6x7 / 6x8 Folding Camera?

[clarence]

Hello, I was wondering about 6x7 folders. The 8x10 conventional printing format made me think about aspect ratios and frame wastage. 8x10 works out to a 6x7.5 format, but surely there aren't any cameras with that specification. The Fuji GSW680 and GW680 come to mind, but they are a little too rare, expensive and big for me. As far as I know, 6x7 and 6x8 folding cameras are quite uncommon. Would anyone care to mention some?

Clarence

 

[BSchall]

Most, if not all, folders use a red window for frame alignment and counting. 120 film does not have numbers on the backing paper for 6x7/6x8. That's why you don't find 6x7 folders. 6x4.5 is close to the 8x10 aspect, so that's the best you can do with a folder.

 

[Abbazz]

Hello, I was wondering about 6x7 folders. The 8x10 conventional printing format made me think about aspect ratios and frame wastage. 8x10 works out to a 6x7.5 format, but surely there aren't any cameras with that specification. The Fuji GSW680 and GW680 come to mind, but they are a little too rare, expensive and big for me. As far as I know, 6x7 and 6x8 folding cameras are quite uncommon. Would anyone care to mention some?

Clarence,

I wouldn't call the Fuji G(S)W680 a folder.

6x7 is a relatively new format which was developed in the 1960s-70s, when the folding cameras were already history. 6x8 is even newer and has never been popular outside Japan. The only 6x7 folder I am aware of is the Plaubel Makina 67/W67/670.

Cheers,

Abbazz

 

[RML]

The only 6x7 folder I am aware of is the Plaubel Makina 67/W67/670.

Though not a folder but Polaroids taking SW70 (?) film are also 6x7.

 

[Doug]

Keep in mind that 6x7cm and the other 6x's are metric round-offs of inch-measured image sizes, and that nominal 6x7 (2-1/4x2-3/4") is about 56mm x 70mm, and that's an 8x10 proportion, why it's termed "ideal format". And 6x9cm is closer to 56x83mm (2-1/4 x 3-1/4")

 

[clarence]

Thank you for all the input. Doug's reminder that 8x10 is a rounded-off measurement was especially sobering, and BSchall's explanation for the lack of old 6x7 and 6x8 cameras was also very interesting.

The new problem is that I now desire a Plaubel Makina 67W / 670W, but will probably never afford one. I need a wide angle lens, so the the Fuji GA645W might be a better alternative.

Clarence

 

[Doug]

Hi Clarence... The Fujis are fine little cameras; I have a GA645Wi and it's excellent. Feature-laden auto-everything point'n'shoot, sharp lens and focuses close. Note that if you're more inclined to simpler mechanical cameras like the Plaubel, Fuji's earlier GS645 Wide offered a 45mm f/5.6, a stop slower than the GA and scale-focus only, but very light and compact. 6x4.5cm measures out more like 56mm x 41.5mm, essentioally a "half-frame" of 6x9, and it's a 1:.75 ratio.

 

[Spavinaw]

I have a 6X7 folding camera. Just get any 2X3 press camera with a Graflok back and a ten exposure 120 film back. It ain't little; it ain't light, but it IS a 6X7 camera that folds!

 

[kram]

Bessa iii /fujifilm GF670 are modern folding 6x7 cameras.

 

[Dwig]

Keep in mind that 6x7cm and the other 6x's are metric round-offs of inch-measured image sizes, and that nominal 6x7 (2-1/4x2-3/4") is about 56mm x 70mm, and that's an 8x10 proportion, why it's termed "ideal format"...

True, but that is the modern 15 exp format found on cameras with metered film advance.

Folders using the ruby window will be shooting a different format. They use the old standard 16 exp format which is closer to a 2:3 ratio similar to the original 8 exp "6x9" format.

 

[oftheherd]

I would have sworn Welta and some others made 6x7 models, although I think they were rare. But I have checked my sources (ebay 😀) and can't find any. Maybe I am thinking of 6x9. I think 6x9 is a nice ratio. I never wanted one until I sprang for a Zeiss 6x9 folder several years ago, looking for something less weighty than some of my Welta 6x6 cameras. Indeed light, but a very nice lens, and I learned I liked the 6x9 ratio more than I thought.