Fuji GF670 demo model on Photokina

And oh how much we do long for a 55 version, at least I would die for one! So please please please...
 
*sigh*

it's going to be a long winter.

i see the "cosina dna" has made it into production. :bang:
 
Like Roger, I had a chance to handle the Bessa III at Photokina. Not shoot with it, but handle it and two things stood out! It has the quietest shutter of ANY camera I have used. It makes a TLR Rollieflex sound like a dumptruck full of scrap metal! First I did not even think the shutter was working! But holding it up to the light and cycling through speeds with the back open, it did show it opening/closing. Photokina can be a bit noisy,even in a closed room , but I had to put the camera up to my ear to even hear it go off!
The rangefinder/frames are as good as any of the Bessa R2/R3's - ie about as good as it gets and vastly better than any other folder I have seen or used.
It is a AE camera with manual over ride if you want to.
Not a small camera by any means, but pocketable (admittedly largish pockets) and the fact that it can be switched from 6x6/6x7 - though not in mid-film as you have to turn a small control acessible only when the back is open. The frame-lines shift nicely and no "ghosting" of the set of lines not in use.
Kudos to both Fuji and Cosina Voigtlander for doing something like this. It is obviously not going to be a common camera, even among filmusers, but I can see it being used in landscape and due to the fact that the shutter is virtually vibration free - I can see it being used for 120 shots in low light. I think that it can be handheld at 1/4 sec - even with the 80mm lens.
I am dusting off my Focomat IIc in anticipation of 2009 and 120 film!
 
That's interesting news about the electronically controlled shutter being so quiet. I agree it is not going to be a common camera. I can't wait to read a review in pop photo where the reviewer laments the lack of auto focus, in-lens image stabilization or a pop up flash.

bessa3b.png
 
Last edited:
Will it also be made in silver?

Yesterday an older photographer was showing me his personal collection of cameras, many were folders, and all of them were silver.
 
Solinar said:
That's interesting news about the electronically controlled shutter being so quiet. I agree it is not going to be a common camera. I can't wait to read a review in pop photo where the reviewer laments the lack of auto focus, in-lens image stabilization or a pop up flash.

bessa3b.png
Click to expand...

Are there no hi-res images available?
I need something big for my computer background! :D
 
ClaremontPhoto said:
Yesterday an older photographer was showing me his personal collection of cameras, many were folders, and all of them were silver.
Click to expand...

most were silver of course although i have a gloss black Welta Weltur that looks very nice, they changed to silver after that, and you could say the first series of super Ikonta's were black, not to forget the very popular and smart looking original Bessa RF is gloss black as well

edit; thats just a few of the coupled rangefinder models obviously (more come to mind now)...many of the early/first (pre-war) folding rollfilm cameras were also black
 
Last edited:
frame size + outer dimensions

frame size + outer dimensions

There are more high resolution pictures on the Voigtländer.de site and a view of the opened back. Measuring there I get 56x56 68x56 mm frame sizes. The outer dimension is 176x111x63 mm, All give or take 1 mm. The construction looks solid. Edit: 7 rounded aperture blades. Sorry, too much reflections in that shot.

All in all a big camera for a 56x68 mm max format. Again I do not understand why they didn't go for a wider frame and left the blinds out. If Fuji wants to sell film, then make it 82 mm wide. If film flatness is an issue then crop the height to 50 mm and make the width 75 mm. Alpa did something similar. I'll skip this one. My budget is limited.

Good luck.


Ernst Dinkla
 
Last edited:
Ernst are you sure on the 6 aperture blades?

I may of been mistaken and the pictures wont come up for me now to check, but when i looked at those picture a few days ago I counted a lot more than that and it made a quite a circular diaphram..which i thought was in tune for what people expect for out of focus rendering nowadays

i have to agree on the size issue! i , again only from memory looking at those pics a few days back there is some space that could of been saved using smaller film rollers ect (particularly on the right hand side!). however this keeps in tune for my hopes that a future model would be 6x9. it would take a bold and brave company to release a 6x9 now, without testing the waters for the more common 6x6 and recent 6x7 formats...

i know people mention film flatness but really i havnt found too many problems with it at all in 6x9...heck they make 6x17 backs and those people dont seem to complain...
 
chippy said:
Ernst are you sure on the 6 aperture blades?

I may of been mistaken and the pictures wont come up for me now to check, but when i looked at those picture a few days ago I counted a lot more than that and it made a quite a circular diaphram..which i thought was in tune for what people expect for out of focus rendering nowadays
Click to expand...

I was mistaken, 7 blades rounded so it gives a nice round aperture. Better than the Fuji 645 folder had.
The lens at 80 mm and 56x68 mm frame size is equivalent to a 39 mm on 24x38 mm based on the diagonal angle. Some say that's wide-angle, I would say it is not. The Industar 75mm f.3.5 on the Iskra has the equivalent of 41 mm and is by that wider on 6x6 than the "Heliar" 80 mm on the Bessa III is on 6x6. The 6x9 folders that I have are around the 43 mm equivalent.

My guesswork was too optimistic on the frame size, for the rest it looks like a competent camera.

Subject closed for me now.

Ernst Dinkla
 
the 80mm on my Mamiya 7 feels like a 'more useable' standard lens to me in that I prefer 35mm equivalents for general use. Had it been 90/100mm it would be used even less. As it stands I love the 65mm FL and feel that a 70mm would be about perfect as a mild wide on such a camera. having said that, the 80mm does allow you more usefulness IMO for environmental portrait type work, so its a good compromise. Perhaps 73mm would have been better :D

I'd be tempted to keep this camera in my bag with the mamiya 7 with a roll of Pan-F 100 in for travel portraits during the day and Delta 3200 in the evening. If this lens has nice bokeh wide open, it will do nicely. My rolleicord Va had beautiful bokeh wide open. not the sharpest lens at f3.5 but dreamy OOF and nice soft corners!
 
If you look at the large photos on Voigtländer.de you can see that the back has small pin rollers, which some of the old folders have, and machined film rails, which most of the old folders don't have (they usually have a stamped metal frame). The modern film rails should improve film flatness.

Film flatness problems are hard to notice, unless you've compared a back or camera that has pretty good film flatness to something that has excellent film flatness, like a Linhof Super-Rollex back. It's a bit like the difference between using an open negative carrier and a glass negative carrier. You may be getting sharp results with the open negative carrier, but if you switch to glass, presuming the enlarger is properly aligned, you suddenly get SHARP results.
 
David Goldfarb said:
If you look at the large photos on Voigtländer.de you can see that the back has small pin rollers, which some of the old folders have, and machined film rails, which most of the old folders don't have (they usually have a stamped metal frame). The modern film rails should improve film flatness.

Film flatness problems are hard to notice, unless you've compared a back or camera that has pretty good film flatness to something that has excellent film flatness, like a Linhof Super-Rollex back. It's a bit like the difference between using an open negative carrier and a glass negative carrier. You may be getting sharp results with the open negative carrier, but if you switch to glass, presuming the enlarger is properly aligned, you suddenly get SHARP results.
Click to expand...

On the Bessa III, there's one pinch roller at the left side where the film transport starts. The roller at the right side is for frame counting and has probably a kind of elastomer tooth-wheels that run against the film edge while wheels or an axle at the back cover door will press the film against them. Similar method is used on the Iskra and Monitor folders that I have but in that case spiked wheels are used. The Iskra also has (Russian :) machined film rails.

There's a compromise to be made when selecting frame sizes. It will always be harder to get a 6x9 frame flat than a 6x7 or 645. Linhof has a reputation with its holders but Alpa converted Linhof holders to improve on that, sacrifizing the original frame size for a smaller size to improve planerity. For example the 44x66 mm size has more than 8 mm at the sides to flatten the film. There are more frame size choices. Depending on the lens + film resolution and at what size prints will be made there is a difference in detail reproduction from center to corner. Another example is the Koni Omega with its 6x7 holders that have a clamping system which is released when the film is pulled through and clamps again on the next frame.
A rigid camera construction like the Alpa and Koni makes it worth the effort to improve film flatness.

On scanner film flatness and focus correction: For the scanners that I have, the Nikon LS8000 and the Epson 3200 (later on the V700), I made wet mount holders before anyone else did and I published how to do that in early 2003. I also tweaked my 8000 wet mount holders to improve focusing on the two succesive 6x9 frame scans possible with that holder. Same for the Epsons but credit goes to Norman Koren who published some information on focus correction for the Epson 2450 holders. With some 44" inkjet printers in my shop you sure see the improvement. Way too much pixel peeping for the folder cameras I have but at least the bottleneck isn't in scanning.

Ernst Dinkla
 
The story so far...

The story so far...

Given that:
  • the Voigtlaender Bessa III cannot be higher priced than Mamiya 7II for obvious reasons,
  • it's slightly larger than Plaubel Makina 670 (length and depth),
  • a Makina 670 has recently sold for $2,100 on eBay (see here),
  • Bessa's lens is half stop slower than Makina's,
  • Mamiya 7II has interchangeable lenses,
...I conclude the logic would dictate a price no higher than about $1,900. Anything higher and people will simply buy the Mamiya.

BTW, is it just me but would it kill them to include an advance lever?

--
Jan
 
Last edited:
I'm very happy to hear that there is no loud shutter "clack" as in some other Fuji cameras.
 
And what about its minimum focusing distance? Would be nice if one could do portraits with the thing (unlike Mamiya 7).

--
Jan
 
JanPB said:
And what about its minimum focusing distance? Would be nice if one could do portraits with the thing (unlike Mamiya 7).

--
Jan
Click to expand...

personaly i find that all fixed lens camera of standard focal length, that minimum focus distance is close enough for portrait (head and torso/body shots). for head and shoulder shots i find its one of the limitations of this type camera--a longer lens is preferable
 
The minimum focusing distance, judging by the second video on this page (a blurry YouTube clip), is a bit under 1 metre (looks like 0.9?).

--
Jan
 
chippy said:
personaly i find that all fixed lens camera of standard focal length, that minimum focus distance is close enough for portrait (head and torso/body shots). for head and shoulder shots i find its one of the limitations of this type camera--a longer lens is preferable
Click to expand...

The minimum focus distance usually depends on the accuracy of the rangefinder, so if the lens were longer, it would probably have a longer minimum focus distance, and wouldn't be able to give a tighter portrait at the near focus distance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom