jett
Well-known
My experience is with 35mm RF's/SLRs and 6x6 TLR's/SLRs. Now, I'm craving a 6x9 camera for that beautiful tonality and 3:2 ratio. My application is handheld, available light, casual portraits.
I've decided to try a folder, Bessa II - Skopar, for casual landscape/street/general use; however, I don't feel that classic folders are the best 6x9 cameras out there because of their problematic design ( not the lens designs but the front standard rigidness and film flatness issues, mostly).
I want to try a more "rigid' camera to make more out of 6x9. I was thinking of getting a Mamiya Universal with a 100mm f3.5/f2.8 lens or a Fuji GL/BL with a 100mm f3.5. I only care about a standard lens. I don't need a meter or any type of automation (AE, film advance, and etc.). I haven't researched these cameras too heavily but...
1. How is the size/weight/handling between the two?
2. How is low light shooting and noise? I believe that the slower shutter speeds are problematic for larger SLRs, such as the Pentax 67 (although this is debatable). Can I expect to shoot at 1/30th of a second?
3. I assume that both lenses are sharp enough. Any thoughts on the bokeh? I'm a slightly more interested in the Mamiya because of that 100mm f2.8 lens, but I haven't seen many samples. Is it a dog?
Any other impressions/advice is greatly appreciated.
I've decided to try a folder, Bessa II - Skopar, for casual landscape/street/general use; however, I don't feel that classic folders are the best 6x9 cameras out there because of their problematic design ( not the lens designs but the front standard rigidness and film flatness issues, mostly).
I want to try a more "rigid' camera to make more out of 6x9. I was thinking of getting a Mamiya Universal with a 100mm f3.5/f2.8 lens or a Fuji GL/BL with a 100mm f3.5. I only care about a standard lens. I don't need a meter or any type of automation (AE, film advance, and etc.). I haven't researched these cameras too heavily but...
1. How is the size/weight/handling between the two?
2. How is low light shooting and noise? I believe that the slower shutter speeds are problematic for larger SLRs, such as the Pentax 67 (although this is debatable). Can I expect to shoot at 1/30th of a second?
3. I assume that both lenses are sharp enough. Any thoughts on the bokeh? I'm a slightly more interested in the Mamiya because of that 100mm f2.8 lens, but I haven't seen many samples. Is it a dog?
Any other impressions/advice is greatly appreciated.
marek_
Established
I have quite a few folders and haven't experienced any issues with the front standard alignment/rigidness. The 6x9 folder I'm currently using most is a Zeiss Ikonta and it's build is solid as a rock. I would say that the sturdiness will depend on how the cameras has been taken care of - used by someone with heavy hands then it may be more prone to the issues you have commented on.
If you want a "casual landscape/street/general" camera, the two you have mentioned would not come to my mind. Both are very big so casually walking around with one may turn out not so casual. Handling is quite personal. I think Mamiya TLRs are ergonomic and nice to handle - many other disagree. For what you're looking for I'd give a folder a second thought - light, compact when not using (slips into jacket pocket), protected when not in use, most have excellent lenses, simple to service. Get one in very good condition and you shouldn't have any problems you've highlighted.
Mark
If you want a "casual landscape/street/general" camera, the two you have mentioned would not come to my mind. Both are very big so casually walking around with one may turn out not so casual. Handling is quite personal. I think Mamiya TLRs are ergonomic and nice to handle - many other disagree. For what you're looking for I'd give a folder a second thought - light, compact when not using (slips into jacket pocket), protected when not in use, most have excellent lenses, simple to service. Get one in very good condition and you shouldn't have any problems you've highlighted.
Mark
jett
Well-known
thanks for your input.
I was unclear. I meant that I would like try both cameras: folder for general use and something rigid for image quality. The two aforementioned cameras do seem cumbersome to carry...
I may perhaps take it slow and find a nice folder first. Every other 6x7/6x9 camera seems like a pain to lug...
I was unclear. I meant that I would like try both cameras: folder for general use and something rigid for image quality. The two aforementioned cameras do seem cumbersome to carry...
I may perhaps take it slow and find a nice folder first. Every other 6x7/6x9 camera seems like a pain to lug...
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
I happen to have both, in several variations. They are similarly heavy - the GL indeed is the heaviest of them, about the weight of a RB67 or Pentax 67, and the later Fujis and Mamiya Universal still are the weight of a RZ67, so you don't really save weight by having no SLR. The Fujis are about the size of the Pentax 67, minus prism, while the Mamiya is a monster, more than twice that size. The Mamiya has separate transport and shutter cocking levers, and only the rare and expensive Type 3 magazine with built-in release knob has a rudimentary dual exposure prevention interlock, while the Fujis are single lever wind like any modern small format camera.
Given a leaf shutter, no mirror bounce and a heavy camera, 1/30 is quite manageable. But when calculating like that, you forget that the point of a bigger negative are bigger prints - printing to the same ratio as in small format, you will see shake set in one to three stops earlier, as the threshold at which it is hidden by grain is somewhere else. Much like in small format, acceptable shake really depends on print size.
The 100/2.8 is a fine lens, but so are the f/3.5 lenses - overall, the difference is so small that I pick cameras by convenience rather than by lens, and prefer the faster and more ergonomic Fujis for 100mm and 65mm, using the Universal only with the 50mm and 150mm, or for Polaroids.
Given a leaf shutter, no mirror bounce and a heavy camera, 1/30 is quite manageable. But when calculating like that, you forget that the point of a bigger negative are bigger prints - printing to the same ratio as in small format, you will see shake set in one to three stops earlier, as the threshold at which it is hidden by grain is somewhere else. Much like in small format, acceptable shake really depends on print size.
The 100/2.8 is a fine lens, but so are the f/3.5 lenses - overall, the difference is so small that I pick cameras by convenience rather than by lens, and prefer the faster and more ergonomic Fujis for 100mm and 65mm, using the Universal only with the 50mm and 150mm, or for Polaroids.
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
Fuji is the most "35mm-like" in terms of its handling. Pentax 6x7 comes in second, but it is a very hard camera to load quickly (it does have astounding film flatness, though). You can also get the Fuji with an AE 100mm lens. A Mamiya Universal is a little kludgy, although it has great lenses.
On Sevo's point, on the Fuji cameras, 1/actual focal length (so 100mm lens at 1/125) more than suffices for TMX. On TMY, 1/35mm-equivalent-focal length seems to work well enough (so round 1/45 up to 1/60 for a 100mm lens).
Dante
On Sevo's point, on the Fuji cameras, 1/actual focal length (so 100mm lens at 1/125) more than suffices for TMX. On TMY, 1/35mm-equivalent-focal length seems to work well enough (so round 1/45 up to 1/60 for a 100mm lens).
Dante
Spanik
Well-known
Have also both camera's (Mamiya Super 23, G690BL) and I prefer the Fuji by far to use and carry. Unless I want to take more than 2 lenses, then the Mamiya has an advantage. You can't even drop the Mamiya in a bag because of the shutter release cable hanging about. The Mamiya is awkward for me with the lefthanded shutter release (could be an advantage for a lefthanded user). And this makes me move the camera more than I do with the Fuji. So I need higher speeds with it. I find the patch of my Fuji better visible than the Mamiya. And the ergonomics of arming and transport are decidedly better on the Fuji. Also on my Mamiya the bellows at the back do seem to have a life of their own.
Shutter noise isn't an issue on either. The Fuji shutter is so silent I often wonder if it worked. But the Fuji makes quite some noise when advancing the film.
But the Mamiya is a bit easier to find, cheaper (certainly the lenses), has backs (that can also give 6x7 and 6x4.5).
Don't think you're going to enjoy a folder after seeing the results of either the Mamiya or Fuji.
Shutter noise isn't an issue on either. The Fuji shutter is so silent I often wonder if it worked. But the Fuji makes quite some noise when advancing the film.
But the Mamiya is a bit easier to find, cheaper (certainly the lenses), has backs (that can also give 6x7 and 6x4.5).
Don't think you're going to enjoy a folder after seeing the results of either the Mamiya or Fuji.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
As I have often done before, I'd recommend the MUP heartily.
Despite its bulk, once you get used to it, it flows well with spontaneous shooting. And because of its bulk, you can get sharp photos in low light.
And definitely strive to get the 100/2.8 lens.
Despite its bulk, once you get used to it, it flows well with spontaneous shooting. And because of its bulk, you can get sharp photos in low light.
And definitely strive to get the 100/2.8 lens.
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
I had the same idea. I tried two paths that both worked reasonably well. In my case, I wanted to take the plunge without investing big money.
1. Baby Graphic press camera. Roll film. Kalart rangefinder. There are some pretty good lenses for these cameras. Light weight, compact when folded.
2. Mamiya Press. Heavier and doesn't fold. Higher quality, IMHO very good quality. 6x9 back has excellent film flatness. Rangefinder. The 100 f/2.8 and the 75mm are really great lenses.
If money had been no object, then it would have been Mamiya 7 or a Blad.
1. Baby Graphic press camera. Roll film. Kalart rangefinder. There are some pretty good lenses for these cameras. Light weight, compact when folded.
2. Mamiya Press. Heavier and doesn't fold. Higher quality, IMHO very good quality. 6x9 back has excellent film flatness. Rangefinder. The 100 f/2.8 and the 75mm are really great lenses.
If money had been no object, then it would have been Mamiya 7 or a Blad.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Like the Colonel says, there are drawbacks to the Mamiya Press (Standard, Super, Universal). But that negative:
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
since you are "not bothering" with other than normal lenses, id ont see why bother with Fuji GL/BL. Go for the GW690 for the "solid" choice.
I have one (GW690II version) and it produces amazing 6x9 frames. Very simple and robust design, relatively easy to load, failproof.N light meter or other obstruction, good viewfinder, due to the size/weight and orientation it's not so good for vertical shots on a tripod.
I have one (GW690II version) and it produces amazing 6x9 frames. Very simple and robust design, relatively easy to load, failproof.N light meter or other obstruction, good viewfinder, due to the size/weight and orientation it's not so good for vertical shots on a tripod.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
And 1/30s is pushing it handheld even in a rangefinder design, for a 6x9 90-100mm lens. At least for me.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
Jett - you are over thinking it a bit with regards to the possible problems of using a 6x9 folder. For instance, with the exception of the Bessa II - I have not encountered a problem with jiggly front standard on a 6x9 folder.
Also - I haven't found front cell focusing and an uncoupled RF to be a show stopper - but the two together will slow things down.
With that said - the nice features with regards to the more modern Fuji GW series are the excellent viewfinder with parallax corrected frame lines, a great Planar-type unit-focusing EBC Fujinon lens - along with modern film loading and auto stop winding.
Now, if I had to shoot professionally, the Fuji or maybe a Mamiya 7 would be my pick over a vintage folder. The packaging of the Fuji is just like 35mm fixed-lens RF camera of the 1970'ies with only one fly in the ointment - bulk - which brings me back to 6x9 folders.
I have only just enough room in my favorite, city-friendly, over the shoulder satchel for the Big Fuji - or - I can easily slip in both a compact 35mm RF and a 6x9 folder into the same satchel. Just a random thought.
PS - I have a Fuji GW 690III due to its bulk, it gets used on one or two weeks per year.
Also - I haven't found front cell focusing and an uncoupled RF to be a show stopper - but the two together will slow things down.
With that said - the nice features with regards to the more modern Fuji GW series are the excellent viewfinder with parallax corrected frame lines, a great Planar-type unit-focusing EBC Fujinon lens - along with modern film loading and auto stop winding.
Now, if I had to shoot professionally, the Fuji or maybe a Mamiya 7 would be my pick over a vintage folder. The packaging of the Fuji is just like 35mm fixed-lens RF camera of the 1970'ies with only one fly in the ointment - bulk - which brings me back to 6x9 folders.
I have only just enough room in my favorite, city-friendly, over the shoulder satchel for the Big Fuji - or - I can easily slip in both a compact 35mm RF and a 6x9 folder into the same satchel. Just a random thought.
PS - I have a Fuji GW 690III due to its bulk, it gets used on one or two weeks per year.
jett
Well-known
My concern with folders is that I would like to shoot at wide apertures and at close distances. The bessa, as you have mentioned, is not the most rigid. Front cell focusing isn't ideal but i might be overanalyzing that...A coupled rangefinder is important for my application. If I were shooting landscape then I wouldn't be concerned with front cell focusing or a rangefinder, but this is not the case.
awbphotog
Well-known
My trusty Fuji G690BL goes with me everywhere. The heft really isn't as bad as people say it is...and I'm no body builder. I say as far as convenience, familiarity, and sheer image quality, the Fuji 6x9 is the way to go. Get a hand held meter or a clip on and you're golden. Good luck!
Andy
Andy
kuzano
Veteran
After owning shooting many 645 camera's I switched to 6X9. I shot mamiya 23 super, and Universal press.
Then I began reading a lot about the early Fujica and bought one. (Thanks Dante) After using the Fujica for awhile, I sold all my Mamiya Press gear.
I consider the optics comparable. I had the 2.8 Mamiya lens. It was a great lens, but I did not find it considerably superior to the 3.5. I sold it for what may seem an odd reason. It was too valuable at the time to take into the field. My medium format is knock about shooting and I do not like to have overly expensive equipment for the amount of shooting I do.
The Mamiya was a good system, but it had a couple of detracters. I did not like the lack of interlocks in the camera. Was always fighting forgetting to cock the shutter, and I do not shoot mulitiple shots on one frame by choice.
It's a System camera. There were too many choices of attachable equipment for me. There was always some attachment I was looking for, and oddly the one's I wanted to try were not cheap, in spite of the availability of used gear.
It's somewhat more bulky (to me) and tricky to handle (the interlock problem) in the field.
Otherwise, I was very happy with the images from the 100mm and 75mm lens. Even had the 50mm for a while.
The Fujica was a very different camera. I've had the G690, the bl, and the GL with two shutter buttons.
Right now I have a very cosmetically challenged GL690 with the 100m lens. It just came back from a rebuild (repair of the transport and CLA) by Frank Marshman in Virginia. Got it back a month ago.
Looks ugly, shoots sweet. Heavily brassed, and Frank also tapped various dents in the top hood back into place. Franks been doing Fujica's for me for about 15 years now. Almost every one I buy goes to him. Very reasonable and fast.
The Fujica is Big... so was the Mamiya. However the Fujica is just a large, very simple, non battery dependant rangefinder camera. Put a strap on it and go. The lens selection for me boils down to the 100, and the 65mm.
I never expect the dark slide for midroll changes to work. I also do NOT consider it a bonus when it does. Who changes lenses midroll when you only get 8 frames on a 120 roll. 220 film is essentially gone. I buy all my film on eBay, and I buy mostly expired film from sellers with high count and 100% positive feedback, and refrigerate their film. Consistently shooting film expired in the late 90's and from 2000 on.
I don't have a real problem with the weight of the IL bodies, but I did buy a very nice GSW690 from a fellow in Portland... Don Metz. He had taken a long trip and used the GSW690 on the trip.
I used the camera for about a year, and realized it was one of my pet peeves. GREAT images, but far too nice a camera for me to be carrying around. The GW and GSW fixed lens camera's with the EBC coatings on the lens are considerably lighter and non fussy to work as the heavier G690 based bodies.
For some samples, here is the pBase gallery called Neon Highways that Don shot with the GSW before I purchased it from him.
http://www.pbase.com/neonhighways/inbox
Special Note: I like to do Panoramic shooting on 120 film, but I am far too cheap to buy a dedicated 6X17 camera. A setup can run $2000 to $4000. So, in lieu of expensive equipment, I take my big ole Fujica 690 and on a tripod shoot 2, perhaps 3 frames with overlap. Then I have the images scanned, and I stitch them together. I have gotten roughly 6X17 and in some cases near 6X24 CM panoramas that came out quite nicely.
Then I began reading a lot about the early Fujica and bought one. (Thanks Dante) After using the Fujica for awhile, I sold all my Mamiya Press gear.
I consider the optics comparable. I had the 2.8 Mamiya lens. It was a great lens, but I did not find it considerably superior to the 3.5. I sold it for what may seem an odd reason. It was too valuable at the time to take into the field. My medium format is knock about shooting and I do not like to have overly expensive equipment for the amount of shooting I do.
The Mamiya was a good system, but it had a couple of detracters. I did not like the lack of interlocks in the camera. Was always fighting forgetting to cock the shutter, and I do not shoot mulitiple shots on one frame by choice.
It's a System camera. There were too many choices of attachable equipment for me. There was always some attachment I was looking for, and oddly the one's I wanted to try were not cheap, in spite of the availability of used gear.
It's somewhat more bulky (to me) and tricky to handle (the interlock problem) in the field.
Otherwise, I was very happy with the images from the 100mm and 75mm lens. Even had the 50mm for a while.
The Fujica was a very different camera. I've had the G690, the bl, and the GL with two shutter buttons.
Right now I have a very cosmetically challenged GL690 with the 100m lens. It just came back from a rebuild (repair of the transport and CLA) by Frank Marshman in Virginia. Got it back a month ago.
Looks ugly, shoots sweet. Heavily brassed, and Frank also tapped various dents in the top hood back into place. Franks been doing Fujica's for me for about 15 years now. Almost every one I buy goes to him. Very reasonable and fast.
The Fujica is Big... so was the Mamiya. However the Fujica is just a large, very simple, non battery dependant rangefinder camera. Put a strap on it and go. The lens selection for me boils down to the 100, and the 65mm.
I never expect the dark slide for midroll changes to work. I also do NOT consider it a bonus when it does. Who changes lenses midroll when you only get 8 frames on a 120 roll. 220 film is essentially gone. I buy all my film on eBay, and I buy mostly expired film from sellers with high count and 100% positive feedback, and refrigerate their film. Consistently shooting film expired in the late 90's and from 2000 on.
I don't have a real problem with the weight of the IL bodies, but I did buy a very nice GSW690 from a fellow in Portland... Don Metz. He had taken a long trip and used the GSW690 on the trip.
I used the camera for about a year, and realized it was one of my pet peeves. GREAT images, but far too nice a camera for me to be carrying around. The GW and GSW fixed lens camera's with the EBC coatings on the lens are considerably lighter and non fussy to work as the heavier G690 based bodies.
For some samples, here is the pBase gallery called Neon Highways that Don shot with the GSW before I purchased it from him.
http://www.pbase.com/neonhighways/inbox
Special Note: I like to do Panoramic shooting on 120 film, but I am far too cheap to buy a dedicated 6X17 camera. A setup can run $2000 to $4000. So, in lieu of expensive equipment, I take my big ole Fujica 690 and on a tripod shoot 2, perhaps 3 frames with overlap. Then I have the images scanned, and I stitch them together. I have gotten roughly 6X17 and in some cases near 6X24 CM panoramas that came out quite nicely.
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
But none of the mentioned lenses are particularly fast, were originally designed for low light operation or focus that close. If you are really after that, it might be better to get a RZ67 with 110/2.8 - these have grown amazingly cheap (indeed a kit would be much cheaper than the Press 100/2.8 by itself), and it performs much better wide open and will focus down to 30cm...
Spanik
Well-known
Apart from the RZ I agree. Most of these camera's do'n focus closer than a meter or so. Unless you start to mess with hard to find close-up attachments. And at those distances their rangefinders are approximate at best. Also a reason those lenses are limited to f2.8-f4.
jett
Well-known
I consider f3.5/f4 wide and 1m close....
oftheherd
Veteran
I have and have used the Super Press 23. Very good camera imho. There was a time when I had a bad back problem and simply could not use it. That is its biggest drawback as far as I am concerned. I have lessened the back problem but am a little out of the habit of using the 23. The back problem drove me to folders which I have grown to like when I don't need interchangeable lenses. I have a Zeiss Ikon 6x9 folder that gives stunning photos.
Still I miss the versatility of the Super Press, and will begin using it more often as time goes by. I always liked the ability to interchange backs as well as lenses. Close ups and cut film were nice as well. But that was me. I never used any of the other 6x9 cameras mentioned, so I can't compare them.
But I did and do like the Press 23, and several folders I own.
Still I miss the versatility of the Super Press, and will begin using it more often as time goes by. I always liked the ability to interchange backs as well as lenses. Close ups and cut film were nice as well. But that was me. I never used any of the other 6x9 cameras mentioned, so I can't compare them.
But I did and do like the Press 23, and several folders I own.
charjohncarter
Veteran
OK right, I walked around town with my Super 23 today. Will develop the negatives tomorrow. I should not have purchased a 6x7 back because I have a Pentax 6x7. But really the 6x9 is the best 'feel' I have for a negative. I don't really have two films ever in the two backs. So, the changing of backs isn't a priority with me. But I have to say even with the bad rap on the 100mm f3.5, I still think mine is great. I can show you the wide open 100x edges and center shots I tested it with.
But here is one of the 65mm f6.3:
I love this lens, and I'm not really a lens guy.