yoyo22
Well-known
I don't know how or why, but I believe having seen some post of 6x9 positives somewhere here in the forum triggered a massive GAS attack in me. So now I want to try out that format and during my research I have come to a point where I believe that a GW690 would be a relatively inexpensive entry point.
Could anyone please point out please which version of the GW690 would be advisable? Version I and II are available rather cheap, but how about their reliability? I am tending towards the version III.
Could anyone please point out please which version of the GW690 would be advisable? Version I and II are available rather cheap, but how about their reliability? I am tending towards the version III.
Prest_400
Multiformat
Make me feel guilty for having a few rolls of Provia sitting on the shelf and have the Fuji loaded with Portra... Without having loaded slide film for a quarter. The large transparencies are a wonder.
I have a mkIII purchased in June 2014 from a seller in Japan. User condition at a low price of ~300€, back then there were a few of these at those prices but I lost track, the trend is around $400.
From what I remember of my research, mkIII has the polycarbonate body (earlier GW's may also be plastic, but a harder kind with different texture) with ergonomic grip (IMO, quite good), rubberised focus ring (mine has a bit of slack and has a bit of play which is not nice haptics wise) and the button loading/unloading.
The red button under the spools release the catch and it's very easy to load/unload. Earlier fujis do not have this spring loaded system and it must be manually pulled, a bit more of a hassle.
Reliability wise, mine seems to fall short in RF calibration (came like this) and gives infinity at the R-f11 hyperfocal mark instead of hard infinity. Nearer distances are accurate. Look up for RF calibration issues in the Fujis and you'll find just nothing around... Reading about the Mamiyas has more stories about miscalibration and needing to baby them up.
mkIII's are rather new and probably do fine without a CLA, mkII's are still not that old. Again, the cameras are simple, so issues do not seem to be plentiful. I did get the impression that all of the models went fine without any CLA (older mkI's may require dehazing the VF).
BTW, they are kind of the best deal in large MF nowadays. Pentax 67's seem to be more hyped and I see the prices are higher for older cameras, also, they do not seem to get the bad rep for size.
I have a mkIII purchased in June 2014 from a seller in Japan. User condition at a low price of ~300€, back then there were a few of these at those prices but I lost track, the trend is around $400.
From what I remember of my research, mkIII has the polycarbonate body (earlier GW's may also be plastic, but a harder kind with different texture) with ergonomic grip (IMO, quite good), rubberised focus ring (mine has a bit of slack and has a bit of play which is not nice haptics wise) and the button loading/unloading.
The red button under the spools release the catch and it's very easy to load/unload. Earlier fujis do not have this spring loaded system and it must be manually pulled, a bit more of a hassle.
Reliability wise, mine seems to fall short in RF calibration (came like this) and gives infinity at the R-f11 hyperfocal mark instead of hard infinity. Nearer distances are accurate. Look up for RF calibration issues in the Fujis and you'll find just nothing around... Reading about the Mamiyas has more stories about miscalibration and needing to baby them up.
mkIII's are rather new and probably do fine without a CLA, mkII's are still not that old. Again, the cameras are simple, so issues do not seem to be plentiful. I did get the impression that all of the models went fine without any CLA (older mkI's may require dehazing the VF).
BTW, they are kind of the best deal in large MF nowadays. Pentax 67's seem to be more hyped and I see the prices are higher for older cameras, also, they do not seem to get the bad rep for size.
Last edited:
EdSawyer
Established
Go with the MkIII. It has a plastic/rubber outer coating but the inner body is all metal like the earlier ones. it also has the latest lens coatings and will be the most reliable since it's the newest.
JChrome
Street Worker
I have loads of time behind the MkIII and it's an excellent camera. As Ed says, it's still metal construction just covered in plastic. Very high quality and the lens is very contrasty with that EBC coating.
One point I've yet to hear is that the EBC coating changed over the years. I've always thought that it remained the same. I could be wrong but I believe that the original MKI has the same coating as the MKIII (both are EBC coating).
Not having used the earlier models I can't say to much in comparison but apparently the MKIII has a brighter VF'er but less contrasty RF patch. So if lower light is your thing then you might take that into consideration.
@Prest - Rangefinders can definitely get out of alignment but it's not too hard to open her up and adjust her (and clean the windows as well). Completely* agree about how they are the best deals in MF right now. Such great cameras.
www.stillthrill.com
One point I've yet to hear is that the EBC coating changed over the years. I've always thought that it remained the same. I could be wrong but I believe that the original MKI has the same coating as the MKIII (both are EBC coating).
Not having used the earlier models I can't say to much in comparison but apparently the MKIII has a brighter VF'er but less contrasty RF patch. So if lower light is your thing then you might take that into consideration.
@Prest - Rangefinders can definitely get out of alignment but it's not too hard to open her up and adjust her (and clean the windows as well). Completely* agree about how they are the best deals in MF right now. Such great cameras.
www.stillthrill.com
Last edited:
mike rosenlof
Insufficient information
I have owned both the ii and the iii, in opposite order. I think you should make your decision based on the condition of the camera you can find and not prefer one model over the other. The lenses are the same, the VF is slightly different, but equally usable. The mechanism that holds the film spools changed a bit, and the iii has a bubble level.
The mileage is going to make more of a difference than the model number.
--mike
The mileage is going to make more of a difference than the model number.
--mike
KenR
Well-known
I have a GSW i and a GWiii so I don't know the ii models that well. The i seems to be built like a tank with a metal skin. Changing the shutter speeds and aperture is easy because there is no integrated lens shade. However the major downside of the i is changing film - it is a real pain as you have to pry the film out of the camera with a tool (a bent paper clip) as otherwise it doesn't budge. On the iii the film issues don't exist as the spools pop out easily, but changing speeds or apertures is cumbersome because of the integrated lens shade. The body seems more delicate as it is plastic, and over the years I saw several that had "cosmetic" cracks and chips from being banged around. Thus far my iii has not suffered that fate and continues to look good despite its being the primary camera on a couple of hiking trips. Either way you can't lose as these are great cameras - my favorites.
Huss
Veteran
I had the II, returned it because the Japanese seller did not mention the haze and fungus (even though I asked if it had any), got a local III and much prefer the III for handling and use. I actually like the pull out hood that covers the aperture and shutter dials when not in use. It makes sure you always use the hood!
And this is a crazy solid camera. On a recent trip to San Fran I was about to exit my hotel elevator when a group of kids barged their way in, not caring who they bumped into. One of them ran straight into the lens of my GW, and well, I think he's still feeling it 2 months later.
And this is a crazy solid camera. On a recent trip to San Fran I was about to exit my hotel elevator when a group of kids barged their way in, not caring who they bumped into. One of them ran straight into the lens of my GW, and well, I think he's still feeling it 2 months later.
Addy101
Well-known
I have a II. They seem less popular, but the differences between these cameras are oh so small.... The II has plastic body parts, but inside it is just the same as the I. It also has the pull out hood Huss likes (unsure why he prefers the III over the II).
I chose the II because of price and condition. I'm with Mike: condition, price and availability are the reasons to decide, I, II, III less so.
I chose the II because of price and condition. I'm with Mike: condition, price and availability are the reasons to decide, I, II, III less so.
I chose the III model in 2007 because of the added convenience features. But condition is probably more important at this point. The GW670II/GW690II came in 1985, then improved in 1992 to the GW670III/GW690III with totally new VF/RF mechanism. Brightness is increased but VF-RF spot contrast is reduced, added film spool release buttons, different back latch, changed cosmetic appearance, added bubble level.
This is a tank of a camera, and as mentioned above the body structure is metal, not plastic. The rubberized outer covering is comfortable to handle, gives a secure hold and may serve to cushion bumps!
Edit: To get a shot count add ONE zero to the number you see on the bottom of the camera. For instance, 539 would be 5390 shutter actuations. Frank Marshman at Camera Wiz is an expert with Fuji rangefinders. He told me the shutter lasts hundreds of thousands of rounds, so the suggestion for service every 500 on the shot counter is flexible depending on level of future use... and these cameras are well-known for irregular frame spacing, said to check that the roller at the right of the film gate spins freely.
This is a tank of a camera, and as mentioned above the body structure is metal, not plastic. The rubberized outer covering is comfortable to handle, gives a secure hold and may serve to cushion bumps!
Edit: To get a shot count add ONE zero to the number you see on the bottom of the camera. For instance, 539 would be 5390 shutter actuations. Frank Marshman at Camera Wiz is an expert with Fuji rangefinders. He told me the shutter lasts hundreds of thousands of rounds, so the suggestion for service every 500 on the shot counter is flexible depending on level of future use... and these cameras are well-known for irregular frame spacing, said to check that the roller at the right of the film gate spins freely.
williaty
Established
Does VF brightness or VF/RF spot contrast matter more when trying to focus in low-mixed lighting like trying to focus inside a bar or in the deep woods with dappled sun?
Addy101
Well-known
You might want to look at the Dante Stella page on the GW and you can find the manual of the II here on antiquecameras.net - and there are several threads on this here and on APUG if you want more. But as I said, what I take from these, the differences aren't that big even if the viewfinder of the III is better (no problems with the II here).
narsuitus
Well-known
I selected the III version because it was still in production when I purchased it.
I selected the 6x9 version with the 65mm f/5.6 wide angle lens for landscapes, scenic shots, architectural shots, and large group portraits.
However, I selected the 6x7 version with a normal lens for shooting full-length portraits and weddings.
Fuji Medium Format Rangefinders by Narsuitus, on Flickr
tedium
Newbie
I bought a v3 and recently had it repaired and a new shutter in it. Cost me as much as the camera but well worth it. I would go for the 3 purely on the fact there are parts around still.
Surprisingly it's very light for the size.
Surprisingly it's very light for the size.
ASA 32
Well-known
Trying to fight a GAS attack on the 6x9 III. One on the big auction site showing 064 on the counter, looks clean, seller "therangefinder" feedback 100%, located in Montreal, wants $850USD, serial number 5120001. I already have Pentax 67, 67II and 645NII—what will I do with another big camera? Help me, please!
Chubberino
Well-known
That's a lot.
williaty
Established
Just a few months ago I paid hundreds less than that for one in EX+ with a lower counter than that. What you're looking at is a ripoff.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Had a version I for a couple of years. Worked very well. I think that condition means much more than model version. Of course the I is the oldest so the chance of them having the most use goes up, etc.
Unless you plan to put 20 rolls a week through it, the odds are that any version you get in good shape will last.
By the way, resetting the counter is super easy. A few screws removes the bottom plate, one or two screws removes the counter block, spin to what you want, reassemble- voila!! Your camera is now worth a hundred dollars more for four minutes work!! In other words, study wear in other places to determine use, and do not go by the counter.
Unless you plan to put 20 rolls a week through it, the odds are that any version you get in good shape will last.
By the way, resetting the counter is super easy. A few screws removes the bottom plate, one or two screws removes the counter block, spin to what you want, reassemble- voila!! Your camera is now worth a hundred dollars more for four minutes work!! In other words, study wear in other places to determine use, and do not go by the counter.
JChrome
Street Worker
Has anyone removed the plastic cover on the MKIII to show the metal underneath? Is that even possible? I sold mine some time ago but would love to see the bare metal
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
EdSawyer
Established
$850 is not a bad deal for the GSWIII version.
williaty
Established
$850 is way more than they're going for right now. Check ebay and you'll see them hundreds less. I bought mine a couple of months ago from either Adorama or KEH and I paid $540 for one in EX+ with a shutter counter of 24.