Why do people mutilate Fuji GW and GSW Mark IIIs?

[raid]

He's trying to fool somebody who doesn't know any better into thinking they are getting something better than the original so he can charge more than what a good GSW would cost.

How different are the two 65mm lenses?
The asking price is not to my liking, but someone may bite and buy this frankensteined camera.

 

[raid]

I had two of those original Brooks - brilliant idea - how they could screw up a simple winding mechanism has to be one of the big blunders in camera design history. And they must have been smoking an early form of crack when they applied the chrome plate.

Frank,
I have the more basic Graflex XLSW which has a Schneider 47mm/8 lens in a simple housing allowing me to chnage the backs quickly.

 

[FrankS]

I have 2 Fuji GW67ll's and hate the built in sliding hood. When retracted the hood covers the aperture and shutter speed scales. The hoods bind when you try to extend them and often sit tilted when extended. There is not enough width to the hood's ring that contacts the lens barrel. The theme of this camera is strong simplicity and down to bqasics. The built in hood is anti-thema to this. It''s got to go. When I want to use a lens hood, I'll screw one on, thanks.

 

[Sjixxxy]

I finally received the Heavystar hood I linked to in an earlier reply. It does work with the built-in collapsible hood on my GW690III, and does not vignette.

 

[skibeerr]

I have the gw690III and the hood is removed (bought here on rff) I had the gw670III with hood and I often wanted to remove it but lacked the b*lls.

No I am perfectly happy without the hood, I can reach the controls easily and the rubber hood I installed is a great bumper :d

 

[Thomas78]

Did you see the fool on eBay who took a GS690x, knocked out the lens elements, hacked the rangefinder off, and mounted a "better" 65mm view camera lens into the lens housing?

He was asking $1050 for it since he improved it so much ;-p

http://cgi.ebay.com/Uniquely-modifi...488709244?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item43a279f07c

No offense if you're the fool or anything, but come on, that's like trying to tell me your turds are tootsie rolls.

Im not sure if I get the point on this "modyfication".

He exchanges one 65 mm lens with leaf shutter agains another one to sacrifice the rangefinder, the coupled shutter cocking and film transport and the film transport stop just to increase the film area from 56 x 82 mm to 56 mm x 90.5 mm ?

Why not use a 6x9 camera with a film area of 56 x 86 mm or 56 x 88 mm or just crop the 56 x 82 mm image to 50 x 82 mm if you want the aspect ration of 56 x 90 mm?

Any why did he need to change the lens for this?
Is the original 65 mm not able to cover the slightly increases image circle?

 

[divewizard]

The frankencamera

The frankencamera

I can see doing this (http://cgi.ebay.com/Uniquely-modifi...488709244?pt=Film_Cameras&hash=item43a279f07c) and making a frakencamera if the original lens had been trashed. At that point you have nothing to loose with the hack job.

 

[DamenS]

I haven't committed the "sin of surgery" yet on my GW690III, but am considering it for the reasons already mentioned (it is awkward to reach the shutter/aperture rings at times - maybe I have fat fingers - and it does "bind" a bit). The main reason for me, however (and something I haven't seen mentioned thus far) is that if I wish to buy expensive filters (such as BW ND110) which cost over $100, I wish to have them as large as possible (72mm or 77mm lenses are common) to ensure my investment is able to be utilised on future cameras. I know this would reduce the resale value of my 690, but they are probably just going to decrease over time anyway.

I posted more thoughts on this issue in this thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110478