm f/1.7 lens. These pictures are camera-made JPEGs using a few different Film Simulation Recipes. Over the coming days and weeks I’ll be testing various Recipes to see what works best on GFX, and I’ll be sure to share the results with you, so stay tuned! In the meantime, I hope that you enjoy these 10 XPan images.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.
Fujifilm GFX100S II:
Amazon, B&H, Wex
Fujinon GF 80mm f/1.7:
Amazon, B&H, Wex
I think I mentioned this before but I’ve got a book of photos of the Scottish Highlands taken on a Linhof 617S which takes 4 frames on a roll of 120 film. About the time I bought the book in the mid 90s Fujifilm released a tiny but high quality compact called the DL Super Mini which had a panoramic feature consisting of a switch which manually masked both the film and viewfinder. I bought one specifically for this feature and got a lot of photos I was pleased with, mostly on Sensia or Provia.
Fujifilm also made a 120 6×17 camera similar to the Linhof but it was way out of my budget, and of course it ate vast amounts of film. These cameras are also big and heavy so need a similarly big and heavy tripod.
I sometimes crop digital photos to panoramic and I agree with you that cameras more humble than your GFX should have the option. I don’t think I’ve ever taken a 3:2 photo with the deliberate intention of cropping to panoramic but sometimes realise afterwards that there’s a lot of boring stuff at the top and bottom so decide to crop it out.
Ages ago, when I first started as an aerial photographer, one of the cameras we used for oblique shots was a giant Kodak 10” roll film camera that took 9”x18” film exposures. Not quite as wide as Xpan, but you can imagine the detail from a piece of film that big.
You could do a 9″ x 18″ contact print 😮
I did. On 10”x20” paper. On a raster exposure contact printer. For land survey use we printed hundreds of 9”x9” contacts on 10” paper, and for actual 3D mapping we used pairs of 10” glass plates. The first roll of film I ever developed was a 150’ long x 10” wide roll of Kodak PlusX Pan Pro. “Big” prints were on 60” wide paper! Those were some big trays.
Wow! Do you still have some of those prints?
I could not put a reply with the comment above… about the big prints… so I’ll add it here… No, I don’t have anything kept from then, that was literally 50 years ago, my first professional photo job, shooting aerial photos and photo-mapping, and running the lab that did the b&w part of the work. What a great introduction to photography, big scale!
A great first photo job, for sure. 😀
The Holga 120 Panoramic could be an interesting budget-friendly option… if you don’t mind the softness of the plastic lens. The Linhof is nearly as much as my GFX (😮), but would be amazing to use. What is the name of the book?
The book is called Highland Wilderness by Colin Prior. Published in 1993 and long out of print, and I don’t know whether it was ever published outside the UK.
On his website there is a current book of Scottish panoramic photos called Scotland’s Finest Landscapes which appears to be the original book in a redesigned form. There are small versions of a lot of the photos so I hope you don’t mind me linking to it, but just delete this if so.
https://colinprior.co.uk/products/scotlands-finest-landscapes
Wow, amazing! I appreciate the info! 😀
Wow! Thanks for sharing. With a GFX50R I am hoping for 12″x32.5” prints that I can somehow run through a 13” wide printer that doesn’t have a roll paper option.
I’m going to do a test print at 12″ x 30″ from a couple of labs. Wish it was a bit more cost effective, though… 🤣
I recently purchased a Lumix S5 for this aspect ratio.pristine condition, $700. It’s a cheap thrill to shoot it framed, in camera, at this crop.
$700 is a lot cheaper than what I paid for the GFX…
XPAN has surpassed PASM
The battle with PASM is now lost.
And how many pompous speeches there were)))
I can’t stop laughing.
I’m sure you are right, unfortunately. I prefer the controls on my retro GFX50R to the PSAM models, but if a GFX100R never shows, I will probably do what Ritchie has done and get an S model eventually. But where Xpan is not an issue, on models where it is not offered anyway, not so much. I sold the X-H2s and got an X-T5, solely because I prefer the mechanical dials setup. And on my FF Nikons I now have just retro models, Df and Zf, which have both the manual dials AND psam switches. Imagine… Nikon making combo retro and psam cameras, when Fujifilm only gives us a choice of one or the other! That combo is my true preference. Sorry if that sounds pompous! Not intended.
For this project, unfortunately PASM was the only option. I wish that were not the case. I’m not sure I get the comedy about it, or the pompous speeches statement.
Yes, yes, yes, you don’t understand pathos, yeah
PASM is NOT for Me
I hate PASM
I won’t buy another PASM camera
To renounce in time is not a betrayal, it is foresight)))))))))))
You’re just trying to start shit.
Someone might hate flying on turboprops and might even speak openly about it, but if that’s the only type of aircraft that goes to their destination, they’re not a hypocrite for buying the ticket. They’d fly a jet if only there was one.
I own several PASM cameras, BTW. My Ricoh GR and GR III are both PASM. If there was a non-PASM alternative, I’d own/use that; however, the GR cameras are unique and do something for me that no other camera can. The closest non-PASM is the Fujifilm X70, and I own/use that, but it isn’t fully a substitute for the GR.
If there was a GFX100R, I would have purchased that instead. If they made that camera in the future, I would happily sell the GFX100S II and buy it.
I still do hate PASM. I also don’t like flying… turboprops or jets, doesn’t matter… and would choose a roadtrip any day of the week. With that said, I flew a lot in 2024. Sometimes there’s not an option.