I have the RF645

returned last night from my euro trip (London and English countryside and paris/versailles). The rf645 was my only camera companion since the digital died suddenly the day before i left. Pity, because. . . . actually, no, it was great.

I am not exactly the sharpest mentally right now - having only 11 hours of sleep in the last 4 days, but, I'd just like to say that the RF645 performed beautifully throughout the trip. Even in temperatures well below freezing, everything worked smoothly. Of course I babied it heavily, but its problem free operation was nice.

I only thing that happened that didn't please me was when a roll of Provia didn't wind tightly on the spool, and when I finished the roll and took it out, it was really "big" thanks to tons of extra space around the spool. Probably blew that roll.

I took 20 to 25 rolls of 120 on the trip, everything from PanF to Delta 3200 and NPZ800, and it was marvelous to use. I will post the pics in the next week. Hopefully they all look OK after being mercilessly scanned at airports (through a lead bag, but still) churches, museums, and pretty much anything that any tourist would be interested in seeing. Batteries last forever too.
 
shutterflower,

I purchased an RF645 a couple of weeks back on the US eBay (I live in England). Also the 65mm and 100mm lenses. Will be picking them up next weekend in the States. So was pleased to read that you're still enthusiastic about the camera. Looking forward to your pics!!!
 
Shutterflower,

Thanks for a great write-up, and the handy illustrations. How are you finding the portrait orientation? My MF usage has been the square frame only (old folder, Hassy).
 
Hi Rico -- The square format has the advantage that you never have to consider at shutter-pressing time whether to turn the camera for some other orientation. 😀 Other cameras with rectangular picture proportions do force a decision at this point, but I'm not at all sure if it makes any real difference whether you have to turn the camera to get a vertical or turn the camera to get a horizontal picture.

645 format SLRs default to horizontal while 645 RFs default to vertical. I don't recall if folks back in the 60's complained about the vertical orientation of half-frame 35's, or what the thoughts were about this back before WWII in regard to folding cameras seemingly made to work vertically or horizontally. Probably a non-issue... it is for me now, anyway.

But then one of my first cameras, about 1963, was a half-frame Petri, so I was exposed to the vertical orientation early-on. Now along with various horizontal rigs I still have half-frames, and four vertical 645 rangefinders... Here's proof that the Bronica RF645 can make horizontal shots... <grin>
 
When I was in Paris and England this Christmas, I used the RF645 for about 20 rolls of 120. The portrait orientation was not a problem, but I did end up turning it for shooting horizontal shots when using the 45mm (I intend to crop them into panoramics). But, having used horizontal framing cameras since the beginning, and having done mostly portraits for years, I am extremely used to shooting in that position. I think that the vertical frame will actually reduce how often I turn the camera, and will prove to be a blessing more than anything.

The portrait style frame is nice because it saves lots of space in the camera's design, and because it is great if you shoot people. But, if only for a while, it will also add some variety to my work, since my other cameras have all been horizontal, and the vertical frame has given me reason to rethink lots of shots.

The small size of the RF645, how compact it is, how unobtrusive it can be compared with pretty much anything in the MF market, and even much in the 35mm market, was a blessing on my trip - not to metion it fits into small carrying cases intended for small 35mm camera outfits. You have all seen Doug's shot of the RF645 and the 35mm RF and how it is nearly the same size in terms of width and depth. It fits in a case that I could not use for my D70 even - super nice.

And I'll post the pics as soon as Ivey Imaging gets my stuff done - turning it in tomorrow to be processed. THen I will scan and post.
 
here are some pics

here are some pics

These are from my Euro-trip. There are more to come. I will post them here for now, and then in the gallery, mostly because they are part of my little review thingy.
 
just these last pics. For now . . . .

all the color is NPZ800 (shot at 800). The black and white is Delta 3200, HP5, or PanF. The Delta was shot at 1600.

Nearly all of my shots were taken with the 45mm lens. I only used the 65mm for one roll . . . mostly because I wanted the DOF and the ability to get the shot when things were tight. And since I have worked with 80mm on MF since my first days, and the wide angle thing seemed appropriate for my trip.

NICE lens. Very sharp corner to corner. Focus is dead on.

Every one of my shots was taken through a cheapy UV filter that I always keep on all my lenses except when shooting portraits for $$$$.


The camera performed well. Didn't need any battery changes. Handled low light work well. Was easy to work with vertical or horizontal, and easy to mount on the a tripod. Changing film in hte field was much easier with Fuji films - I had one roll of E-6 slide off the spindle and wind improperly thanks to it not catching well initially during loading. The focus was pretty stiff on both lenses initially, but that stiffness has softened considerably. I did leave the exposure lock on once, and shot a few frames at the wrong setting. The 8 second limit on exposure was annoying a couple times, and the 500th limit was also irritating when I wanted the wide aperture while shooting with fast film during the day. But good planning solved that on following outings.

What I most enjoy about the RF645, in terms of its benefits in the field, is how easy it is to focus accurately. Really nice, bright, clear focusing patches.
 
Last edited:
uh oh, more pics. I think I will do these and one more set tomorrow.

All of these pics are from 20 rolls of Provia 400F, NPZ800, Delta 3200, PanF, and HP5. I said all the color was from NPZ only, I lied. I meant that and Provia.

Everything was scanned on my nasty Epson 3170 with Photoshop.
 
congrats on your camera, the pics look great! I love that photo of the cross.

I am playing around with a borrowed Super Ikonta right now. Cant wait to see the results. 🙂

Kind of a side question, Is it possible to do multiple exposures with bronica?
 
Yes, the RF645 has a multiple-exposure buttion on the back that lets the electronic leaf shutter recock and enable the shutter release without transporting the film. I think I used it once accidentally... 🙂
 
sircarl said:
Hi beethamd,

Thanks for the tip, but for the complete outfit -- RF645 body, 65mm, and 45mm -- Robert White is still cheaper (GBP 763.75, as opposed to Mifsuds price of GBP 798 -- both including VAT).

Too bad that 100mm lens isn't more readily available. But like you, I'd rather not lose any sleep over it!
Click to expand...

Mifsuds are cheaper at the moment since Robert White is now selling it at £700 + VAT, which is £822.50 according to my maths (or the calculator on the pc!) while Mifsuds remains the same.
 
If anyone sees any 100mms around, for this camera, PLEASE let me know. I want one - highly. Have looked everywhere and found none. :bang:

also, another note, I will be sending my RF645 body in to Tamron here in the states to have the strange creaking sound looked at. They will likely replace the body, according to the nice lady at the office in New York. I was pleased when I told her about hte problem upon using it for the first time, and that i wanted to take it with me to Europe before turning it over. She said, yeah, take it with you and use it, and then return it for another body when you get back!

The creaking sound, as i have describe already, comes from the VF when I focus. I assume it is, well obviously it is, energy releasing from some unpleasant friction inside the viewfinder.

Camera worked well on the trip though. I actually did alot of scale focusing on the trip and things worked out well. I used the 45mm largely for the DOF power it has, and shot using hyperfocus guessing. Most all of my shots were at small apertures since I have my little tripod with me most of hte time.
 
An update on my purchase last month of an RF645 with both the 65mm and 100mm lens on the US eBay site. I finally got to the States a couple of weeks ago to pick it up, and everything seems fine, except for one small detail. The camera body's viewfinder is NOT calibrated for the 100mm lens! It's the older model with the 135mm framelines. Boy, was I stupid. (Note my earlier post above, where I confidently said, "I'm assuming that someone selling an RF645 along with a 100mm lens has a camera body calibrated for that lens, otherwise why would they own the lens in the first place?") Before I placed my bid I even asked about this, and the seller replied he assumed the body and his 100mm lens were compatible, though he hadn't used the camera very much. Yet the brochure and other materials he sent me along with the camera make it clear they aren't. I now will have to send the body to Tamron here in the UK to get it modified for the 100mm (which, thankfully, the seller is reimbursing me for). Just another cautionary tale about eBay purchases.
 
Thanks for the very insightful review. I'm about to pony up for one. My MF is a H'blad - love it but at that cost don't always want to take it on the street or in inclement weather. FWIW the Brony & 65mm is great for all around. Personally I wouldn't get the 100mm, but then I have a 120mm Makro-Planar Zeiss. My goal would just be street camera w/ 65mm.

Portraits, sure go-ahead w/ the 65mm - try something new. I run portraits all the time w/ my 65mm Distagon. Thanks again. Paul
 
Carl, sounds like your seller was not being very honest in communication, and indeed felt some guilt over it! Hopefully Tamron there will check out the camera for proper function beyond just the RF mask. One of my two bodies is set for 135mm also, and I'm looking for that lens to fit it.

Paul, I think the Bronica 100mm is useful as a "long normal" as the 65mm is a somewhat "wide normal". The 100mm gives about the same view as the normal 40 and 42mm lenses for the Pen F... and only a little longer than the 58mm considered normal on some older SLRs.

I find the slightly wide-normal useful more often, so the 40mm on my CLE and 65mm on RF645 are mostly just right. KEH's recent price drop to $165 triggered my purchase today of another 65mm for my second body. That's just too good to pass up, and will cut down on lens swapping between bodies. I figure also if in future I sell one RF645 it'd be much easier if the normal lens goes with.
 
Hey George, nice photos by the way! This is the first I've looked through this thread. Do you happen to know what the close focus distance is like for the lenses you have? The med. format I'm shooting with currently seems rather restrictive when trying to get in there close for portaits on a 150mm (GS-1). This camera keeps tempting me and I wonder if that's an issue like mine and the Mamiya RF's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Fuji GW690II Frame Overlap: Resolved
Replies
0
Views
335
chuckroast
C
S
A problem on Mamiya-6
Replies
3
Views
617
Stargazer63
S
A
Bulk loaded film gets fogged/ Leitz cassettes
Replies
11
Views
315
Alizarinus
A
J
Certo Six - Vision Correction lens?
Replies
0
Views
162
j_3
J
T
Fujica GL690 65mm strange Finder
Replies
1
Views
334
Tmas
T
Back
Top Bottom