My last post was all about my adventures with the Wide Pic faux panoramic camera and some 30 year old expired film.
When I posted pictures of these cameras I received some crap camera snobbery on Twitter and Facebook, no surprises that folk like to shout a lot in those places but the fact that some can actually get on their high horses about £3 pieces of crap and try to suggest that one dog turd smells better than another really amuses me.
Most were suggesting that the Halina pano, or other mainly USA variants on it, had a much better lens. So I invested another few quid and bought one.
Now then, I probably didn’t use a wise film choice , it was a roll of Tri-X, not expired, that I took from a bulk roll bought last year. Why not a wise choice? well, it was quite sunny for most of the time I was shooting with the Halina so shots were over exposed and haven’t rally scanned all that well in parts. As for the grain that was a bit unknown as believe it or not this was the first time I had ever shot with Tri-X in over 35 years of photography so I wasn’t really sure what to expect but I knew it wouldn’t be grain free.
As it turned out some I liked and some not so much.
The Tri-X will get used for urban shots in the Nikon F2 in future. I will put a roll of Foma 100 in the Halina next time to see how that looks.
Remember you get a cropped 35mm negative to give you that panorama effect so there will never be much negative “real estate” for pixel peeping.
I used stock Microphen, not my normal developer either.
Anyway as for the results, putting the film choice aside, I cant really tell the difference between the two cameras. I’m sure some will be “better” than others due to “sample variation” but to be honest I kind of like both so my advice don’t waste your money on the Halina – but another roll of film and get the Wide Pix.
But hey – whatever you do, have fun.
Stay Safe Everyone.