GA645 or GW690???

johnny9fingers

johnny9fingers

Well-known
Local time
6:43 PM
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
341
Hi everyone, I recently sold my Isolette and miss medium format more than I imagined I would and am ready to jump back into the bigger negative world. I am interested in the GW690 foolio has for sale here, but also have my eye on a sweet little GA645 (little compared to the 690). I am trying to weigh the advantages of the auto exposure/focus of the 645 vs. the bigger neg or the 690. I will use the camera to make pictures of kids concerts, landscapes, and travel pictures, and I'm wondering if the relative speed of the 645 outweighs the benefits of the larger negative of the 690. Any advice will be appreciated.
Thanks,
9fingers
 
Do not be mistaken. All Fuji 6x9 cameras are huge and heavy. I have the old interchangable ones which are even heavier. I love mine to bits, and am probably going to be putting down another $300 or so to get the 6x7's shutter release fixed (grrr! seized on me when there were these simply gorgeous clouds in the sky). The GA645 is much more portable and 8 shots to a roll would be seriously inconvenient for travelling. Now, despite all this, I don't use my GA645 hardly at all, preferring the big Fuji for close to home where I can just bring all the film I'm likely to ever need. But I'm not insane enough to bring the 6x9 on an international trip with me.

Additional things, the 645, since it contains a meter, is much more self contained and packs down considerably smaller than the 690 ever will. It feels kind of like a big point and shoot in some ways, although the lens is very nice.

My uses lean toward putting up with the 690's quirks in return for the very nice negative and for the flexibility.
 
I dont find the relative speed a problem with the 6x9. Because even at high asa's the grain is still hardly noticable. i would say go for the 6x9 the print quality will amaze you...
 
I used to have a GA645 (sold to another member here) and it was a fabulous travel camera. For your stated uses I would think the GA645 would be just fine.
 
When I said relative speed I meant you could make a photo quicker with the 645 as it has auto exposure/focus, while with the 690 you have to set the exposure and focus manually.
 
dkirchge said:
I used to have a GA645 (sold to another member here) and it was a fabulous travel camera. For your stated uses I would think the GA645 would be just fine.
Click to expand...

Thanks Doug. I am leaning toward the 645 thinking I'm probably never going to have 20 ft by 20 ft enlargements done (ha ha) but I'm intrigued by the idea of the increased detail a larger neg would give me. Such as looking at a landscape photo and seeing a deer or wolf peering from the edge of the woods that I didn't notice while making the picture.
 
Absolutely the GA645 before the GW690. The 690 is slow, heavy, HUGE, and meterless. And no AF (which, if you like AF, is a big deal). And, the image quality . . . a AF 645 frame, if the AF is on target, is going to be nearly as sharp as a 6x9 manual focus frame on average unless you are a mutant with manual focus and your rangefinder is dead on. But, in my own experience, AF has rarely been a perfect thing.

AF, aside, all other options point at the GA645. Small, quick, more shots, metering.
 
P C Headland said:
Buy both, problem solved. You know you want to.... :p
Click to expand...

Yes, buying both would simplify things, but my bank account isn't sufficient to do that. I will eventually get them both as I have terrible gas for the fuji glass.
 
Hi Johnny9... I've never even handled a Fuji 690 but have long used a Pentax 6x7 which may be about as bulky to pack around. I don't mind packing it around, but there's no getting around the 645 RF cameras are handier to have along. I have a pair of Fuji's... the manual non-folding GS645 and a wide-angle GA645 that has all those P&S features. :)

I have a sort of love-hate relationship with the GA, as you really have to be on your toes to make sure the AF is focusing on what YOU want it to. But it focuses down to .7m and has a lovely lens. It also reads the barcode on fuji film and sets the ISO -- this "convenience" means I have to manually re-set the ISO where I want it for each roll of film. Grrr. This camera is pushing into those inteface issues where you not only should understand the technology of photography, but also understand the technology of the camera to fool it into doing what you really want. I might just be easier and more direct over all to know photography and set a manual camera to do what you want, period. If you make a mistake, tough, but you don't have to worry about the camera trying to outsmart you.

So, that brings us to my pair of Bronica RF645 cameras. Sort of like using a Leica plus Aperture-priority and Program AE as well as easy full-manual control. Very well made, great to use. My only complaint, really, is the limited range of lenses, 45, 65, and 100mm. But then on the other hand that's two more choices than the Fujis! :D But check out the Bronica here: http://www.tamron.com/bronica/
 
I'll echo the comments about the AF on the GA645... you MUST pay attention to the distance readout in the viewfinder to make sure you're where you want to be. The camera has a quirky interface, but it's not horrible; expect to read the manual. After schlepping my GA645 all over central Florida for a long, active weekend, I can honestly say that I didn't even really notice I was carrying the camera.

I won't comment on image quality of 645 compared to 6x9. I have no experience with the 6x9 format and thus can't offer an informed opinion on the subject.

If I had it to do over again, my money would still go to the GA645. You might also consider the GA 645zi with the 55-90mm zoom lens for a little more versatility in the same compact package. Doug offered up a good alternative with the Bronica RF645; I've not used one myself but from everything I've heard it would also meet your stated needs.
 
Last edited:
I could add a comment about 6x9 vs 6x4.5cm, as the latter is just "half-frame" of the former. Half the film area, twice the number of shots on the roll. Very comparable I expect to the difference between 24x36mm shots and 24x17mm half-frame 35mm shots. And like half-frame 35, the 645 frame (at least in an RF cam where the film runs through horizontally) shows a vertical picture format... you have to turn the camera to get a horizontal shot. For some folks, that's just too weird but it doesn't bother me. :)
 
Oh, yeah, well, OBVIOUSLY the RF645 would be the best possible choice in medium format. Hands down. And a half. With a cherry on top. I have used or tested pretty much every MF system out there except the Hasselblads and the Russians. That means, the Mamiyas - all of them, the Pentaxes, the Contax, rollfilm backs on 4x5 cameras, etc. And the RF645 pleases me the most of any. The Fuji doesn't compare, not even close, not on any aspect. That Fuji has AF, but as I said, AF is not all that it is cracked up to be. My sharpest shots have been manual focus (except one). AF is tricked at the worst moments, sometimes doesn't lock when you want it to, sometimes just misses - and with the FUji, you have zero visual feedback. No idea it it's on or not.

But the RF645. You could not possibly find a better medium format rangefinder. Read my loving review of it :

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14424

And it feels like heaven in your hands. The Fujis don't.
 
Oh, and GAS for fuji glass . . . . I empathize, but it isn't the best. I mean, it isn't the worst either. In other words, in my opinion and experience, there is no good optical reason to choose FUji over, say, Bronica or Mamiya. I had the great Fujinon 75mm SWD on my 4x5 once, and was never pleased with the results. My old Kodak Ektar made me happier. My Caltar made me about equally happy as the Fuji - and cost 1/10 as much.

Get a Bronica RF645 used from KEH for $800. Be happy.
 
Last edited:
If you are planning on buying only one medium format camera, don't choose a Fuji 690.

I do not find it particularly heavy, but it is huge and the shutter release is LOUD.

They don't call it the Texas Leica for nothing! :D
 
We've been discussing rangefinder cameras or rangefinder-ish cameras, but I'm going to throw this out and see what you make of it: have you considered a TLR? Reasonably easy on the budget, reasonably compact, very quiet operation, nice big 6x6 negative, and you're not peering through a viewfinder to compose but rather looking with both eyes at a ground glass or fresnel lens.

Granted, autofocus will not be an option, you're generally stuck with one focal length (except for some Mamiya models), and not all that many have built-in meters. Getting used to a reversed image on the ground glass and composing for a square can prove challenging as well (although you can just leave cropping room for later if you want to).

That said, I find my TLRs easy to operate in practice and if the negative size is important to you, it is a fair bit bigger than 645. You also don't have to decide on vertical or horizontal composition when you take the photo, either. They make a great landscape camera and are pretty dandy for portraits or unobtrusive street photography. Either my Lubitel or my Seagull would have been almost as easy to carry around as my Fuji, but not quite as handy. I'll also admit that I love the sheer "retro" nature of the cameras.

Anyway, my opinion is worth exactly what you paid for it. Decide what features you really need, try out every model you can, and enjoy whatever you end up with.
 
Last edited:
Thanks everybody, now it's time to digest all this info and what I've learned through my research. Thanks again, I know which ever camera I get I'll be happy and making what I hope are great photographs.
j9fingers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom