New Fuji / Voigtlander 667 Folder Update

even after all the past months of hearing about the possibility of this camera and these last few days of it becoming a reality it still amazes me that a new folding camera is being produced..just how long ago was the last regular folding camera made late 50s, early 60s...i still find it hard to believe eh

makes me laugh quietly to myself as well all those posts i have read over the past years where people have staunchly pronounced that folding cameras are basically poor performers and riddled with design problems because of the bellows, front standard and folding aspect of them, and to back up their argument they always fall back on the fact that they havnt been built for so long and those are the reasons why. when in reality many of us have been using folding cameras 50-70+ years old with great success and ease. I feel like some rotton bugger has finaly given our secret away LOL.

well i hope this camera is no dud, proves to be great and sells like hot cakes then they can make a 6x9 :)

and just to be respectfull to my old folders. I feel like i am betraying them even looking at a new young folder--i say to them, tis ok, this new dude wont have your feel, lens charachter and imatation is the biggest form of flatery ;)

they are still great cameras, they still look sleek, still work great and produce fantastic results, i will still use them, no reason not to..if it wasnt for them this new dude wouldnt be getting made at all :D
 
I'm just speculating, but I think the lens is unlikely to be a Heliar-type if it's 6 elements in 4 groups. That describes a basic double-Gauss design, a.k.a. Planar-type. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I can't think of a reason why TTL metering would be needed on a camera like this. Naturally it will have a leaf shutter, like virtually every other medium-format folder.

I'm very interested and will probably get one. It depends on the lens performance. I don't like certain kinds of bokeh and Fuji lenses don't have a great track record in that area. All I need to see is 10 or 12 shots with o-o-f in 'em, and I'll know.

If Stephen imports it I'll definitely get it from him, but if not I'll just get it from Japan. The downside of that is that it will inevitably be more expensive that way.

BTW, my favorite post so far on the Bessa III 667: a guy complaining bitterly (on another forum) that it had "knob rewind." Heh! I wanted to tell him it's tough rewinding 120 no matter how you do it...

Mike J.
 
txind76 said:
I'm just speculating, but I think the lens is unlikely to be a Heliar-type if it's 6 elements in 4 groups. That describes a basic double-Gauss design, a.k.a. Planar-type. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

I was thinking that it could be a Heliar + 1, just like Pentax did a Tessar + 1 for its 40/2.8 pancake lens in order to increase the coverage of the original Tessar formula. We all know that a Tessar (or a Heliar for that matter) doesn't offer much in terms of lens coverage. Zeiss made a 40mm Tessar covering 24x36, but it had to decrease the maximum aperture to F/4.5 to get enough coverage. In order to obtain an acceptable coverage at F/2.8, Pentax used a fifth element.

Here's a 50mm Tessar:
50f4-Macro.gif


And here's the Pentax M 40mm F/2.8 with increased coverage (the newer DA 40/2.8 Ltd. is similar):
40f2.8-i.gif


Now, here's a 100mm Heliar:
100f4-Macro.gif

[All lens diagrams linked from Bojidar Dimitrov's Pentax K-Mount Page]

And here's how a 80mm "Heliar + 1" with increased coverage could look:
p479939503.gif


Cheers!

Abbazz
 
Having experimented with Heliars and Heliar-types in various formats, my own sense is that the "Heliar look" really comes through with a Heliar at about twice the normal focal length for the format or longer for medium format and 35mm. I don't think a Heliar is that special as a normal lens unless you're close enough to get some selective focus effect, at about the near limit of the rangefinder and maybe one stop down from wide open.

I love my Heliars, especially the 36cm/f:4.5 in my avatar that I use for 8x10", but I'd rather have a Planar type on the Bessa III.
 
Last edited:
Dear Abazz,

You no doubt know more than I, but the Pentax looks like a Tessar with the rear glass split into two, or an Astro Tachar with the third group turned into a cemented doublet, and I can't quite follow your 'Heliar + 1': wouldn't the fourth and fifth glasses need to go plano-convex? Or am I completely put of my depth?

Cheers,

R.
 
Bellows longevity?

Bellows longevity?

Hi,

I quite like the idea of the camera and its design. I wouldn't be too worried about the lens and the rangefinder. The standard Bessa R2 series also has a base length of about 37mm. This is fine to focus the 90/3.5. Taking into the equation the larger circle of confusion being acceptable on a MF than a 35mm camera (for dof scales typically a coc of 1/20mm is used in MF while 1/30 mm is used on a 35mm camera) this rangefinder should provide plenty of accuracy to focus this lens. I also like the 80mm. I think the key competition for this is the Mamiya 7 (with an 80/4 lens).

The only worry I have is how longevity the bellows. Replacement bellows for the Fuji 645 folder are a very sought after item. Fuji changed for the rigid 60mm and 45mm to avoid the issue. Now they are back there. In particular if the camera is rare, spare parts will not be easy to come by. Any comments?

Ta
Joachim
 
joachim said:
Hi,

I quite like the idea of the camera and its design. I wouldn't be too worried about the lens and the rangefinder. The standard Bessa R2 series also has a base length of about 37mm. This is fine to focus the 90/3.5. Taking into the equation the larger circle of confusion being acceptable on a MF than a 35mm camera (for dof scales typically a coc of 1/20mm is used in MF while 1/30 mm is used on a 35mm camera) this rangefinder should provide plenty of accuracy to focus this lens. I also like the 80mm. I think the key competition for this is the Mamiya 7 (with an 80/4 lens).

The only worry I have is how longevity the bellows. Replacement bellows for the Fuji 645 folder are a very sought after item. Fuji changed for the rigid 60mm and 45mm to avoid the issue. Now they are back there. In particular if the camera is rare, spare parts will not be easy to come by. Any comments?

Ta
Joachim
Click to expand...


I've got 50 plus years old folders that have excellent original bellows.
Seems they could just do it right.
 
dazedgonebye said:
I've got 50 plus years old folders that have excellent original bellows.
Seems they could just do it right.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the answer, but I am not getting it. Who is they?

Anyway, just saw that ringfoto (German owner of the Voigtlaender brand) has large images up. Go to http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7jzjul.html and click on the individual images. If we get that server down, they might get the tune that some people here are keen on it :D
 
I didn't realize that Fuji has a history of making poor bellows. That could be a real buzz killer for the camera and its potential buyers. My only folder experience is with vintage cameras.......Weltax, Bessa I and an Agfa.

Ray
 
ray*j*gun said:
I didn't realize that Fuji has a history of making poor bellows. That could be a real buzz killer for the camera and its potential buyers. My only folder experience is with vintage cameras.......Weltax, Bessa I and an Agfa.

Ray
Click to expand...
The Fuji 645 folder was without doubt, in 50+ years of photography, the most unreliable camera I ever owned. It was repaired three times by Fuji, then when after about four years they didn't have parts, it was repaired by a respected UK repairer. His advice was to sell it, bad design and bad materials.
I looked at the Ringphoto pictures, and horrors,the bellows, front door lock, and interior look virtually identical to the Fuji 645!!
I will wait till a good number are sold, and the problems are sorted.!!
I am if anything over careful with my cameras,and cameras I have owned for years still look and work as good as new desspite shooting thousands of pictures.
My very much cheaper and older Adox Golf 6x6 r/f folder was and still is more reliable.
I really hope that Cosina does not get its fingers burned with this one!!
I sold the 645, to a dealer, after its last repair. He told me later, it has been back for further repairs.
 
Last edited:
joachim said:
Thanks for the answer, but I am not getting it. Who is they?

Anyway, just saw that ringfoto (German owner of the Voigtlaender brand) has large images up. Go to http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7jzjul.html and click on the individual images. If we get that server down, they might get the tune that some people here are keen on it :D
Click to expand...

Sorry if I was unclear.
I was trying to say that it was possible to make a good bellows 50 years ago and you'd think they (cosina/fuji) will be able to make one now.
 
John Robertson said:
... the bellows, front door lock, and interior look virtually identical to the Fuji 645!!
Click to expand...

I also thought I have seen similar before ...

Compare http://matsubokuri.cocolog-nifty.com/.shared/image.html?/_camera_mini_museum/images/FujiGS645.JPG and
http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7jzjul.html/$file/bessa_iii.jpg

But then the new one is an electric (electronic) shutter, the old one was mechanically controlled. Typically this results in fewer links being needed and hopefully fixes these problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom