Thoughts on the GF670 lens?

I posted before you mentioned that, but had to edit the photo posting, took a while 😉

To be honest though, I don't think you could have gone wrong with any of these cameras, what I've seen from the Mamiya 7 is great.
 
Jamie123 said:
This is a portrait I took of a guy that asked about my camera. Nothing special but I think it shows quite a pleasing out of focus background while being pretty sharp at the point of focus (eyes). Must've been shot wide open or close to it as it was taken inside a trainstation on a late summer afternoon. Bit too saturated for my taste but that's because I usually don't shoot slides.



I love the shallow depth of field with this camera. It's gorgeous. Thanks for posting your pics. Very nice.
Click to expand...
 
historicist said:
Not being an owner of a GF670 (looks great though, I'd love to try one) or any of the other cameras mentioned, could I perhaps mention the Mamiya 6 as a possibility?

3 lenses available (50mm, 75mm and 150mm), all collapse into the body which make it very easy to carry around. I've only got the 75mm - super sharp, slightly harsh bokeh, on all accounts the 50mm is also excellent. Ergonomics of the camera are near perfect.

Some examples:

4769140418_1b0f8b458e.jpg


4462657134_abe1476066.jpg


4334859122_3ec90134e5.jpg
Click to expand...

Beautiful pics with the Mamiya 6. I will have to give it a look-see.
 
I have owned both cameras and tested the optics of the Mamiya 7 with the 80 against the GF670. On my particular cameras, the GF670, on center, is the sharpest MF lens I have ever tested (over 120 lp/mm). Towards the periphary of the frame, the Mamiya maintains slightly better sharpness compared to the GF670, although in absolute terms, both are amazingly good right into the corners. I tested both with Rollei ATP, which is a very high resolving microfilm derivative as well as Velvia 100. In resolution terms, both are excellent and will often exceed the resolution ability of most films, when good technique is used. However, my own opinion is that the Mamiya lens rendition results in pretty harsh out of focus areas, which for my purposes makes the GF670 a more desirable optic. The OOF rendering of the Fuji lens is a lot smoother and less harsh, although not as pleasant as many other lenses I have tested.

I recently sold my Mamiya 7 system and mostly because it is just that - a whole system which almost always encourages one to leave home with too much gear. For my purposes, the fixed lens of the GF670 is a big positive - the camera is what it is and I work around it, instead of it working around me!
 
Interesting, well, I now have the Mamiya 7, I think I made the right choice, but time will tell. The GF670 still appeals a lot to me, especially having seen a Bessa III in the flesh for the first time rescently, smaller than expected and looks great in all black.
 
I have no experience with either camera, but just looking at posted pics here and others online (review by steve huff) - to me photos from GF670 dont look near as sharp as ones from Mamiya 6/7. I wonder about sample difference or scanning being a factor here.
 
Krosya said:
I have no experience with either camera, but just looking at posted pics here and others online (review by steve huff) - to me photos from GF670 dont look near as sharp as ones from Mamiya 6/7. I wonder about sample difference or scanning being a factor here.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I think Steve Huff shot everything wide open. The Bessa/GF670 lens doesn't really sharpen up to laser preciseness until about f/5.6 -- from there to f/11 it is amazingly sharp.

Wide open the lens is soft, and you can use this to your advantage for portraits, etc.
 
John NYC said:
I could be wrong, but I think Steve Huff shot everything wide open. The Bessa/GF670 lens doesn't really sharpen up to laser preciseness until about f/5.6 -- from there to f/11 it is amazingly sharp.

Wide open the lens is soft, and you can use this to your advantage for portraits, etc.
Click to expand...

John

My copy is very sharp on center wide open (80 lp/mm) - of course, the limited effective rangefinder base-lengh means that accurate focus wide open is not easy.

FWIW, I very seldom see any images, especially scans which really give any indication of what lenses can actually do online.
 
Don Hutton said:
John

My copy is very sharp on center wide open (80 lp/mm) - of course, the limited effective rangefinder base-lengh means that accurate focus wide open is not easy.

FWIW, I very seldom see any images, especially scans which really give any indication of what lenses can actually do online.
Click to expand...

What you are saying could definitely be affecting my perception of the lens wide open. I have only a few times shot it wide-open, but the results were much less sharp than where I normally shoot, the aforementioned range of stops.

All of my impressions are anecdotal from my own shots. I have never tested the lens.

I will say that I do think it out-resolves b&w film easily. A recent shot on fp4. The subject was about 150-200 feet away.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/33946021@N04/4867781538/
 
As the GF670 goes into more hands, we'll probably see more examples of what the lens can do. With modern coatings etc. it's hard to imagine that the old Bessa will out-resolve the new one, but I guess funnier things have happened.
 
Krosya said:
In this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84989

there are pics from Bessa II with Apo-Lanthar that to me look clearly better than anything I have seen from Bessa III/Fuji 667. Funny that old folder can outperform a new modern one.
Click to expand...

They're scanned with an Imacon Flextight scanner so the quality is stunning to begin with. It's also a larger neg.

FWIW, I think the colors in all but the Lamborghini pictures are terrible. Probably mostly a matter of pp.
 
Jamie123 said:
They're scanned with an Imacon Flextight scanner so the quality is stunning to begin with. It's also a larger neg.

FWIW, I think the colors in all but the Lamborghini pictures are terrible. Probably mostly a matter of pp.
Click to expand...

Everyone is allowed to edit an image as he likes it. Right, there is too much saturation and sharpening in the landscapes. A 56x88mm frame scan downsampled for the web with the right anti-aliasing routine + sharpening will create a digital like quality on a monitor screen. It will show artefacts in large prints though. And too much saturation is becoming a trend these days.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
 
Krosya said:
In this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84989

there are pics from Bessa II with Apo-Lanthar that to me look clearly better than anything I have seen from Bessa III/Fuji 667. Funny that old folder can outperform a new modern one.
Click to expand...

Those are of high image quality.

I have not shot any slide film out of my Bessa yet (and I almost exclusively shoot B&W with it), so I can't compare my own shots to those. I'm not going for that look in my work.

But in my opinion there are plenty of shots on flickr that equal or better those in terms of sharpness and contrast.

It is very difficult to judge camera quality, though, from shots posted online, since scanner model (and scanner operator skill) and experience in applying curves and sharpening in Photoshop can't really be factored out in the shots you see.
 
Last edited:
Japan---Exposures said:
http://www.galerie-photo.com/bessa-667.html

Have a look at this comparison to Hasselblad/Carl Zeiss Planar (text is in French).

Jean-Claude Mougin and Emmanuel Bigler are very well known and respected French photo reviewers.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Very interesting review.

For the at-infinity tests, his results match what I have been saying here: softer wide open and super sharp after that. I also agree with the contrast comparisons with the Hasselblad, where he favors the 'blad. Before I sold my 'blad, I thought long and hard about these things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom