eeyore
Member
Hi, I am thinking of purchasing a Fuji GW690 or 670, but not sure about what differences exist between the II and III version? I understand the lens is the same? But what are the differences? Different body construction? Size, weight? Shutter? Reliability? And the basic question is, is it worth the price difference, that is, to pay more for the III?
dtomasula
Newbie
David, as you know there is no difference between the 670/690 II and IIIs in terms of the lens. But the body was redesigned extensively.
Here are the highlights of what's new in the III versions:
Redesigned rangefinder (it's brighter). The older gold-coated beamsplitter system was replaced by a Leica-style beamsplitter.
Two small red buttons inside the film chanber are used to load the film.
To open the camera back there is a latch on the back itself. The IIs have a pull-down latch on the bottom of the camera.
The camera is more rounded and features an anatomic grip on the front and back of the right side.
The easiest way to distinguish a II from a III is by the bubble level on the top plate of the III. The II does not have a level.
Here are the highlights of what's new in the III versions:
Redesigned rangefinder (it's brighter). The older gold-coated beamsplitter system was replaced by a Leica-style beamsplitter.
Two small red buttons inside the film chanber are used to load the film.
To open the camera back there is a latch on the back itself. The IIs have a pull-down latch on the bottom of the camera.
The camera is more rounded and features an anatomic grip on the front and back of the right side.
The easiest way to distinguish a II from a III is by the bubble level on the top plate of the III. The II does not have a level.
eeyore
Member
Dean, thanks for your reply, much appreciated!
Jabash
BrooklynView
Someone told me one has a plastic body and one has a metallic body, is this true?
satbunny
Established
What prices have been seen for user GW690III?
Fredrik
Newbie
I have a GW 690 III and a GSW 690 II. I actually like the ergonomics of the II better. The III is slightly larger and feels less comfortable to hold. More "clumpsy".
Both have plastic top covers. But that is not an issue. The plasic is very strong and can take a lot of beating. Further, the chassis of the cameras is a really rigid all metal construction.
As mentioned, there is also a difference in the viewfinder construction. Take a look at Dante Stella´s site for a more detailed descrption.
Final word; Go for the II. It will save you some money for film and paper.
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/gw.html
Regards,
Fredrik
Both have plastic top covers. But that is not an issue. The plasic is very strong and can take a lot of beating. Further, the chassis of the cameras is a really rigid all metal construction.
As mentioned, there is also a difference in the viewfinder construction. Take a look at Dante Stella´s site for a more detailed descrption.
Final word; Go for the II. It will save you some money for film and paper.
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/gw.html
Regards,
Fredrik