Sharpness: fuji gs645 << gw670 < gw690 < gw680 ?

[piero2025]

Hello friends,

I am trying to make up my mind about which Fuji MF camera to buy. From my flickr wanderings, I have seen photos made by the hasselblad/zeiss combination, and although certainly sharp, they are not appealing to me (I would describe it as a "cold" look).

Fujis I like very much, but (again, from flickr, so sometimes a specific camera's photos are on average poorly scanned and so they don't look good on flickr and viceversa)

- gs645, very atttractive format, really not so sharp
- gw670, sharp
- gw690 sharper
- gw 680 sharpest

I don't need the sharpest camera in the world, but from what I have seen, the gs645 really seems like it borders the unsharp. Opinions?

Thanks!

 

[Retro-Grouch]

With all respect, I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle. All the Fuji cameras are noted for their sharp optics; that being said, a larger negative will always give you better apparent sharpness if you are printing to the same size. The real question is, which camera will best suit your needs for portability and fast handling while still affording the degree of sharpness you need for you print size? Having owned both a 645 and a 690 Fuji, I can assure you that these are very different cameras in actual use!
In addition, I think you may have seen results from a bad sample or a bad scan from the 645. That baby is sharp! But of course it will never beat out the 690 for an equivalent sized print. Simple physics!

 

[the_jim]

All of them are very capable cameras. The sharpness from Flickr examples is more likely limited by the photographer’s ability to hit focus and their scanning rather than the lens/camera combo. As stated above, bigger negative is better. Additionally, the 6x8 and 6x9 have the exact same lens, so it’s hard to imagine the 6x8 being sharper.

The experience of using the dim/low contrast rangefinder is going to be the biggest difference vs an SLR medium format system. I’d suggest looking through a Canonet (or some other 70’s Japanese RF) and deciding if that is doable for you (my Fuji GW690II is only marginally brighter).

 

[OlivierAOP]

I was under the impression that the Fuji 670-680-690 have the exact same lenses.

 

[DownUnder]

The two GA645s I owned (now sold, alas) gave me negatives I can describe as "incredibly sharp" - they scan and print well. Corner to corner, sharp throughout. Best ever.

I agree with the previous poster who commented Fujinon lenses are renowned for their sharpness. My XT2 kit (14, 18, 23, 18-55) produces superbly sharp images.

The main reasons I disposed of my two GA645s were (1) the electronics, which can't be repaired if or rather when they go boom! on you, and (2) the odd noise the GA lens made when focussing, which annoyed me. (1) is by far the most significant "why" I sold my two cameras - one expired a year or a little later after the sale and the other is still going great guns.

I did consider buying a GS645w (a friend owns one, I've played with it and I enjoyed it) as I liked the ergonomics and also the results, just as sharp as the GAs. What has held me back so far is (1) the high cost of the beasts, mostly from sellers in Japan, and (2) I already have four Rolleiflex/cord TLRs and two 1950s German folding cameras, and my Significant Other insists they are more than enough MF cameras for one lifetime. So I must obey. (or else)

My personal observations. I hope it will help you in your decision. I will add as a last comment that whichever Fuji MF you decide to buy will probably give you wonderful results. Size and print are likely your main reasons for whichever Fuji you decide to buy.

PS Another point to consider - if you like to photograph landscapes, the GAs and Gas have to be held vertically (= sideways) for horizontal images. This may or may not bother you. It did me, none of my verticals came out as I wanted them. Rollei TLRs do not require this as their images are square. Even with a 16 exposure kit in a Rolleiflex T or a Rollecord Vb, you get nice horizontal scenery shots and the building walls and poles all stand as I prefer them, straight up.

 

[piero2025]

Thanks guys, as usual, you gave me much food for thought..

 

[piero2025]

All of them are very capable cameras. The sharpness from Flickr examples is more likely limited by the photographer’s ability to hit focus and their scanning rather than the lens/camera combo. As stated above, bigger negative is better. Additionally, the 6x8 and 6x9 have the exact same lens, so it’s hard to imagine the 6x8 being sharper.

The experience of using the dim/low contrast rangefinder is going to be the biggest difference vs an SLR medium format system. I’d suggest looking through a Canonet (or some other 70’s Japanese RF) and deciding if that is doable for you (my Fuji GW690II is only marginally brighter).

Can I infer that the finder on the GWs could be the reason that some people slightly miss focus? I own a Bessa L and can focus allright, maybe there are some special techniques?

 

[piero2025]

With all respect, I think you're approaching this from the wrong angle. All the Fuji cameras are noted for their sharp optics; that being said, a larger negative will always give you better apparent sharpness if you are printing to the same size. The real question is, which camera will best suit your needs for portability and fast handling while still affording the degree of sharpness you need for you print size? Having owned both a 645 and a 690 Fuji, I can assure you that these are very different cameras in actual use!
In addition, I think you may have seen results from a bad sample or a bad scan from the 645. That baby is sharp! But of course it will never beat out the 690 for an equivalent sized print. Simple physics!

Would you mind telling me more about cameras being very different in actual use? You mean speed right?

 

[piero2025]

The two GA645s I owned (now sold, alas) gave me negatives I can describe as "incredibly sharp" - they scan and print well. Corner to corner, sharp throughout. Best ever.

I agree with the previous poster who commented Fujinon lenses are renowned for their sharpness. My XT2 kit (14, 18, 23, 18-55) produces superbly sharp images.

The main reasons I disposed of my two GA645s were (1) the electronics, which can't be repaired if or rather when they go boom! on you, and (2) the odd noise the GA lens made when focussing, which annoyed me. (1) is by far the most significant "why" I sold my two cameras - one expired a year or a little later after the sale and the other is still going great guns.

I did consider buying a GS645w (a friend owns one and I've played with it) as I like the ergonomics and also the results, just as sharp as the GA. What has held me back so far is (1) the high cost of the beasts, mostly from sellers in Japan, and (2) I own four Roller TLRs and my Significant Other insists they are more than enough MF cameras for one lifetime. So I must obey.

My personal observations. I hope it will help you in your decision. I will add as a last comment that whichever Fuji MF you decide to buy will probably give you wonderful results. Size and print are probably your main reasons for whichever you choose.

Great tip on the GAs being not repairable, thanks!

 

[valdas]

Great tip on the GAs being not repairable, thanks!

We all die, so do cameras. But you can check the exposure count on GA - it gives you the idea of the mileage and hopefully how long it will last. I am using my GA for about 10 years - great camera, great image quality. Even if it dies, it served well. And I paid for it 300$.

 

[the_jim]

Can I infer that the finder on the GWs could be the reason that some people slightly miss focus? I own a Bessa L and can focus allright, maybe there are some special techniques?

The finder is definitely part of the challenge in focusing. It's quite dim. I have never used a Bessa L, but any of the other modern Bessas that I've played with have much better/brighter rangefinder patches.

Also, the depth-of-field in medium format can be much less than what you would experience in 35mm photography with the same relative field of view. The 90mm lens on the 6x9 gives you a similar field of view as a 40-ish mm lens on a 35mm camera. And 90÷3.5 gives you a similar number to 40÷1.6, but in actual use the fall-off between in and out of focus can feel more sudden on medium format. Hence, if you move...or your subject moves (even just a little), your focus will be off. Couple that with the dim finder and it can challenging... But very rewarding when it works.

 

[piero2025]

The finder is definitely part of the challenge in focusing. It's quite dim. I have never used a Bessa L, but any of the other modern Bessas that I've played with have much better/brighter rangefinder patches.

Also, the depth-of-field in medium format can be much less than what you would experience in 35mm photography with the same relative field of view. The 90mm lens on the 6x9 gives you a similar field of view as a 40-ish mm lens on a 35mm camera. And 90÷3.5 gives you a similar number to 40÷1.6, but in actual use the fall-off between in and out of focus can feel more sudden on medium format. Hence, if you move...or your subject moves (even just a little), your focus will be off. Couple that with the dim finder and it can challenging... But very rewarding when it works.

Do you think this could help?

 

[Retro-Grouch]

Would you mind telling me more about cameras being very different in actual use? You mean speed right?

It's a matter of sheer size. The 645 is about the same bulk, and less weight, than a Leica. The 690 is huge; you should try to handle one in person before making a decision. The 645 can be stealthy, if you so wish. No way can the 690 be stealthy; subjects react to it strongly, sometimes with hostility, sometimes with curiosity. The 690 doesn't have a built-in meter, which may slow down the shooting process. And as the_jim pointed out, the larger format gives less depth of focus. Pre-focusing and zone focusing become far more difficult.
I'm not sure what you mean by "speed". If you meant the amount of time it takes to bring the camera up to your eye, focus, and press the shutter, probably about the same for all of them. But, subjectively, the larger camera "feels" slower. Nevertheless, consider what people did with monster press cameras back in the day; they overcame far greater technical obstacles inherent in their cameras, and nevertheless created some photos that were masterpieces of timing and composition. It's only partly about the camera!

 

[the_jim]

Magnifiers will help see the rangefinder patch better, for sure…with the sacrifice of being able to see the whole frame readily (you’ll have to move your eye around). I wouldn’t have too much interest in having one attached to my camera. I think you’re better served by getting used to it’s limitations and just having fun.

 

[aizan]

I'd guess that if people have trouble focusing, it's just beginner's user error (people using rangefinders for the first time). The finder is maybe half a stop dimmer than a Leica/Bessa/Zeiss Ikon and a notch less contrasty.

More likely any unsharpness in online images is from not-so-great flatbed scans.

The GS645 has a sharp, good lens, with very smooth bokeh. However, it is a folder so things can go out of whack and require servicing.