Fuji medium format rangefinders

viewfromthenorth

viewfromthenorth

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,269
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
No
It's a few years since I shot medium format (Mamiya 645) but I suddenly seem curiously attracted to the Fuji rangefinders, especially the big GSW690 as I like wide angle, and its 65mm lens is equivalent to 28mm in 135 format.

I know they're big, but having hauled round a gripped D700 with 28-70 F2.8 for the past few years, I think I've had some excellent training with big lumps, although the shooting experience (unmetered rangefinder, 8 shots per roll) is clearly different.

My only reservations are around getting the best out of the negatives - process and high res scanning at DSCL is £20 a shot, and something like an Epson V700 isn't cheap either.

Anyone any experiences of these Fuji's?
 
Yep I borrowed and used a Fuji GSW690 MkI for about a year (now trying to pursude the guy to sell it to me :) ).

They are a very simple camera with a cracking lens, no light meter in them so no batteries needed. The range finder window is bright and easy to see through. They have a counter on the bottom which tells you how many shot have been taken but you have to rember to multiple it by a factor of 10. Think it is to do with "so many shots taken means it needs a service" but i have not found anything on the web about this.

For such a big machine they are suprisingly light, I used to carry it around with my Olympus E3 + 12-60, which is not far off the same weight as the D700 kit, with out any issues. Obviously they are not small but I managed to get both in a small back pack.
 
Last edited:
An Epson V500 should be enough to get some good scans out of medium format. The GSW690 is an awesome camera from what I've seen.
 
I purchased a Fuji GW690 (Mk1, so branded as Fujica) last year from Japan off the well-known auction site. Like you, I had the thought to try it out after a couple of years using my 645 Super.
It’s a different sort of bulk to a gripped D700; it’s really shaped like housebrick although I wouldn’t describe it as heavy. Really, really basic design and I think of it as my medium format point and shoot.
The viewfinder eyepiece is on the far left of the body rear and it still takes bit of getting used to having the bulk of camera extended away from the right side your face when shooting, compared to when shooting DSLR’s or the 645 where you’re more ‘behind’ the camera.
That ergonomic aside, the great feature on the Mk 1 at least is the second shutter release on the front of the body next to the lens mount, sort of where a DOF button on a DSLR would be, it’s a fantastic, intuitive feature and I don’t use the normal top plate release at all.
I would’ve liked the wide version but couldn’t justify the extra cost at the time, if I was buying now I probably go for the GSW. Having not shot such large format before it took a while to get used to the lack of depth of filed and smaller apertures so a few wasted shots but no other issues to report.
I’m not the best to comment on getting the best of image quality at either the taking or scanning phases (using a V500) but for the price these things sell for it’d be rude not to try it!
 
I have the GW690III with the 'normal' 90mm lens, not the wide one.

I've had it about a year, and have probably put around 15 rolls through it (which is only 120 photos, of course!). Most of my photography is done with Nikon manual focus SLRs (F2, F3, FA) so it's a very different beast and to be entirely honest I haven't really yet got to the point that I feel comfortable with it. However I am going to perservere, because the results can be truly mind-blowing (and for most purposes, can be scanned very well with my V500). Big negatives and a good lens. I think it is such a different style to what I'm used to that it will take me a lot more practice to get the best out of it.

It is also very much a landscape shooter's camera - not well suited to portraits (difficult to get close enough, though there is scope for lots of cropping, obviously!) or anything requiring speed of operation. However it can be very easily used handheld, and is much lighter than most other cameras of this or similar format (eg RZ67), apart from the old folders I guess, so can be used on a trek without weighing you down too much. However it probably is most at home on a tripod, with a slower approach.

Those big negatives also open up great cropping potential eg for panoramas.

It is clearly very well made and durable, but somehow it doesn't feel as nice to handle as my old Nikons - there's a lot of plastic surrounding its solid metal innards (though I think the older versions have less), and the shutter release has a rather unsatisfying action I find, but these are just minor quibbles.

Whether it is the right medium format camera for you, depends on what you like to shoot, I'd say. Personally, I think if I complemented it with something more suited to portraiture, like a Rolleiflex or a Hasselblad, I would have everything I want out of photography covered. One day...
 
Thanks for the responses chaps, much appreciated. Normally for 35mm I pay for develop and scan, but I am seriously considering the economics of getting my own scanner to do 35mm and MF (my current all in one job isn't up to much and won't do MF). Something like a V500 / V700 would be the solution, but of course, is an additional cost to the camera itself, so I'd need to consider if I'd use it often enough to justify the upfront cost. Plus scanning is SO tedious......
 
Looking at the costs of decent scans from the good quality online labs the v500 pays for its self in about 10-15 films.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Thanks for the responses chaps, much appreciated. Normally for 35mm I pay for develop and scan, but I am seriously considering the economics of getting my own scanner to do 35mm and MF (my current all in one job isn't up to much and won't do MF). Something like a V500 / V700 would be the solution, but of course, is an additional cost to the camera itself, so I'd need to consider if I'd use it often enough to justify the upfront cost. Plus scanning is SO tedious......
Click to expand...

Isn't it just. In fact I do sometimes prefer paying a few quid for the lab scans instead of scanning myself, if I can't face hours in front of the PC. Though that does make me feel guilty!
 
Sadly, I quite enjoy scanning......But as Steve says 10-15 films and a V500 pays for itself and you can usually get most of your money back if you get bored and sell it on.

Andy
 
Sorry to ask a stupid question, but will the scanners convert negatives to postives through the compuer? Or am I better offmwith slides?l
 
No such thing as a stupid question.

A normal scanner won't work but a dedicated negative scanner such as the Epson V500 will convert the neg to a positive through the software. So you end up with a positive in processing software on the computer.

Andy
 
Will the 700 do it too? And can it do it in batches (rolls) or 1at a time? I used to have 645zi which I loved but got swept away in the digital rush....now the Fuji 6x9 look very appealing if I can store developed negs online.
 
Yep 700 is perfect. If its the same as the 500 it comes with 2 negative holders, one for 120 film (2 at a time) and one for 35mm and slides. 4 slides at a time and 2 lots of 6 35mm. I belive you can by non- OEM holders which are apparently superb but are quite expensive, I'm happy so far with the ones provided.

Andy
 
Got to persuade Mrs. C that film is the future!! Thanks for the help Andy, might be picking your brains again...
 
I think we may have reached the limits of my knowledge :nuts: However someone will be along soon with my medicine
 
Andysnap said:
However someone will be along soon with my medicine
Click to expand...

Somebody better be along with your medicine soon before you or the alien that has inhabited your body sells all your lovely cameras.

Who are you and what have you done with our cameraholic friend Andy?
 
Don't worry Nick, many more lovely cameras are on their way. A Leica II should be here tomorrow and later next week a Mamiya C330f with numerous shiny lenses.

The medicine is just to stop me going daft and buying too much stuff.....:thinking:
 
I have a couple of new arrivals that I really must post up on here and I'm developing a real hankering for a Leica and if your Bessa was a 4 rather than a 3 I would have snapped your hand off, I just need it to handle the wider end of the spectrum and the 3 just doesn't tick the right boxes unfortunately.
 
Still debating the purchase of a Fuji, but I have dug my mamiya 645 out of my cupboard, along with 5 rolls of film that expired 5 years ago! I guess the black and white won't be too bad but I suspect the colour might be subject to some interesting colour shifts. Wish I'd known about freezing film 7 years ago.....
 
Give the colour a go anyway Andy, it'll probably be fine.
 
Last edited:
If I didn't have the Mamiya, I'd prolly be shooting Fuji...:( but :shrug:
 
The GW690 III is a great camera as others in the thread have said, but I felt that for the inconvenience and cost of only 8 frames per roll, you might as well go the whole hog and go LF, something like a speed graphic is much more flexible too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top