Large Format Shooters... MF as backup?

[sanking]

Overall, I think it is a fabulous tool for those times when a view camera is not appropriate but the potential for a great shot makes you want something better than a DSLR or 35mm.

I agree, and look forward to using one of these cameras in the future.

BTW, does anyone know how Fuji got the right to distribute this camera as the Voigtlander 667 Bessa 111? I own one of the original Voigtlander folding Bessas, a 11 from the mid-1950s, and it is an incredibly well-made and wonderful performer for the period.

Sandy King

[Don Hutton]

I agree, and look forward to using one of these cameras in the future.

BTW, does anyone know how Fuji got the right to distribute this camera as the Voigtlander 667 Bessa 111?

AFAIK: Plusphoto in Germany bought the Voigtlander name out of the Rollei Bankruptcy in 1996 and sold it on to Ringphoto who sold it on to Cosina of Japan. Since about 1999, Cosina has been making a whole assortment of 35mm rangefinder bodies and lenses, around Leica thread and M mounts which have the Voigtlander name. I believe that the new camera is a joint venture in design between Cosina and Fuji.

[eli]

Yes, get it; there are always opportunities to use the smaller and faster to set-up Hasselblad, especially with a bellows and 135mm or so lens for smaller objects in places it would be difficult if not impossible to work with a LF.

Personally, about the worst mistake I ever made was getting rid of my Hasselblad kit, learning a difficult lesson that, just as there are times only LF will do, so it is with Medium and 35mm gear.

[Gordon Moat]

How much gear can you really carry? Does your photographic vision change as you move from one format to the other?

At some point you have to decide what you are doing, creating images or taking pictures.

The current limit of what I can carry is dictated by the airline carry-on bag size limits. When doing commercial imaging back-up gear is essential. So for my 4x5 kit, I definitely take more than one lens and more than one film holder, but there is simply not room to pack two 4x5 cameras. That leaves room for one other camera body and a couple lenses. Previously that was usually a Nikon body and two lenses, though now that I have a Bronica RF645 that packs in about the same space, then the Bronica will replace the Nikon for air travel to locations.

Of course the third option is renting at a location, but that is not always possible. My tripod is too big for carry-on, so it gets packed into the checked bag. If that gets lost or damaged, then it would be tough to use the 4x5, though there is the possibility of buying another tripod near the airport. Worst case I use the smaller camera and lenses, and wear the same clothes the entire time I am there.


Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

[Gordon Moat]

I am not saying that the Bronica RF645 is large. However, if you compare the size of the RF645 to the Fuji GA645Zi just remember that that the Fuji with its variable focus lens has about three fairly different focal lengths available with a push of a button in comparison to the one lens that is on the RF645.

Sandy King

I like the bit of extra weight and heft compared to the Fuji. I only briefly handled the Fuji, so I don't have much experience with one, though I recall it being much lighter. When you consider getting one or two lenses extra for the Bronica RF645, then the weight to carry would go up quite a bit more. I don't think it is excessively heavy, but it is much like carrying a full body small format camera and a few lenses.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

[sanking]

I like the bit of extra weight and heft compared to the Fuji. I only briefly handled the Fuji, so I don't have much experience with one, though I recall it being much lighter. When you consider getting one or two lenses extra for the Bronica RF645, then the weight to carry would go up quite a bit more. I don't think it is excessively heavy, but it is much like carrying a full body small format camera and a few lenses.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

I have handled the Bronica RF645 several times and my impression was that it , with normal lens attached, was actually a bit lighter than the Fuji GA645Zi. My comment about the heavier weight assumed a Bronica with a two or three lens outfit, compared to the Fuji which has a fixed variable focus lens.

My main MF outfit is Mamiya 7II which I carry in a backpack with three or four lenses. But this would not fit the backpack in which I carry the 5X7, holders, etc. But the GA645Zi drops in there nicely and gives me a lot of flexibility and image quality for the weight and size. Again, the point is that with the Fuji you in essence have a three lens outfit.

Now, if one prefers the Bronica RF645 because it has a nicer viewfinder or because they believe it gives higher image quality, that is another issue. But for this thread I am responding on the basis of carrying weight and size.

Sandy King

[sanking]

AFAIK: Plusphoto in Germany bought the Voigtlander name out of the Rollei Bankruptcy in 1996 and sold it on to Ringphoto who sold it on to Cosina of Japan. Since about 1999, Cosina has been making a whole assortment of 35mm rangefinder bodies and lenses, around Leica thread and M mounts which have the Voigtlander name. I believe that the new camera is a joint venture in design between Cosina and Fuji.

Awesome information.

Thanks,

Sandy King

[Gordon Moat]

Fuji GA645Zi is 884g, while the Bronica RF645 without lens is 810g, or 1110g with the 65mm. The Bronica 45mm, 65mm, and 100mm are 330g, 300g, and 510g respectively. One could nearly carry two of the Fuji with different films loaded and still undercut the Bronica. Definitely seems like the Fuji is the lightweight deal on the market. Just for reference, a Nikon F4S is 1280g without any lens. I think the 645 rangefinders are a cool segment of the used market, and Fuji offer a ton of choices:

http://www.antiquecameras.net/fuji645cameras.html

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography

[jvuokko]

Some very nice Square Work on those sites. I suspect the closest one could come to a square format large format with minimal film waste would be a 4X5 with ends cropped 1/2 inch, or just crop the images. However, I think square composition would be enhanced by using a 4X4 inch frame in the ground glass, obscuring the ends of the film down to 4 inches???

I have done simple 4x4 mask that can be used at gg like polaroid's mask for 504 back. Rest is cropping.
The square format feels somehow so right...

[Peter von Gaza]

Whenever I go somewhere with my 4x5 I always take my Mamiya 7 with 80mm lens, not as a backup, but as another tool. Quite often when I have my 4x5 set up and I'm waiting for light I will shoot away with the Mamiya 7. It is the best of both worlds. And as you, I rarely print over 16x20. I scan both 4x5 and 120 film with an Epson 4990 and print on Hahnemuhle Fine Art Baryta. The reality for me is that my buying public cannot and does not care about the slight difference in sharpness between a 16x20 print produced from my 4x5 as compared to my Mamiya 7. Sigh... I have to remind myself of this quite often. My best selling 16x20 prints are still from 120 film. This is a drag because the 4x5 prints are superior, but darn it my buying public buys the "image" and not sharpness and perspective control.

Lately I have started leaving my Mamiya 7 behind and am taking my Canon 5d Mark II with the 4x5 gear. The 5d Mark II is sweet at 16x20 print size! Different than film, but then again my buying public doesn't care. I wish I was famous and could just sell large format at a premium price, but the sad fact is that I am nobody. So for now I shoot with all 3 cameras. I continue to shoot large format because I hope to someday have a show with large prints. I also like working with large format for all the reasons that many like: it slows you down, perspective control, it scans easier than smaller formats and it's fun.

So IMHO at 16x20 print size a 6x7 is basically good enough considering that the average person buying photography as "art" is incapable of telling the difference between formats and does not care. PERIOD.

Before settling on a medium format camera as a backup try a camera like the 5d Mark II and make some prints at 16x20.

Of course all this is just blather if you do darkroom work. In that case ignore everything I have written!

Cheers,
Peter