Fuji GS645S Professional

[Steve M.]

Takes fantastic photos, especially if you help it a little w/ a yellow filter for B&W. Feels like a plastic toy and has a loud noise maker in the shutter (the shutter is actually a very quiet leaf shutter) that I never could figure how to disable. Viewfinder is huge and bright but the RF patch is woefully small. Surprisingly good meter considering it's in the viewfinder. I sold mine because it had to go in for a shutter repair three times in 1 year. They don't make parts for the shutters anymore. If you get a good one and don't mind it's faults it's an excellent picture taker, but if the shutter starts to get stiff or a little wobbley sell it.

 

[kuzano]

Re image quality on MF vs 35mm

Re image quality on MF vs 35mm

Obviously I don't know much about med. format, so I gotta ask if there is any advantage image-wise to them over 35mm IF you're not contemplating enlarging and mounting?

Consideration of the area difference may answer your question.

There is 2.7X more area on 6X4.5 negative than 35mm

IIRC... the increased factor of area is 4.7X more negative with 6X9 over 35mm.

That should put 6X6 at about 3X more negative than 35mm.

Given that there are other factors in MF optics that increase the image quality over 35mm, it should be very clear that medium format simply kicks butt over 35mm in comparable quality cameras.

In fact, 6X9 is almost big enough to contact print... well, OK, if you want 2.25 x 3.25 inch prints.

 

[Jim Simon]

Thanks again all.
Good things; lens, manual operation, lens, size, meter, lens.
Less good things; proximity of controls on lens, f4 being widest stop (even with 200asa film in the daylight many of the images I have were taken at 15th), dim and small rangefinder, the way one has to move one's eye about to see the meter display and then move again to find the rangefinder, noise of shutter (don't understand this as it is a leaf shutter...). Of these only the f4 factor is a real stopper.

Will see if I use it over my M2/Summaron 2.8, but as I scan and inkjet print (Epson 2400) at the moment, and as the flatbed I have at the moment is an elserly Epson 2450, I find that a Coolscanned 35mm neg just about holds its own, printed to A3+, against the 645 via my Epson flatbed... Not really, but close.

I have been musing why Fuji didn't actually make it perfect: cut the noise, put the shutter-speed dial somewhere else so the f-stops and focus were alone on the barrel, put a decent rangefinder in it, have an openended max exposure... I wouldn't have thought much R&D was needed to put these, or some of these, things, right.

However; do I keep it? I have an option of sending it back for a full refund. I do have a Yashica Mat so would still have a medium format option, though I never use it as it's too cumbersome; hence the Fuji. I wanted to find a MF option that meant I could just go out with one camera, but the 15th/s factor is not so good. I sort of know I'll still want my M2 with me...

Anyway - thanks for help. I was going to post an image here, but, really; a MF image limited to 600pix/195KB? It would show that it worked but not much else!

Jim.

 

[Jim Simon]

Just a quickie; should I be worried about the lens being a bit wobbly? The rear of the lens is fairly solid, it's from the aperture dial forward that seems to have about 1.5mm movement. The play is side to side, not in and out, and, at rest it all lays true.
The lens and its controls work ok, but the play worries me.
Jim.

 

[wallace]

Jim,

don't worry, I had my camera serviced by specialist Foto Gerhardt in Germany. (He was given all the spare parts from Fuji Germany when they stopped buisiness)
Mr. Gerhardt assured me that the play is normal (though it was a bit better after the service).
BTW: f 4.0 is not so slow for a medium format wide angle lens, comparable to a 40mm f2.0 in 35mm format. Try Tri-X if 200 ASA is too slow for you. The results are fantastic.

wallace

 

[Jim Simon]

Thanks Wallace. That's calmed me down a bit!
Funnily enough I do use Tri-X a lot, but have evolved a regime that means I expose it @ 200asa not 400. However; I have just bought some Neopan 400 and was going to run it at 400 to develop in DD-X (another new departure). BUT have also decided to try a light yellow/green filter (factor 1) which will take it back to 200! Am I my own worst enemy or what?
I realise f4 is not unreasonable, and I have an old Elmar 35mm lens that only hits a good spot at about f6.3 and above, but I was just aware how many of my shots in the first two rolls I took were at 15th and, not surprisingly, I did find that only about half of these were ok, the rest just off-sharp due to shake.
But it's a learning curve for me, and knowing that the slight wobble you commented on is not unusual is a comfort, thank you.
Any tips on Neopan 400/DD-X welcome.
Thanks again,
Jim.