2x3 ala 6x9 view cameras are a mixed baggie... Weight/size wise they are about the same or heavier/bulkier than a light weight 4x5 field folder or some of the lowest weight 4x5 monorail cameras. The TK23s all up weights and is about as bulky as a 4x5 Sinar Norma..
~Why bother with a 2x3 or 6x9 view camera..
Having been at this 120 roll film view camera thing for many years now, it comes down to camera movements and the ability to use 120 roll film instead of film holders. Lenses can be more available than lenses for 4x5 as many that can work good in 6x9 does not work on 4x5, but vast majority of 4x5 lenses easily works on 6x9.. There remains the hard limit of not being able to easily use lenses in barrel that the Sinar does not have..
The difficulty with using 120 roll film on these 2x3 ala 6x9 view cameras has much to to with the roll film back. There are slide in 120 roll film backs such as the Linhof Rapid Rollex and Toyo, they have a different set of issues.. Most of these view cameras use the 2x3 graflok/international standard back which often means removing the ground glass frame/holder to install the roll film back. Very real hassle here.. This was an irritating issue with the Arca Swiss 6x9 and other roll film view cameras prior to the Linhof TK23s.. While the Linhof back system is much their own, it is easy to use, precise/accurate with absolute repeatability and the Linhof Super Rollex has proven to be the best 120 roll film holder used to date. Except the Super Rollex is Big and Heavy...
There ya have it, none ideal, always a trade-off..
BTW, ++ on the Fuji GX680 as a studio 120 roll film camera. It is Good in many ways. Fuji made three version of the GX680. First version used nicads, later versions had lithium or AA batteries to power the camera. The Fujinon optics are Good, has modest front camera movements and overall IMO better than the RZ/RB of similar.. For studio use, easily better than Hasselblad in every way.
Bernice
Bookmarks