The likely person refered to was nice enough to send me some sample
negatives taken with this camera (as I recall). If this was the same camera, the lens appeared quite sharp near the (long-way) center
of the image, rolling off to somewhat soft along the bottom and top
edges. Since the image area is fairly large compared with normal
35mm, I suspect the images would look good in moderate enlargements.

>On 29 Apr 1998 17:58:43 GMT, yolin@cup.hp.com (Yolin Lih) wrote:
>It will be more helpful if you can point to a web site that has sample pictures.
>I've seen pictures from a site that sells this camera, but all are IR B&W.
>I suspect that it might not really be above the water level.

>niblue@yahoo.com wrote:
>: The Horizon 202 is certainly not a toy. It's capable of extremely sharp
>: results when used properly, although the handling (and particularily film
>: loading) isn't great.
>
>: With Velvia on a tripod it's capable of results which are easily of
>: publishable/callander quality - especially given that alternative routes to a
>: 120 degree angle of view are either very expensive, prone to distortion, or of
>: far lower quality.

>: In article <01bd72b2$4ba9b440$75a61fc3@algol.unive.it>#1/1,
>: "massimo" wrote:
>: >
>: > Is that a cheap panoramic camera or a toy?
>: > Using this one may I have sharp slides and good enlargements with a sturdy
>: > tripod
>: > and a slow film like Fuji velvia?
>: > Any users opinion is welcome!