HN

Comments (90)

• rdiddly
  Huh. Panoramic cameras. That had not occurred to us, Dude.
• aeturnum
  Hah - yah a "new" panoramic camera. I'm glad to see we are seeing production on the kind of cameras that take full advantage of films' qualities. This both has an eye-watering price tag and it fits well into the "panoramic ecosystem" of older wideluxes and X-Pans ($1.5k - $3k and $4.5k+ respectively). The xpan 30mm is pushing $6k now (oh how I wish I would have paid $2k back in the day! It seemed crazy to spend the price of the whole kit again for one lens but it turns out it wasn't).Also happy to see more enthusiast camera companies. I dunno that they'll manufacture the best stuff, but in the age of "financialize everything" I'll take Jeff or the Mint Camera folks over some multinational conglomerate any day.
• Menu

  peteforde
  I've been patiently waiting for this to drop for ~5 years, and I was hoping that it would somehow be under $1000.Oh my god. $4400 is... a lot of money. $175 shipping had better include a Jeff Bridges Cameo video.Don't get me wrong: I suspect that he's spent millions of dollars getting the project to this point, and that it's a mechanically perfect instrument. Huge respect for caring this much and seeing the project through.But damn.
• NoSalt
  Huh ... he must have picked up some engineering knowledge in the grid.
• ajb
  It's surprising how long we've had these. On this page is a panoramic image taken in 1864:https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8ok-AQAAMAAJ&newbks=1&ne...It doesn't look like a photo, because at that time, the only way to mass produce an image was for an artisan to reproduce it as a wood engraving. I don't know if the ILN (which still exists! In Shoreditch high street lol) still has the original.The camera used was by the London Pantoscopic company, like this one: https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/people/cp132843...
• Menu

  anta40
  I unserstand this camera is pretty popular among street shooters/photodocumentary folks.Personally, I prefer less distortion and XPan is the better choice for that (and of course interchangeable lens support). Too bad it's bloody expensive nowadays and since the shutter is battery-dependant, you just have to accept one day it may become a paper weight.
• Menu

  tambourine_man
  I was trying to understand what’s new in this version compared to the old one. From the site:What Has Changed - Modern precision - Serviceable parts - Modern glass - Improved rewind - Custom finishes Which is a bit too vague for my taste.
• Menu

  isatty
  I don’t get the hype. I own, use and also completely love my xpan so I like the format, wideluxx isn’t even close to that.You get none of the Hasselblad glass and distortion (which I guess is what people go for with this?) for more than 100% the price of an xpan?Yes I do admit that the xpan isn’t made anymore but imo it’s still king even if you have to buy another one.
• PaulHoule
  This is what I crave if I could find the budget for it:https://www.kandaovr.com/Obsidian-Pro
• Menu

  michrassena
  It's neat that this exists, and I'm happy that people are still funding these kinds of projects.But 6x17 panoramic cameras exist at a price point with money left over for film and processing, a much larger negative, instant shutter, flash sync, wireless, more space than a nomad, etc.
• post_break
  This is neat, but I will stick with Instax wide. With a $1000 mint body you can get full control of the film. Is it the same aspect ratio? No. But I can get film at Target and it’s instant. Very cool, any analog film is awesome, but this price just isn’t sustainable.
• ginkgotree
  Dammit. Now Im out $4.5k. Most people should not buy this. I shot 200+ rolls last year, and specialize in rare / expired films. There are some people that will buy this and use it as a tool, and this is going to sell out. I can't wait to shoot on it.
• Menu

  smallerize
  Did I miss something or are there only 3 example photos?
• Menu

  freetime2
  I'm glad that this exists. I hope Wideluxx is able to make a profit and remain in operation.But for me, while I think film is cool, that's one rabbit hole that I have no interest in going down personally. And if I did, I would probably buy used vintage gear rather than spending $4,400 on a new (and extremely niche) film camera.Digitial photography and retro film simulations/filters are good enough for me if I want to add some "character" to my photos. And ideally most of the character would come from the subject rather than the medium. But I get that lots of people derive inspiration from the process and the medium - and that's why I'm glad things like this exist.
• steveBK123
  Cool to have someone bringing back a piece of gear they loved, with their own time & investment
• Menu

  _aavaa_
  > I confirm that this is a customized product and that the statutory right of withdrawal under Section 312g(2)(1) of the German Civil Code (BGB) does not apply.Interesting checkbox on the purchase page. I wonder what the implications are.
• Menu

  ajkjk
  the copy on this page is so grating. not uncommon but man can't anything just be sincere instead of fake marketing bullshit?
• Menu

  khazhoux
  For those that don't understand the connection: Jeff Bridges has been using Widelux cameras since at least the 80s. He's even got shots from the set of Tron!https://archive.nytimes.com/lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/3...https://www.reddit.com/r/lebowski/comments/1rjcrfj/behindthe...
• sgt
  Nothing but respect for Bridges. Also happens to be my all time favorite actor. This looks like a fascinating project and a genuine attempt to make films better.
• soulofmischief
  This marketing copy is so obviously written by an LLM and not a domain expert, and that currently signals to me that I should not take the company or its products seriously, because who knows what other corners they were willing to cut.
• Menu

  bhickey
  The "single exposure" brag is a bit silly. Since it's a swinging lens one side of the frame will be older than the other.
• medill1919
  The originals were mechanical challenges.
• tpoindex
  The camera abides.
• milleramp
  It really ties the room together.
• Menu

  fdsajfkldsfklds
  It seems to suffer from an un-necessary amount of panoramic distortion, unless that is supposed to be part of the charm.
• Menu

  bitwize
  He built it in a cave. With a box of scraps.
• yeah879846
  [dead]
• redsocksfan45
  [dead]
• Menu

  lschueller
  I don't see, what Jeff Bridges has actively to do with it. Besides being the marketing bait. Thr about us section just repeats the pr biography. What was his part in this camera?