M to GF670/Bessa III...?

[Peter_S]

Hi!
I keep having this urge to try a Fuji GF670 (ever since handling one in Tokyo) or Bessa III.
Has anyone here made a switch from Leica M to GF670, or tried a GF and went back to M?

The reasons behind my pondering are:

All my serious photography is abroad, and I do mountain/sport and also documentary/reportage photography. Weight and transportability are issues. The M6, while having produced some timeless images, seems increasingly heavy and large for what it can actually do. I use a Contax T3 too (instead of a 35mm lens), and that delivers equal quality in a much smaller package.
The GF670 weights as much as my M6 with lens, with a much larger film area...tempting. My M8.2 (which I prefer to use overall) and M6 are also a bit too redundant...and the M8's image quality is so good (even when compared to Hasselblad X1 scans), the M6 sees less and less use.
For film work, a Contax T3 and GF670 could be a sweet combination that maximizes image quality (with print in mind) to weight ratio. Size is not an really an issue. I shoot very selectively these days - on each trip I shoot only 2-5 rolls of film, so the reduction to 12 images/roll is not a big deal.

Now:
- Reliability? Issues?
- Rangefinder? Anybody had their RF knocked out of alignment?
- How about repair...have you had troubles and the camera needed repair? Where did you send it to? The times my Ms spend in Solms are not funny (neither is the cash I spend annually to keep my M system running), and I am over the myth that Ms are reliable.

So I have also seen very few convincing images of the GF670 used in similar field of photograph where I would use it (portraits, documentary/reportage), but I guess that is because few people shoot MF film in this field anymore, and those who do, had their MF gear setup already and very few people ended up getting the GF670/Bessa III.

Anyways...any thoughts are appreciated, particularly from people with both M and GF670 (long term) experience.

Peter

PS - I used a Rolleiflex 3.5E for a little while. Totally loved the image quality and rendering (I would not mind having that in a RF camera) but the handling was not ideal for me...

 

[1joel1]

Yes, they are both rangefineders, but otherwise I see no overlapping and both systems must be kept.

🙂

Joel

 

[Peter_S]

Hi Joel,

in an ideal world...yes. Realistically, there are only so many cameras I want to take on a trip, use and invest into. In any case I would give the GF670 a solid few months of trial before considering parting with the M6.

 

[randyloo2]

I have both but found that I mostly use the GF. IQ is simply much better.

 

[Joakim Målare]

I bought a GF670W(ide) recently and it feels like a good decision. It's too early for me to comment on reliability issues, but I have no reason to believe I would be disappointed. Every production line has its weakness and I'm sure any problems would be handled appropriately.

I sold a ZI to finance the GF, because I find medium format worthwile in a different way than 135. I will keep my M3 for rather sentimental reasons. If there was a MF RF with the build quality of an M3 and the viewfinder of the Bessa III I wouldn't hesitate one minute, but 35 mm just doesn't interest me any more.

I chose the new Bessa for the viewfinder - an important detail in comfortable photography, I think.

 

[Peter_S]

Joakim and Randy, thank you!
I bought a GF670 recently, and testing it currently. 35mm has lost its appeal at the moment (except when using the little T3/Minilux - the small weight justifies the small negatives.). A wonderful machine. I may keep the M6 to shoot it alongside the GF670 when light changes a lot.
The viewfinder is really good; the short rangefinder base length I find the only weak point so far.

I am looking forward to a MF summer!

 

[Alex Krasotkin]

GF 670 and Bessa III are very good cameras, but to my personal taste the signature of the lens does not have same vintage look as some of Leica lenses. Perhaps Plaubel Makina expensive price is also explained by the that reason. I would keep both systems: GF670 for landscapes and M6 for street, documentary shooting.

 

[Peter_S]

hey,
I agree on that - still, one of my Ms needs to got in order to keep the GF670....probably the digital one though. Got some time to figure it out.

 

[thegman]

I went from Leica M to some different medium format cameras, but also would not hesitate to go to a GF670.

I bought a GF670 used, which arrived DOA, but then I bought a Leica too which needed to be returned. I think reliability is often luck based. Nobody would think that a Lomo LC-A+ was better built than a brand new Fujifilm Klasse S, but the Lomo survived a trip to Hawaii, the Klasse did not.

There are lots of reasons to shoot Leicas, but none for me can beat a 6x6 or 6x7 negative, so I'll always pick medium format over a Leica.

 

[mugent]

Having owned an M6 and a GF670, my thoughts are simple.

The M6 is lovely, fantastic build, we all know that, but it's 35mm, and thus, final output quality is limited.
The GF670 has good, not amazing build, but the results speak for themselves, the lens is very good.
My GF670 was perfectly reliable, but my brother had one that was DOA, it was a refurb though, so maybe it was a shoddy repair.

You've probably seen very few convincing images as there aren't many of them out there compared to Mamiya 7s or Hasselblads. Also, the GF670 is, lets be honest, a hobbyists camera (it's not a slur, I'm just saying releasing an MF folder is always going to attract certain people, i.e. me), the pros will just stick the Mamiyas and 'blads.

The GF670 is excellent, I think one of the best medium format cameras ever made, it's light, compact, great lens, accurate meter, you don't need much more than this. It's pleasingly modern, film loading is easy etc...

I had one for a while, I can't really fault it.

I also went back to M after the GF670, a mistake.

You have a high quality 35mm solution in the form of your T3, I also went to a 35mm compact post-Leica (a Nikon 35ti), don't regret it for a second, for casual shooting, it's the better camera.

 

[Mark T]

Hi Peter,

I have no experience with Fujis/Bessa Iii, but I use a Mamiya 7 as well as a Leica. I find that I use the two cameras for different things. For things out and about, not far from home, of objects, buildings and so on, I find the Mamiya 7 is great. i find 10 shots on a roll about right to expose the whole roll in similar light, and the 67 negative is great in the darkroom. Whilst I oftern find with 35 mm that I need a few outings to get through a roll. So the light can vary etc. Having said all that, when travelling the Leica is king. You need to carry less film, the lenses work in darker conditions (larger apertures), the camera tends to work better with spontaneous pictures of people, and it all occupies less bulk.

I have seen some of your wonderful pictures and for use with mountain landscapes and so on, medium format would be great. However, unless going with that specific intention I think the 35mm is a more flexible system, which occupies less bulk. The type of medium format photography we are now talking about also tends to work best with a tripod. No through the lens metering often means a light meter and so on.

In general, I don't generally think it's a good idea to travel with both medium format AND 35 mm, so wouldn't be keen on taking a Fuji and the T3. I tried it perviously and it wasn't ideal. However, have a go and let us know how you get along with it.

Best of luck!

Mark

 

[GaryLH]

There are lots of reasons to shoot Leicas, but none for me can beat a 6x6 or 6x7 negative, so I'll always pick medium format over a Leica.

Plus one.. These days when I shoot film it is 120 much more often then 135..

Gary

 

[1joel1]

The big advantage to the Leica system is the interchangable lenses and the phenomenal character they impart. The Fuji just can't do that, but it obviously excels in negative real estate.

Joel

 

[lic4]

One thing I find is that the GF670 collapses to be easier to carry in my camera bag than the M6+50mm Cron that used to be my staple combo. I find it easier to grab and go than any other camera I own at the moment.

In use it's fast, and it's easier to shoot with lower shutter speeds than the Leica M because of the low vibration of the shutter. The lens is slower though at f3.5. I've been o.k. with that because I just switched from using 100ASA film with 35mm to 400ASA with 220.

No reliability issues for me so far, but I didn't find the Leica M system to be as reliable as people say. The M rangefinder goes out of whack too easily, for instance. I've had fewer problems with my Minolta CLE kit than any of my Leica M bodies, but the reputation still exists. All this to say, in comparison the M, the GF670 should be reliable enough.

As others have said, the bottom line is the MF image quality.

 

[Peter_S]

Hi!

Thanks all for the additional thoughts.
So far I am really impressed my the GF670. I am aware of its limitations, however, and the strengths of the M6. I bought the GF670 primarily for mountain, travel and landscape photography, where 35mm film became a bit limiting. The T3 is an exception - it is so small, the lens is SO good and the results so "wow" - weight to perfomance ratio is superb; but a film M is not any stronger here, and the small digitals (X1 and DP) are equally suited at a fraction of weight (and cost) of Ms.

Still, I think the M6 (+ Sonnar...) will stay and be reserved for documentary photography, where I will go back to film (with a Leica X1 in my pocket, though), and where it will perform nicely together with the GF670 (I use two bodies for that at the same time anyway). I think the GF will do well there. Yes, only f/3.5, but then Delta 3200 is perfectly fine on MF.

I guess the M6 (particulary when in good shape and with the MP finder) is the one camera I can justify to keep even when not using it regulary (normally cameras that I do not use frequently go on the classifieds).

I will see how the GF670 handles rougher situations...the Ms did not impress me here at all (unlike the Contax bodies which just go go go).

Cheers!
Peter

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I sold my Hasselblad to buy a Mamiya 6 and the three lenses that go with it. Since doing so, I've not touched my two Leicas. The Mamiya gives far better image quality (Leica lenses are the best but they're still exposing tiny 35mm negs!) and it is not much heavier or bigger than a Leica kit. With the Hassy, I could not handhold the camera and it was too heavy to carry everywhere, so I just took it out when i knew I wanted to use it. The Leicas were my everyday carry gear, but the Mamiya has replaced them.

I have not used the Fuji/Bessa folder, but I suspect you'll not regret trading the Leicas for it, unless you need more than just a standard lens. In that case, I'd get a Mamiya 6 (if you like square, as I do) or Mamiya 7.

 

[Spicy]

sell the m8. it's one of the few leica items that virtually guaranteed to become considerably cheap as time goes on. if you want one later, you likely can find one in comparable condition and at a lower price than when you sold yours. people often say that the worst feeling is selling a prized leica lens/body and then a few years down the line finding out it's gone up in value XXX% when one tries to re-purchase it, and is no longer affordable.

 

[louisb]

I too purchased a GF670w a few months ago. I prevaricated for almost a year because of the price. The fact is that with either models there are few if any alternative for compactness or weight. And you get a spectacular 6x7 negative. I've had to give up carting around my Hasselblad kit but the GF670w at 1 kilo is just about acceptable - and the metering is so good I don't bother with carrying my Sekonic meter, either. There are some examples in my Flickr stream.

LouisB

 

[Peter_S]

Been shooting the GF670 for some days now. I love how it makes me think again really hard about light and composition.
Good exercise...but it will take me a while to wrap my head around the square.

Handling, balance and weight are perfect...This camera is something else.