Bessa III (80/3.5) is out - where is Bessa IV (50/3.5) ?

Bessa III (80/3.5) is out - where is Bessa IV (50/3.5) ?

  • I expect the wide version to come

    Votes: 8 9.0%

  • I do not think it will come

    Votes: 42 47.2%

  • Not interested (prefer Mamiya 6/7 for travel)

    Votes: 9 10.1%

  • Would be interested on lens: 40 mm (~ 21 mm in 135)

    Votes: 7 7.9%

  • Would be interested on lens: 45 mm (~ 24mm in 135)

    Votes: 12 13.5%

  • Would be interested on lens: 50 - 55 mm (~ 28mm in 135)

    Votes: 18 20.2%

  • Would be interested on lens: 65 mm (~ 35 mm in 135)

    Votes: 16 18.0%
  • Total voters
    89
I'm an actual owner and don't find the camera to be flimsy at all. Still having some problems with a flashing meter display, though, which seems to occur every now and then when I go out to shoot extensively. I might send the camera in for a repair towards the end of summer before the warranty runs out.
 
Seriously, you are talking about one report of this type of breakage. It's not like all our winders are falling off.

It's a great camera that I carry with me all over NYC in my messenger bag without any issues. I just have it in a neoprene body bag. That's it. Still looks and operates like brand new.

Another guy on flickr has taken his all over the world and is a pro photographer. No issues there either.

It's ridiculous to take one story of breakage and assume the camera is inherently unreliable.
 
viridari said:
Reviews by actual owners seem a bit sparse but one of the first ones I found was a fellow on Flickr who bought a new one, had it jam after 10 rolls, and had Fuji sitting on it in the repair queue for over 4 months before he finally gave up & took a refund.
Click to expand...

You may not have read mine on this site? And I've only grown to love the camera more since then. It's an awesome piece of work. Sharp as a tack... and I have a Hasselblad system, a 4x5 rig and a very sharp 8x10 setup, just so you know what I'm comparing it to. It holds its own and then some.
 
Last edited:
chris00nj said:
A sales tax is a tax on the final sales, while a VAT is a tax on every stage of production (everytime "value" is added). So by the time the product hits the shelves, the tax portion of hte price is much higher than just the difference in the nominal VAT % and the sales tax %.
Click to expand...
It's not how it works. VAT is consumer sales tax, all VAT incurring in production chain does get written off.
 
P.S. - the focal length in 135 are based on longer side of 6x7 (69 mm) compared to longer side of 135 (36 mm).
_I may be slightly off topic but I have always understood such measurements were related to the diagonal which explains the absurdity of having two different focal lengths quoted as the wide angle recommendations for 645 and 6X6 when surely,the longer side being the same,the W.A. focal length should be the same _________________
 
Mad Mike, comparisons are indeed difficult, and in some cases absurd... for instance what is the "normal" focal length for a XPan or Widelux? Absurd to try for a formula that's equally fair to both pano and square.

If we say that all formats will be cropped to 8x10 for printing, then we could very reasonably compare focal lengths on that basis, but that's not any more realistic than going with the long side, short side, or even the diagonal. For myself, the diagonal seems the most useful compromise as a basis for comparisons. And most closely matches the "feel" in use.
 
Thinking about the OP recently, I find that the wide angle would be a good differentiator between the Bessa III and the used market. All the existing MF folders that I know of have "normal" lenses. To add to that list, you have normal lenses fixed on almost all TLRs.

What are the MF wide angle options? A Hassey with a 40mm Distagon?

There could be an untapped market there.
 
I've been thinking of the whole Fuji/Voigtlander/Cosina thing for a while now. The Bessa III is an interesting camera, a Bessa IV would be even more interesting. However quality of these cameras concerns me after a unfortunate session with a 35mm Bessa L. (I opened the thing up I found a very poorly manufactured camera made of tin and plastic.)

When I think of the Bessa series of cameras, I'm reminded now, of those collector plates from Bradford Exchange, you wouldn't eat off the plates but they look nice on a shelf.
 
chris00nj said:
Thinking about the OP recently, I find that the wide angle would be a good differentiator between the Bessa III and the used market. All the existing MF folders that I know of have "normal" lenses. To add to that list, you have normal lenses fixed on almost all TLRs.

What are the MF wide angle options? A Hassey with a 40mm Distagon?

There could be an untapped market there.
Click to expand...

There's a range of wide angle lenses for the Mamiya 6 and the 7 and then there's the Hasselblad SWC which is pretty compact compared to a 500 series Hassy (if you use it with scale focus).

Actually, I think the only viable option for a wider lens on the Bessa III seems to be a 65mm. Judging from other mf systems (Hasselblad, Mamiya) it should be fairly easy to make a 65mm lens at roughly the same size as the 80mm and fit it into the existing design for the Bessa III. Anything wider would probably require a much larger front element thus making it necessary to redesign the whole camera.
 
Could be, Jamie... A shorter focal length means the infinity position of the lens is further back closer to the film, with a shorter bellows, and it might fold up a bit more compactly.

If I had the 80mm lens model, I'd find it hard to justify buying a second Bessa with 65mm to gain so little angle of view. But as an alternative it might be viable.

Considering a 2.1x multiplier to compare 135 format to 6x7, 105mm (~50mm) is "normal", so 80mm (~38mm) is already a very versatile semi-wide. By comparison 65mm (~31mm) isn't all that much wider, though it would also be useful... especially if faster than f/5.6 ! As you suggested in post #5, 60mm (~29mm) would distance it better from the 80mm. And I'd hope they could manage f/4 within the necessary size limits.
 
Last edited:
Doug said:
Could be, Jamie... A shorter focal length means the infinity position of the lens is further back closer to the film, with a shorter bellows, and it might fold up a bit more compactly.

If I had the 80mm lens model, I'd find it hard to justify buying a second Bessa with 65mm to gain so little angle of view. But as an alternative it might be viable.

Considering a 2.1x multiplier to compare 135 format to 6x7, 105mm (~50mm) is "normal", so 80mm (~38mm) is already a very versatile semi-wide. By comparison 65mm (~31mm) isn't all that much wider, though it would also be useful... especially if faster than f/5.6 ! As you suggested in post #5, 60mm (~29mm) would distance it better from the 80mm. And I'd hope they could manage f/4 within the necessary size limits.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, I think I actually meant to write 60mm not 65mm.

Anyways, I have a Bessa III but I wouldn't buy another one whether it's 60mm, 50mm or 40mm. If they made a 60mm or 65mm I'd possibly consider selling the 80mm for the wider version but I don't see the point in having two fixed lens cameras just to have different focal lenghths. I'd rather get an interchangeable lens camera.
 
A wide version is not too surprising... what surprises me is that it appears not to be a folder.
 
Not surprising at all. A symmetrical wide-angle designed for 6x7 is going to have a big, fat rear element that sits only a few mm from the film. It's not going to fold (although the sheer count of 10 elements in 8 groups suggests something other than a symmetrical lens). And wide-angle lenses are more unforgiving of front standard misalignment than normal lenses.

If you look at the Fuji GS645W, you'll see that when Fuji went wide after the original GS645 folder, the new camera lacked the folding mechanism.

What I find more puzzling is Fuji's statement in its press release that this is "latest addition to its lineup of medium-format wide-angle cameras." Fuji discontinued the GA645Wi, GA645zi, and GSW690III a couple of years ago - so this is in fact the only true wide-angle film camera Fuji makes (or licenses).

Dante

Doug said:
A wide version is not too surprising... what surprises me is that it appears not to be a folder.
Click to expand...
 
Krosya said:
Looking at the photo - there seems to be a lens release at the mount - will it be an interchangeable lens camera?
Click to expand...

That's not a lens release, it's a lock (see the ''L''). Makes sense as since the camera doesn't fold there needs to be some other machanism to prevent the shutter to be tripped when the camera's not in use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom