Bronica RF645 100mm lens

399.00 pounds ... that's a good price. I saw one of these go for over $1500.00 US on eBay a while ago! 😱
 
With the problems Bronica had with the telephoto for this one, first trying to market a 135 and latter settling for a 100, how to go along with the frame lines? I understand at some point they offered a service to change the finder masks from 135 to 100.

If I were to get a used cam, how would I find out, which mask is in 100 or 135? If I tracked a lens, how would I get it changed these days? I understand the camera is now discontinued.

Ta
Joachim
 
joachim said:
With the problems Bronica had with the telephoto for this one, first trying to market a 135 and latter settling for a 100, how to go along with the frame lines? I understand at some point they offered a service to change the finder masks from 135 to 100.

If I were to get a used cam, how would I find out, which mask is in 100 or 135? If I tracked a lens, how would I get it changed these days? I understand the camera is now discontinued.

Ta
Joachim
Click to expand...



There should be the information you're after in this thread ... I asked the same question a while back.

Cheers ... Keith 🙂

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54115
 
I bought a RF645 from KEH and it is supposed to have the 100 framelines. After seeing this thread and the one Keith posted, I see that my serial# starts with 00. Which means it has the 135 framelines. Now I don't see me getting the 100 lens in the near future, but is there another way to check the framelines? I specifically bought this camera for the 100 framlines, but according to the serial# it appears to have 135. With the lens off the camera I can see that there are small framlines. Is that the 100/135? If someone can post a picture of their viewfinder with either the 100 or 135 lens, maybe I can tell which mine has.
 
I love my Bronica RF645, but I just can't understand the allure of this lens.
The 100mm is barely longer than "normal", and the 135mm is barely portrait length.
IMO it's impossible to compose critically within the tiny area defined by those framelines.
For less money one could buy a complete MF SLR outfit complete with telephoto lens...

Chris
 
yes, amazing price, but some were sold higher priced and some with lower price.
It seems the seller like his lens and need not to sale
 
ChrisPlatt said:
I love my Bronica RF645, but I just can't understand the allure of this lens.
The 100mm is barely longer than "normal", and the 135mm is barely portrait length.
IMO it's impossible to compose critically within the tiny area defined by those framelines.
For less money one could buy a complete MF SLR outfit complete with telephoto lens...

Chris
Click to expand...

The allure is not so much for portraitsure but landscape type work I think. The short tele is a super FL in this regard. Roman Loranc shoots mostly with a 210 on 5x4, which is not far off a 100 on 645. The problem with a complete SLR outfit is size, weight, flapping mirrors, noise levels and generally less suitability for hand holding esp at low speeds. The key is finding a 100mm or 135 at a good price. FWIW, I am moving away from the RF645 becus I could not find this lens at a good price. I have bought intot he Mamiya 7 and do not regret it so far. When I need somethign smaller, faster and with better handling I use a 35mm RF. The RF645 is perfectly between a leica and Mamiya 7 in handling terms, with its auto light curtain, excellent exposure compensation and generally great handling, but the Mamiya 7 has more lenses and its slower handling is less of an issue when working slowly. The 150mm on the Mam 7 is about between the 100 and 135 on the RF645 and so once again V useful for environmental portraits (not tight) or landscape work. For me, one of the benefits of the Mamiya 7 over the RF645 has been the 65mm lens, of which there is no equivalent on the RF645. 45 is wider and the 65 longer. I use the 65 on the Mamiya 7 kinda like a 35mm on 35mm, except with greater depth top to bottom. VERY useable FL and I suspect it will be on the camera 70% of the time. still, I bet I hold onto my RF645 kit....just love it and when travelling light with two lenses, it is hard to beat.

Rgds
 
Way, even though your camera serial number starts with 00, it's still likely to have the 100mm frameline conversion, done free by Bronica on a call-back. One of my RF645's has the 135mm frames, so not ALL were converted.

I rather like the 100mm, as reasonably distinct and usefully longer than the 65mm. As suggested, I have used it more for landscape than portraits. The shorter two lenses have had a lot of use for environmental portraits.
 
For anyone who finds themselves in the position I'm in where I found a 100mm lens after much searching only to discover my camera has the 135mm frame lines there is a makeshift solution. I've tried guessing the field of view and it just doesn't work for me but the CV viewfinder that came with my75mm Heliar aproximates the correct field of view very closely for the 100mm lens when mounted on my RF645. Of course the orientation is different because the Bronica shoots in portrait mode as default so I have to rotate the camera 90deg then return the camera to normal position to take the shot but at least I now have an idea of where the lens is framing. I suspect that if I keep doing it eventually I will intuatively know where the 100mm frame lines would be! 😛
 
Doug said:
Keith, I think you could have the 135 frame set swapped out for the 100 at your Tamron/Bronica importer... Maybe even at no charge!
Click to expand...

It can't be done in Australia from what I know and I'm noy keen to send the camera overseas for the frameline changeover ... maybe one day I might but at the moment I'm reluctant to spend the money!
 
Turtle said:
I am moving away from the RF645 becus I could not find this lens at a good price. I have bought intot he Mamiya 7 and do not regret it so far.
Rgds
Click to expand...

But aren't the Mamiya 7 lenses much more expensive than the RF645 lenses? Plus the cost of the camera itself, it adds up to a lot more than the high price of a 100mm RF645 lens.
 
Michael P. said:
But aren't the Mamiya 7 lenses much more expensive than the RF645 lenses? Plus the cost of the camera itself, it adds up to a lot more than the high price of a 100mm RF645 lens.
Click to expand...

Yes, very true, although I got my 150 for the mamiya 7 for far less than a RF100mm lens. My reasons were the difficulty in finding a 100/135mm (regardless of price) and also a change in role. since buying the RF645 I have obtained a Leica M for when I want something small to walk about with. I bought the Mamiya 7 because it offers the larger neg and a wider variety of lenses now that I am able to afford to do so. It is the 'slow time' camera that sits in a slignshot case if I walk about, but with wider lenses as well as easily found long lenses, it is more flexible in this regard than the RF645. However, the F645 is FAR, FAR faster in use. Better metering, better exposure comp, TTL metering, auto light blind for much quicker lens changes etc. so with the Leica, I dont need the Mamiya 7 to be fast. I need it to have the lenses I want and have a big fat neg,

However, if I could have only one camera (with 3 lenses) out of a leica M, RF645 and a Mamiya 7, I would get the RF645 set without hesitation. They are wonderful, wonderful cameras...and better built than the Mamiya 7. Ahhhh, if only they had done a 35mm lens along with a wll thought out 110 or somethng. The following would have been nice:

35,45,65,110. or 40,55 (with frame lines) 80,120
 
Turtle said:
Yes, very true, although I got my 150 for the mamiya 7 for far less than a RF100mm lens. My reasons were the difficulty in finding a 100/135mm (regardless of price) and also a change in role. since buying the RF645 I have obtained a Leica M for when I want something small to walk about with. I bought the Mamiya 7 because it offers the larger neg and a wider variety of lenses now that I am able to afford to do so. It is the 'slow time' camera that sits in a slignshot case if I walk about, but with wider lenses as well as easily found long lenses, it is more flexible in this regard than the RF645. However, the F645 is FAR, FAR faster in use. Better metering, better exposure comp, TTL metering, auto light blind for much quicker lens changes etc. so with the Leica, I dont need the Mamiya 7 to be fast. I need it to have the lenses I want and have a big fat neg,

However, if I could have only one camera (with 3 lenses) out of a leica M, RF645 and a Mamiya 7, I would get the RF645 set without hesitation. They are wonderful, wonderful cameras...and better built than the Mamiya 7. Ahhhh, if only they had done a 35mm lens along with a wll thought out 110 or somethng. The following would have been nice:

35,45,65,110. or 40,55 (with frame lines) 80,120
Click to expand...


For the perfect Bronica ... you forgot to mention an advance mechanism that's a little more consistent would also be nice. Even after a CLA mine occasionally takes two lever strokes to advance the film to the next frame ... and I've heard mention of it from other users! 😛
 
Keith said:
For the perfect Bronica ... you forgot to mention an advance mechanism that's a little more consistent would also be nice. Even after a CLA mine occasionally takes two lever strokes to advance the film to the next frame ... and I've heard mention of it from other users! 😛
Click to expand...

Good point. One of mine is perfect and the other one snags once in a blue moon at the penultimate frame but is ok after a wiggle. This camera was so darned close to being the perfect RF irrespective of format. Another reason for the switch to the Mamiya was using it sie by side with a leica, the formats are orientated the same. Used on its own the RF645's orientation did not bother me a bit.

I wish teh Mamiya 7 had TTL metering, an auto light shield and a bigger gape for fitting in those wide lenses with the long rear sections....and the lever exposure comp. That was genius. Still, one of the best things about the mamiya 7 was the least expected: the 65mm lens. Framelines included in the body and the most useable FL of them all - a 35/FF equiv of a laterally cropped 28 or a deeper 35 depending on how you want to look at it. so, so good. kinda like using a 32 on average I guess (I think the diagonal method of measuring FL equivs not nearly as handy as the linear method!)

Rgds
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom