More news - "Fujifilm GF670 Folding"

[pfoto]

I would be willing to pay upto $1500, since beyond that the Mamiya 7/7II comes into play.

They're completely different cameras! Could you throw a Mamiya 7 (with lens) into the front pocket of your F-2 bag?

I would bet that the camera is available only on the Japanese market. all of the new film cameras by Fuji over the past few years have been limited to the japan market.

If that's the case why was it debuted at PMA?

 

[NickTrop]

Fuji - based on countess accolades, has always made a wicked MF rangefinder going way back. They /are/ the MF rangefinder people. The lens will be superlative. This is Fuji we're talking about here, not some entrepreneur lookin' to start a camera company - like that Japanese gent a few years ago.

If their model is to sell the camera at or near cost to sell more MF film - the "razor blade" model, in a bid to push more 120 film, this could be pleasantly surprisingly affordable camera. Don't think they're unaware of the Holga phenomenon.

Again, that's speculation. But what won't be speculation is that this camera will take amazing pictures. She's a beauty, isn't she? I'll put up 1/2 my cameras and lenses and start shoving change into my piggy bank if this thing lives up to expectations. A modern 120 folder made by Fuji? C'mon.

 

[jlw]

I don't think they'll sell a lot of these regardless of how they price it (although they'll probably sell one to me if I can afford it.)

Let's face it, a fixed-lens camera is not versatile enough to appeal to a lot of people.

However, you've got to keep in mind that Fuji is a film company in addition to a camera company. I suspect the real value of this camera to them is that all the publicity and interest they'll get will enable them to say, "See, lots of people ARE still interested in shooting film!"

 

[jlw]

I just watched the video on the CAPA site (CAPA is a technically-oriented Japanese photo magazine, IIRC.)

Notice how exposed the front element of the lens is?

I predict they'll price the camera at $49.95, and then offer an "optional" lens hood for $1499.95.

 

[SDK]

I hope they have a 50 or 55mm/4 lens GSWF670 version some day. And they should definitely put a lever film advance on the cameras. The knob advance is too retro, it would be rather inconvenient for advancing 70mm of film.

 

[slm]

I was wondering if anyone would have an email address for Fujifilm Japan, where we could simply send a note commending them and showing our interest ?

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Maybe I'll finally be able to sell my GS645!

Chris

 

[aizan]

the fixed lens is not a problem. we're talking about medium format here.

 

[dazedgonebye]

Fuji - based on countess accolades, has always made a wicked MF rangefinder going way back. They /are/ the MF rangefinder people. The lens will be superlative. This is Fuji we're talking about here, not some entrepreneur lookin' to start a camera company - like that Japanese gent a few years ago.

If their model is to sell the camera at or near cost to sell more MF film - the "razor blade" model, in a bid to push more 120 film, this could be pleasantly surprisingly affordable camera. Don't think they're unaware of the Holga phenomenon.

Again, that's speculation. But what won't be speculation is that this camera will take amazing pictures. She's a beauty, isn't she? I'll put up 1/2 my cameras and lenses and start shoving change into my piggy bank if this thing lives up to expectations. A modern 120 folder made by Fuji? C'mon.

I'm with you Nick.

I hope they keep it as minimalistic as it looks at this point. Ok, give it the wind lever...though that will not look as pretty.

Just be sure to give it a lens that is sharp, wide open if possible, and I'll keep that baby with me at all times.
I'll even sign a promise to shoot nothing but fuji film in it...if that'll help any?

 

[jlw]

the fixed lens is not a problem. we're talking about medium format here.

Fuji seemed to think otherwise on the GX680 I use.

All I'm saying is that people will (correctly) perceive a fixed-lens camera as being less versatile, which in turn will limit the price that they'd be willing to pay.

 

[SDK]

Yes, I make prints on 11x14" paper all the time and plan to step up to sheets cut from 12" wide rolls of Fuji C paper (great stuff!). I'm thinking of taking a summer class at NESOP in Boston to use their big processor and print on 20x30" paper. My friend Judy Daniels says gallery owners really can sell big prints easiest.

 

[NickTrop]

I'm with you Nick.

I hope they keep it as minimalistic as it looks at this point. Ok, give it the wind lever...though that will not look as pretty.

Just be sure to give it a lens that is sharp, wide open if possible, and I'll keep that baby with me at all times.
I'll even sign a promise to shoot nothing but fuji film in it...if that'll help any?

I'd sign a contract to shoot nothing but Fuji. Across isn't my first choice but I could certainly live with it - learn to like it.

 

[kuzano]

Bipedal Zoom... AKA ... Shanks Zoom

Bipedal Zoom... AKA ... Shanks Zoom

As long as I continue to have two legs, I only need one focal length. I have had numerous zoom lenses and various primes over the years. When I go shooting, usually I am carrying one prime lens, and rarely a zoom.

 

[Tuolumne]

I've never used a folder in MF, but I do have a few MF cameras which I don't use much anymore because I don't make large prints that would show there advantage. Do those who still shoot medium format regularly still make large prints?

SM,
I can see the difference on 4x6 prints and even Web prints. Maybe I'm fooling myself but it looks obvious to me, especially if I know the photo was taken with a MF in adavance.

/T

 

[NickTrop]

As long as I continue to have two legs, I only need one focal length. I have had numerous zoom lenses and various primes over the years. When I go shooting, usually I am carrying one prime lens, and rarely a zoom.

Yep. God gave you the best zoom. Your feet. And as the old photography anecdote goes, "What's the best wide angle lens?" Answer, "...two steps back". (Which is not to say I don't own zooms or wide angle lenses but they're more a product of GAS for me... Gimme a stinkin 50 or a 35. This is why I like fixed lens rangefinders. Not much choice in the matter with those things, is there?)

 

[NickTrop]

SM,
I can see the difference on 4x6 prints and even Web prints. Maybe I'm fooling myself but it looks obvious to me, especially if I know the photo was taken with a MF in adavance.

/T

Yep. Something about the larger focal plane, the greater "gradiation" of OOF areas, greater "smoothness" of planes. They just have more depth or something, even in small prints. More lifelike in someways, more "photographic" in others. I might not be able to tell one lens from another, or digital (truth be told) from film on the web, but I can pick out MF stuff with certainty.

 

[Daniel Kreithen]

I'm betting on a Planar formula lens with EBC multicoating. If the currently shown camera is really a prototype, I'd wager that the lens is not EBC because they have not signed NDAs with the third-party manufacturer (Cosina?) for the formulation. I'd suggest a list price of $999. I know I'd buy one at that price. Remember it will be competing with used medium format gear, which is plentiful and cheap today. Even a used Mamiya 7 (not II) with an 80mm lens cannot be much more than $1000 used today. And that certainly has more perceived "value" due to interchangeable lenses.

 

[Tuolumne]

Yep. Something about the larger focal plane, the greater "gradiation" of OOF areas, greater "smoothness" of planes. They just have more depth or something, even in small prints. More lifelike in someways, more "photographic" in others. I might not be able to tell one lens from another, or digital (truth be told) from film on the web, but I can pick out MF stuff with certainty.

Nick,
Exactly. They seem to have more "presence". More there there. That's why I've started doing so much shooting with my MF gear. It really does look so much better than 35mm or anything digital. Long live MF film!

/T

 

[kuzano]

Single lens choices more challenging.

Single lens choices more challenging.

Yep. God gave you the best zoom. Your feet. And as the old photography anecdote goes, "What's the best wide angle lens?" Answer, "...two steps back". (Which is not to say I don't own zooms or wide angle lenses but they're more a product of GAS for me... Gimme a stinkin 50 or a 35. This is why I like fixed lens rangefinders. Not much choice in the matter with those things, is there?)

I have often found that limiting lens choices improves my image composition and quality. Takes more time and thought to get a shot the way you want it. In addition, changing lenses on site has never appealed to me.

There is now a much larger issue on interchangeable lenses and digital. Digital does not lend itself to lens changing as often as one might have become used to with film. This, in my opinion, is one of the reasons the emphasis on DSLR is to build better zooms. Those who want prime lens capabilities in a digital camera must contend with a significant amount of time avoiding or cleaning dust off the sensor. Imagine having film cameras for all these years where the film was open to the elements during lens changes. OK... a bit inconceivable, but exactly the issue with digital. No blind or focal plane shutter over the sensor on lens changes. Huge problem.

But getting back to the camera at hand. I am pleased to pursue a fixed lens folder. However, I have seen some references to the lens focal length in these posts that I think are a bit optimistic on the wide angle side. The normal (50mm equivalent) lens on my G690bl is 100m. The lens on this folder is a normal prime length between 45 to 50mm equivalent. Not the 35mm wide angle equivalent that I have seen posted for the GF670 by various posters.

 

[Jeroen]

"What's the best wide angle lens?" Answer, "...two steps back"

I'd say "what's the best standard lens?" "...two steps forward"

(I'm a wide angle guy)