Going to Yosemite but can't take my 4x5 or 8x10. What to do?

[lenicolas]

Had the same challenge when touring New Zealand a few years ago; no 4x5 or 8x10 due to flight and transport logistics.
Answer: Fuji GSW680 Texas Leica fed with Ilford Delta 3200 film. The negative is big enough to deliver minimal grain and the film is fast enough to permit hand held shooting at reasonable shutter speeds.

I visited Lofoten this summer with a Horseman 612 camera and that same film.
In good weather the speed of the film even allowed for the use of a red filter hand held.
Grain is rather pronounced, but it is a dramatic landscape and I was going for a dramatic look…

[xkaes]

Keep this painting in mind:
Think there was an well worn saying, "Best Camera is the one in hand."

Bernice

Sounds like a vote for a keychain 110.

[paulbarden]

IMO, the Fuji GSW690 is WAY under appreciated as one of the best medium format fixed lens cameras made and FAR better camera than most would know or understand.


Bernice

In 6x9cm format, you could get a Medalist II for 1/4 the price of the GSW690 and the results would be just as spectacular. The Ektar lens in the Medalist is a Heliar design, and sharp as you could possibly want. https://flic.kr/p/29A81mv

[abruzzi]

In 6x9cm format, you could get a Medalist II for 1/4 the price of the GSW690 and the results would be just as spectacular. The Ektar lens in the Medalist is a Heliar design, and sharp as you could possibly want. https://flic.kr/p/29A81mv

not that I disagree--I'd love a Medalist, but won't you also spend a decent chunk getting it converted to 120? So more like 1/2 the price of a GSW?

[paulbarden]

not that I disagree--I'd love a Medalist, but won't you also spend a decent chunk getting it converted to 120? So more like 1/2 the price of a GSW?

Mine is not converted to 120 - I re-spool 120 to 620 reels and it’s no problem. I will not change the camera just to enable 120 film usage.

[Graeme Hamilton]

For your consideration regarding the Medalist and GW:
My GW690II: weight, 1479 grams (loaded); width, 200mm (lug to lug); depth at lens, 127mm (hood collapsed); width excluding lens, 41.7mm; lens, 90mm 3.5
My Medalist I: weight, 1394 grams (loaded); width, 140.5mm (hinge to hinge); depth at lens, 94.6mm (lens collapsed); width excluding lens, 62mm; lens, 100mm 3.5

Having used both, I expected the medalist to be the heavier of the two, it is not at all ergonomic or handy for hand held snaps. It does have a wonderful lens, but I don't think anyone would accuse the fujinon of being a slouch.

The Medalist is more compact, but is not balanced on a strap if you plan to wear it. It tries to turn turtle with vigorous movement.

The Medalist also has a separate split prism that is not integrated into the main finder, it sits directly below and is close enough you can eyeball both most of the time.

The Fuji has a much bigger finder image with a decent dot and parallax corrected frame lines as you focus. The apparent frame size is so large through the Fuji, that I can not see the entire thing when wearing glasses (I usually wear contacts to shoot anyway, but might be relevant to you)

I also respool, and it is not a big deal. But, the inconvenience also gets overly downplayed. When you want to use the camera and realize you've not kept up with keeping your fridge stocked with respooled 120, it is very annoying. This would not be an issue for a planned trip, however.

There is not a bad choice here, but I would personally prefer the Fuji as I find it feels smaller to me when wearing and its more modern ergonomics and feature set make it handier.

[abruzzi]

Mine is not converted to 120 - I re-spool 120 to 620 reels and it’s no problem. I will not change the camera just to enable 120 film usage.

I gave up on adapting one format of film to another some time ago, its just not worth the effort to me, so the Medalist would only be on my radar if I could shoot straight 120 film.

[Drew Wiley]

A phone is an obnoxious phone. Just what you need on vacation trying to find a piece solitude - more Robo calls, annoying texts, and gloomy internet news! That's why I prefer the backcountry instead, where there isn't even any cell coverage. I leave my phone home, anyway. I grew up right across the River from Yosemite - almost a backyard, but have probably taken less than ten shots in the Valley itself my entire life. If I were to go up there on a quickie trip this winter, I'd bring my 6x7 with a 300 tele to home in on details of the crags and waterfalls, and forget the postcardy stuff. More likely, I'd weep with sympathy for anyone who couldn't bring a view camera.

Now, as per stealth gear you can put in a modest shoulder bag and go out into falling snow with, without having a big dry-out hassle at the end of the session, I specifically opted for the "Texas Leica" series of Fuji RF's (6X9 in my case), and have in fact used these on some quite long really messy weather snow and rain trips in the high country. Reliable and fast to use. Great lens. But being somewhat wide angle, you're obviously going to have some annoying convergence of verticals if you point it upwards toward high cliffs in Yosemite, with conifers in the foreground.

[bmikiten]

That may be the ticket. I'm looking at a few sites that have 6x17 rentals. I can get 3 lenses and the camera at a reasonable price for a week and walk away with actual negatives!

Brian

[bmikiten]

Have you been pleased with the image quality of the Fuji? I see that the Linhof has Schneider lenses.

Brian