Bessa III vs. Makina 67

bob338 said:
Seriously? Do you own both cameras? Have you even seen both cameras in person?
I've never used a Bessa but I seriously doubt the Plaubel is inferior to it.
Click to expand...

I was the original opener of this thread and a couple of months after buying the Bessa III is also bought a Makina 670.

The Makina is clearly the better camera in terms of optics but not very comfortable to hold.

The Bessa is ok, but (at least mine) has a couple of flaws:
- sometimes the shutter just does not open => lost shots
- battery consumption very high (especially at lower temperatures)
- very visible barrel distortion (if you are into architecture that's very annoying)
- focussing not very accurate (shorter base length than the makina) and focus mechanism very flimsy
- frame lines are only true to the format if focussed on 3m (I am speaking about the format and not about the precision)
- at least mine is focussing way beyond infinity (will have to send it in anytime soon)
- bokeh not that nice (if you are into nice bokeh)
- battery dependent

Besides that it's a fun to use camera that's very (!!) comfortable to hold.
But the Makina still is way more precise and a real tool to work with.

After another couple of months I also bought (traded in my Hasselblad 500) a Mamiya 7II, that is the perfect mix between the Bessa and the Makina (though it's not a folder of course).
Right know I'm using the Mamiya most of time and the Makina if I need the folded size or a backup-/black&white-camera.
 
I was considering those too .. I looked thru the VF of an BessaIII once and loved it. I also like the design and the compactness of a folded in Makina.
I ultimately went for a Mamiya 7 tho.
I'd love a f/2.8 lens for it but I don't necessarily need it for the stuff I do with it.

if you have the money for the bessaIII go for it. I'd love to switch my format to 6x6 sometimes, that's a killer feature.
 
- johnny -
thank you for sharing your experience. With the Makina it is indeed the lens that is attractive to me and of course also compactness of the camera when folded.

However - I would like to ask how do you find the metering on these 3 cameras (Achilles' heel of the Mamiya 6 in my opinion)
 
The Mamiya 7 and Voigtlaender are about the same.
The Makina is different as it is a 5 degree spotmeter and must be activated by an extra button. But very reliable as well. Also the Makina doesn't show shutter speeds - only under- , over-, or correct exposure.

The Makina also has a stepless aperture - so you can set any value you want.
 
The bessa is better because:
1. it's new and will be warrantied.
2. it's less expensive.
3. ability to switch formats.
4. it's new and will be warrantied!!!
5. incredibly good viewfinder and meter.

sorry guys but i think it's kind of a poor choice to buy a 30 year-old folding camera with a history of electrical problems (and will probably need a cla) over one that's brand new for nearly the same price. that's why i'm saying the bessa / 670 is clearly the better camera. disagree if you want. they both make fantastic images but the fuji comes with all the other benefits.
 
I just got a bessa for a bit over one grand us$, but I have always lusted for the makina, to me the lens on the makina has much more character, and I also don't mind the faster aperture. But I keep on hearing how fragile the camera is and how expensive it is to get it repaired. In the end I had to go with the bessa for reliability. Of course the auto exposure function is also a huge plus for me.
 
I've owned Plaubels for years and years. They are still first rate and will surpass the Bessa optically any day. As for someone saying it felt "Plasticy". Are you kidding me, that thing is a solid block of camera. It is slim and great for hiking and it feel very solid in the hand. As for being fragile, well, the winding mechanism is a bit fragile, but just don't rip to the next frame. It's not a camera for sports photography so take your time and advance to the next frame slowly and carefully and you'll never have any issues. The 670 and/or the W67 are the ones to have. The 67 is okay, but the 670 is a great improvement. Wish I still had mine but at least I still have the W67.

JMO,

Joel
 
interesting discussion.

I went with the Bessa III and have not found much to complain about with it, other than its size compared to the little Balda Baldix and Voigtländer Perkeo II cameras. It has produced excellent sharpness and nice out of focus rendering for me.

I have no experience with the Makinas, although I was tempted to look for a wide. However, I decided I'm sticking with 6x6 and the Hassy SuperWide is my favorite wide camera in that department —*that Biogon is one of 'the' lenses to me.

G
 
1joel1 said:
I've owned Plaubels for years and years. They are still first rate and will surpass the Bessa optically any day. As for someone saying it felt "Plasticy". Are you kidding me, that thing is a solid block of camera. It is slim and great for hiking and it feel very solid in the hand. As for being fragile, well, the winding mechanism is a bit fragile, but just don't rip to the next frame. It's not a camera for sports photography so take your time and advance to the next frame slowly and carefully and you'll never have any issues. The 670 and/or the W67 are the ones to have. The 67 is okay, but the 670 is a great improvement. Wish I still had mine but at least I still have the W67.

JMO,

Joel
Click to expand...

Let me know if you ever want to sell the W67, I want to be your first potential buyer.

I have owned the Plaubel Makina 670 for a couple of years or so, and it is definitely my favorite camera. In medium format, I can only compare it to my Mamiya 7II, and a Rolleiflex 6008i, which is a completely different beast (no need to discuss...).

I have not been very happy with the Mamiya. The rangefinder needed adjustment, and now the shutter button is sometimes working and sometimes not. I also was not very happy with the lightmeter--it really acts so much like a spot meter, it's annoying, plenty of images were not correctly exposed--compared to some 300 Plaubel images, there were at most 10 that were badly exposed.

Not having too many electronics I believe is a plus of the Plaubel. I use the lightmeter all the time, and find it really useful in combination with the step-less aperture ring--it's easy to slightly over- or underexpose.

And in terms of repair, I think it's marvelous that the original maker of the camera still repairs these. Let's see how Voigtlander does in 25 years. Anyway, I had mine sent in once after the film-advance acted abnormal. Here a cost break-down (translated as best as I could from German):

-Shutter mechanism defect, renewed (new part) 28,-- EURO
-Shutter testing, Rangefinder Adjustment, Camera Cleaning, Small Parts -- 5 EUR

Parts Total 33,-- EUR
Wages 110,-- EUR
Shipping (to US) 75,--EUR
Total ca. 218,--EUR

This was far from expensive, remembering my Leica M8 rangefinder adjustment.

Just my 2 cents.

Here my Makina 670 Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/drtebi/tags/makina670/
 
An old thread but I am pretty sure others will be making this decision down the line. There're some important differences in user experience between the GF670 and the Makina.

As furcafe mentions the GF670 (and W) has an aperture priority mode. This enables much more assured reactive shooting, especially if you shoot slides. At least to me, the Makina 67's operation is a little like juggling, requiring you to turn two or even three rings simultaneously (while also holding a button with your right thumb). So it enforces a slower pace for each shot, which may or may not work for your purposes.

However, the GF670 introduces a slower pace *between* shots with its film advance knob, as opposed to the Makina's faster lever. Between rolls, the GF670 is again faster because it's considerably easier to load--and it takes 220 film, for whatever it's worth now, which the Makina 67 doesn't but the 670 does.

The Nikkor does have a very beautiful classical rendition, as well as less barrel distortion than the Fujinon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom