Rafe, In my case, the negatives will be scanned and printed on my Epson 3000 printer. If the results can make a gorgeous 10x27 inch print, I'll be very happy. To see the approximate quality of this size file, I scanned two 35mm negatives Shot on a Canon EOS 1N, at 1600 DPI on my Canon Scanner, and joined them together in Photoshop. They were Technical Pan Landscapes. The resulting print was fantastic. As sharp as anything I've done to date. So if the Epson 1600 DPI Scanner can't do that good, I'll just return it and shoot two or three pictures side by side and join them in photoshop. I KNOW what the results will be if I do it that way. A little less convenient, but doable. And I'll use the full 2700 DPI next time. (Although I don't see how the print could be any sharper than it already is. Raphael Bustin wrote: > On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, Brian Reynolds wrote: > > > > > By the way, it might be considerable less expensive to get a Medium > > Format camera (perhaps used) and crop the image to a panoramic aspect > > ratio than to get the XPAN. For what it is I think the XPAN is over > > priced. > > Of course, one might say that about almost anything > that carries the "Hasselblad" brand name. > > To me, about the only thing going for XPAN is that > it uses 35 mm film, which will make it easier to > get the film itself processed. Of course, what > happens after that (prints? slides?) is anybody's guess. > > rafe b. > > - > Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use > accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions. - Please turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for instructions.