Related Links:
1001 Uses for the Nimslo by Andrew Davidhazy of RIT/Photoforum
Sample photos from Nimslo panoramic homebrew (1:3)
Xpan pages
Nimslo 3D film Developing
Flash repair

Andrew Davidhazy of RIT has described a number of conversions which can be done with the low cost Nimslo 3D cameras. The charm of these cameras lies in the ease with which they can be converted to other purposes, and their low cost (often $20-25) due to being remaindered (obsoleted). Yet I was surprised to discover that these Nimslo cameras were originally over $225 US, and feature a precise all metal body in a small sized format.

The basic plan for converting a Nimslo 3D camera into a panoramic involves removing the four lenses and their related baffles. Now simply mount a lens with shutter which can cover the exposed 22mm x 72mm long channel. Take note that the Nimslo 3D channel is a true 72mm long, which is significantly longer than the standard Hasselblad/Fuji Xpan's 65mm channel length (10%+). However, the film channel is slightly narrow, being 22mm rather than the standard 24mm usually found on 35mm SLRs. You can still use 35mm film cassettes.

The standard conversion strips out the built-in light meter elements controlling the shutters. You will need to use print film (more latitude), an external lightmeter, or paper film exposure guides (for daylight and standard EV situations). Be sure to keep the four lenses and use them on bellows or several together for stereo effects. Again, Andrew Davidhazy's article(s) have many ideas worth exploring and having fun with!

The lens and shutter can be stripped from any low cost cameras, such as old folders, twin lens reflex cameras, or other sources. Ideally, you might like to have a small lens and leaf shutter to match the small size of the Nimslo 3D camera body (similar to a Nikon FE or Pentax ME Super). The Nimslo body is circa 44 mm thick. So it is a relatively easy trick to mount a standard 75mm f/3.5 leaf shutter lens from a twin lens reflex junker onto the camera (center carefully!).

Using geometry, you will note that a 22mm x 72mm triangle has a diagonal of 75.3mm, while a 56x56mm (6x6cm) square has a diagonal of 79.2mm. This math suggests that a lens that can cover a 6x6cm square (79.2mm) can also cover a rectangle of 22mm x 72mm with a diagonal of about 75mm at least as well. On the other hand, a 6x4.5cm (56mm x 45mm) lens needs a diagonal of under 72mm, so coverage might be quite marginal (but some lenses might work - you just have to try them out!).

Similarly, you can obviously use any longer lenses with 6x6cm or better coverage, such as those from folders or even press or view cameras (with integral shutter). Since the removal of the lenses in the Nimslo also removes the shutter, you are stuck having to provide some sort of shutter with your lens. The easiest and cheapest solution is probably the integral lens and leaf shutter elements from older folders or TLRs are suggested.

Unfortunately, it is pretty hard to find a small lens with the coverage for 6x6cm which has a leaf shutter. The best candidate seems to be the Mamiya interchangeable lenses for their C33/x and C22/x cameras, particularly their 55mm lens. While a bit longer and less wide than the 45mm used on the Hasselblad/Fuji Xpan, it is a lot cheaper and still pretty wide optic. Tom Fuller has described remounting this lens to use to cover 6x7cm format in a past Shutterbug, so the lens should cover the 22mm x 72mm format too. Unfortunately, this professional quality TLR lens is still $250 US or so. But you don't need the entire TLR lens, just the taking lens and shutter, so a junker lens would work too.

If you can't find a low cost very wide lens for your homebrew Nimslo XXX, then look into 0.42x ultrawide front of the lens adapters. See our pages on these ultrawide adapters for more details. These adapters can be relatively small (e.g., video camera versions), fit on front of the regular lens, and provide a ultrawide panorama effect for $25-50 US. Naturally, the quality will be less than what a true prime lens can provide, but the cost and convenience factors are quite high. You will also have a very XXX wide Nimslo, since the ultrawide adapter effectively converts the 75-80mm lens into a 0.42 x 80mm or about 30-32mm ultrawide, with substantial barrel distortion in the edges.

Even if you make a 55mm lens panoramic, you might want to consider getting an ultrawide adapter and building a dual 75mm and ultrawide adapter version. After all, for another $20-25 US, you can afford to have two Nimslo cameras, one for each lens setup!

From Panoramic Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999
From: East Coast Photography ecphoto@one.net.au
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Custom Pan Camera

List

This is exactly (well almost) what I'm wanting to do. I have a Noblex 135U (yes I'm very happy) but require a 35mm 1:2.5+ ratio camera, interchangeable lenses etc. My only reply some weeks ago (yes only 1 reply) was to modify a Nimslo (yuk !). My main purpose with this camera would be to shoot aerial photographs and therefore a rangefinder type camera would be limiting by the fact of not being able to determine polarising of scenes - I suppose I could live without this if absolutely necessary.

I was reading a copy of International Photography (a NZ magazine) a couple of days ago and came across a story by Bob Maysmor, who modified a Canon AT-1 with a Nova Anastigmat lens (f6.3 - 22) built in shutter to 1/200th. He made the comment that 'it is by no means ultra-wide)'. It gave a 24mm x 63mm image.

Unfortunately Bob gave no details on the actual making of the camera.

Anyhow Tan, I would like to discuss our findings further. I am trying to track down Bob and will advise ASAP.

As for buying (say an Xpan for instance, Simon) this would be great, but I am a full time photographer and therefore do not have the money tree in the backyard of my 50 square home beside the pool/beach/lake etc).

Craig & Sue
East Coast Photography
Mail: ecphoto@one
Website: http://web.one.net.au/~ecphoto

[Ed. note: Mr. Simon Nathan is a past Modern Photography columnist and photo author, professional panoramic user, and camera hacker and homebrewer!...]
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000
From: simonwide: , "First simonwide:Last" simonwide@earthlink.net
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Nimslo panoramic?

dear robert- ed meyers would be the one who would have information on this. you are building your own xpan and will be happy, creative all at the same time. you should also look in the photography equipment flea markets (second sunday is name of one held in firehouse, wayne, nj, well, every second sunday) and you don't need it in working order, only the transport part. simon nathan

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> Re-reading Meehan's Panoramic Photography book, I rediscovered his points
> on using a Nimslo 3-D camera as the basis for a simple panoramic camera on
> 35mm by using a larger format lens in shutter for the optics. Since these
> 3=D sell for $40-60 even on EBAY in working order, it seemed like another
> interesting way to get a circa 72mm panoramic film image on 35mm.
> Certainly a lot easier than hacking together two Nikon pro bodies anyway.
> Sure it is plasticky, but the size and cost makes it attractive to me ;-)
>
> Has anybody worked on a Nimslo panoramic, with examples? Andrew D. has some
> notes on having a nimslo panoramic camera at:
> http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-tanzania.html
>
> regards and happy holidays to all- bobm

Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000
From: Joe Durante jandvd@wtco.net
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Subject: Re: Nimslo panoramic?

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> Re-reading Meehan's Panoramic Photography book, I rediscovered his points
> on using a Nimslo 3-D camera as the basis for a simple panoramic camera on
> 35mm by using a larger format lens in shutter for the optics. Since these
> 3=D sell for $40-60 even on EBAY in working order, it seemed like another
> interesting way to get a circa 72mm panoramic film image on 35mm.
> Certainly a lot easier than hacking together two Nikon pro bodies anyway.
> Sure it is plasticky, but the size and cost makes it attractive to me ;-)

Has anybody worked on a Nimslo panoramic, with examples?

If you want a "camera" pick up a Kodak Stereo camera for conversion. It's easier to convert, just four screws an the lens assembly comes off{sell on ebay},the center section is cut out with a keyhole saw giving you a negative up to 93mm long. The sprocket that measures the film advance can be cut to get it out of the line of sight and then screwed back on in it's shorten form. To advance the film hold rewind lever(on the bottom} back and turn film "WIND",release the lever, turn until film stops--repeat one more time and now the film is advanced--cock the shutter and shoot.

No wires or electronics to deal with.

I use a view finder from an older Kodak 616.

Enjoy,

Joe Durante

Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2000
From: ADavidhazy ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
To: panorama-l@sci.monash.edu.au
Cc: ANDPPH@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: Nimslo panoramic?

> Has anybody worked on a Nimslo panoramic, with examples? Andrew D. has some
> notes on having a nimslo panoramic camera at:
> http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-tanzania.html

Bobm,

Andrew D. also has an article on the web describing how he modified the Nimslo for this purpose. It is at: http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-nimslo.html

regards,

Andrew  o o  0 0 o . o  Davidhazy, Imaging and Photo Tech
         \/\/\/\/\/\/          http://www.rit.edu/~andpph
__________|        |_____________________________________

From: lihfamily@cs.com (Lih Family)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Xpan experience ? scanning panoramic ?
Date: 22 Apr 2000

1. XPAN's viewfinder has very small magnification, ~0.5 for 45mm. Very unpleasant to use for people using SLR, especially if used to Hasselblad's 3X prism.

2. Like many 35mm interchangible RF, the TTL metering and the autoexposure are very impotent compared to SLR. For example, with ISO 100, the shutter speed can only go as slow as 2sec regardless the lighting and aperture, though the spec has 8sec max. That means you can't count on it for any indoors use or night scene. It'd take to completely redesign the lens-body linkage to fix the problem.

3. The 90mm lens's DOF is strangely small. The widest apersure in the DOF scale is f11. With RF, there're lots of chance that the scale focusing and the countable DOF scale are desired, but it's impossible with the 90mm lens. Even with RF focusing, the much smaller RF magnification and the low DOF makes it very inconvenient for a young guy like me.

4. I found it needs a lot of practice to learn the 24mm x 65mm format. While it is expected to have wider field coverage in the 65mm dimension, I usually felt that I actually lost lots of coverage in the 24mm dimension.

5. It's really light and portable. This is an excellent traveler's camera if the above issues does not matter.

From 3D Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000
From: Linda Nygren lnygren@pol.net
Subject: Re: query about nimslo 3D as stereo pair camera

This does work quite well in my experience, particularly using two adjacent lenses for closeups. I do prints mostly but have gotten some nice results with slides also. Reel 3D has a very nice book about Nimslos for about $10 which details this and other applications, and I would highly recommend the book. One can use ordinary reading glasses or photographic closeup "filters", or two types of closeups for the Nimslo are commercially available; also a "scenic" accessory lens for more distant focusing.

Stereotype(Craig Daniels):

http://www.harborside.com/pier1/

Teco Nimslo( Jim Lucas):

http://members.home.net/stereophoto/Teconimslo.htm

I don't use my Nimslo camera much for scenics, mainly because of the narrow (4p) film chips produced, although it is really a nice option where weight is a major issue (e.g. backpacking) and one does not want to carry a Realist or a twin rig etc. I would suppose that the somewhat narrow spacing of even the outer lenses at about 55mm, as well as the fixed focus at around 10 feet (OK, 3 meters) does make it more suitable for midrange subjects rather than distant subjects. -Linda

Robert Monaghan wrote:

> see http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-nimslo.html - can a nimslo or later
> 3D cameras be used for 1/2 frame stereo pairs - or is the separation too
> small? the inner lens pair would seem to be useful for macro-3D; I've
> seen suggestions to cover up the inner pair and simply produce two half
> frame images as a stereo pair - does anybody know if this works or ?? ;-)
> thanks - regards bobm

From 3D Mailing List;
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000
From: Mark Shields beamsplitter@juno.com
Subject: Re: query about nimslo 3D as stereo pair camera

Fpr Scenics distance lenses and closeup lenses for the Nimslo, Craig Daniels (StereoType) is back to his original address:

stereotype@winfinity.com

And yes, the Nimslo works quite well to make stereo pairs, including adjacent lenses for closeups--I have a lot of slides in my trays from this camera, all on Kodachrome.

Mark Shields

beamsplitter@juno.com
http://www.stmattpitt.org

[Ed. note: some comments on Xpan pros and cons..]
From: lihfamily@cs.com (Lih Family)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Date: 27 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: Hasselblad Xpan vs. Leica M4-2

I'd say the biggest disadvantage of XPAN is the lens speed.

Leica M is meant to be handle held. Its lenses do not suffer much when wide open, unlike all other lenses that I know of (they are usually best when stepped down for about two stops). Xpan is much more like them than Leica.

Xpan doesn't share Hasselblad's build reputation. Earlier releases experienced faded back coating (typically in the area that the thumb touched) and very short B setting (auto shut-off after 30sec), but the good thing is it still covered by Hasselblad's excellent service. If you happen to have one of the earlier releases, call Hasselblad USA for free back replacement and 256-sec B-setting adjustment.

Overall, I still like Xpan. It's more for landscape than for portraiture or street shots. Xpan and Leica M are the best for each situation, no replacement.

From Hasselblad Mailing List;
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2000
From: BLADHASS@aol.com
Subject: Re: X-Pan VS FUJI

leicaman@email.msn.com writes:

> I am sure the X-Pan would compete against the Fuji 6X17 at normal
> enlargement sizes... but take the prints big and the Fuji will win every
> time... Nothing to do with quality of equipment.. just the format.

The prints size we have been making from the Fuji has been 8x24 from Portra 400VC. The prints from the X-Pan was also 8x24 on Porta 400VC. And yes if we started to go bigger I'm sure the Fuji would shine, but side by side at that size, its very close. My friend did trade is Fuji in for the Linhoff 6x17 claims its better. I have used the Fuji for the last two years and find it to be a great camera. I love its prints from the slower speed films.

But that little X-Pan is great camera.

Peter Peterson

From Photo-3D mailing list;
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000
From: "Michael Georgoff (SAL-US)" Michael_Georgoff@trendmicro.com
Subject: The lowly Nishika don't get no respect!

If it weren't for the lowly Nishika, I would not be here today! (In P3D, I mean.) Someone GAVE me a Nishika (a price I couldn't beat). I shot a roll of print film, had it processed and ended up with two images per print... got out the scissors and glue and some skinny cardboard, figured out which were the outside pairs and, hoo-boy, I was in bid'ness! I was astounded to have made stereo images! Next came slide film and a box of 4-perf mounts with a $5 Radex viewer. Later, after saving my nickels, I bought a beater of a Realist 3.5... And, after tremendous and very patient initial help by legends like Dr. T and John Berkovits, I'm on my way now: real viewer, mounting rig, TDC projector, all variety of stereo goofiness and splendor.

So, let's not be too cruel to the lowly Nishika... Not only do I have lead-weight N8000 beauty (with Vincent Price video still in shrink wrap!), but I recently picked up the slim, trim, lightweight N9000 for "fair market value"!

Michael Georgoff
San Jose, CA

(Bored? Grab a Nishika N8000, tear out the nicely square lensboard and 4-image septums: now you've got a side-by-side 24x36 full frame body. Work up a pair of lenses with shutters on 36mm centers and you've got a table-top or close-portrait stereo shooter that can't be beat. Standard processing on slide film, no muss, no fuss! OR, find a great leaf-shutter lens and you could build a hell of a panorama camera given a 24x72mm film gate! C'mon, be creative!)

From: "Omar" <omar27@bemail.org>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Nishika n8000 (3D) to Homebrew Panoramic Conversion Project
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001

Anybody have any luck converting the Nishika N8000 3D Stereo camera into a
panoramic 35mm (similar to a poor man's Hasselblad Xpan)?
The unmodified Nishika looks like this:
http://www2.pair.com/shuono/hobby/3D-Cameras/nishika_j.shtml

My orignal plan is similar to the Nimslo 3D Stereo camera Project as
outlined on this website:

http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-nimslo.html


If I dremel out the the three half-frame "septums" in the cavity of the
camera I will have what amounts to one frame that is the size of two regular
size 35mm frames (24x72mm, I think?). 

I hope that makes sense. In any case, I will need a medium format lens and
shutter that will cover that amount of area with no problem. I have a few
old Polaroid Peel-Apart film cameras laying around which I am sure would
give me the coverage I need. Another options is to remove an old lens and
shutter off of a $5 dollar Pho-Tak TLR (6x6).

Are there any regular 35mm lens and shutters that might cover this wide of
an aspect?

If any of you homebrew camera photographers have any ideas or have already
built such a beast please post some possibilities. If all else fails, it
will certainly become a panoramic pinhole camera but I'd like to hear your
ideas!

Regards,
Omar
omar27@bemail.org

From: Gene Rhodes <gfrhodes@home.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Subject: Re: Nishika N8000 3D Stereo to Homebrew Panoramic Conversion Project
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001

http://www.photoprojects.net/index5.html is my similar project. I used a
Stereo Realist 3D camera body and a Schneider Optical 47 mm f8 super
angulon lens. This gives me a 24 x 102 mm image frame. It takes 3 scans
to get it into my computer.

http://www.photoprojects.net/index9.html shows my panoramic pinhole camera.
Good luck with your project Omar
Gene 

From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 
From: "Max" maxhert@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Me too!!! RE: Homebuilt X-Pan type camera...

I've done some great 6x12cm images using an old Kodak bellows camera
that was originally for 130 film. The 130 frame was 9x12cm, and I
made a mask to use it with 120 film. The Anastigmat lenses are very
good (very sharp!). The one I have is a 140mm, which isnīt exactly a
wide lens, but it can shoot extremely pleasing panoramics. It's very
much an upscale in size/downscale in price of the 35mm panoramic
thing (these cameras go for 40$ in good shape). One of the great
things is you don't even have to modify the Autographic Kodak
cameras, because those come with a window to write on the film
backing, and can be used to count the frames (obviously, to get the
12cm images you use the odd numbers for 6x6, quite easy).
The slides can be scanned in a drum scanner. And you can bet if the
camera is properly aligned a 35mm version won't come nowhere near in
picture quality.


--- In camera-fix@yahoogroups.com, "graphic99@m..." graphic99@m... wrote:
> Well it looks like I'm not the only eccentric on this maillist.....
>
> I recently picked up a Nishiksa very cheaply on eBay with the intention of
> hacking it into an X-pan type clone ** and ** I also have a spare 58mm
> Koni-Omega lens. I just haven't had the time to do anything but mental
> doodling on the project. 
>
> I'll gladly share progress notes when (and if) I get the chance (Christmas
> is always slow in the convention business and the economy has been rotten
> in general... plus thanks Mr. Bush, for all the travel false alarms and
> lack of truly effective travel security.)
>
> Can the original poster share hints on machining the Niska body to prep it
> for the lens?
>
> Is anyone else working on similar projects?
>
> Wayne
> graphic99@m...


From camera fix mailing list:
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 
From: "Christopher" canon7dude@yahoo.com
Subject: Homebuilt X-Pan type camera...

It looks like I will be needing to mount a lens soon to complete
my homebuilt x-pan. I an using an old 3-d nishika 35.. film body and
plann to mount a medium format lens to get the 73mm film chanel
coverage. As far as wide medium format lenses The 58 5.6 for the Koni-
Omega is what I am planning to use.
If anyone has any recomendations as to how I could build a
focusing lens mount for this camera please let me know. I have
several ideas for building a helical or bellows type focusing
mechanism but would like to hear others suggestions first before I
decide on a course of action.
Also I need advice on creating a lensboard. apparently nobody
makes one for the koni-omega mount.

Thanks

-Chris