Which MF Rangefinder To Replace My 120 Folders?

I recently ventured into the wonderful world of MF folders that shoot 120 film. I currently have a Welta Weltur

w/ Tessar lens, a Zeiss Super Ikonta III w/ a Novar, a very similar Zeiss Ikonta 524/16 w/ the Tessar, a Zeiss

Super Ikonta 531A w/ Tessar, a Moskva 5, and a Fuji GS645s, which isn't a folder but is a good camera. I love the

folders, and the shots certainly have character, but truthfully the more modern Fuji camera has a sharper lens.

Unfortunately it feels like a plastic toy after shooting the classic folders and makes an annoying CLACK when you

fire the shutter.

 

The other day I went to see an exhibit of some very nice B&W photos that were taken w/ a Mamiya TLR. They were so

sharp (compared to my folder shots) that at first I thought they had been taken w/ a 4x5 and cropped to a square

format, but a friend of mine had talked to the photographer at the opening and found out what camera had been

used. As much as I love the folders, I would love to have shots that were sharper. I don't want to carry a big

SLR (which is why I wanted to go to the folders in the first place), and a TLR would not suit my style of

shooting, such at is. I once had a Brownie or something many years ago and the backwards image and the waist

level viewing didn't work at all. So what's left is a MF rangefinder. I am not picky on the format, and actually

like 6x4.5 the best. 6x6 or 6x7 would be fine. Is there a not-too-expensive rangefinder that would rival the

shots of the Mamiya TLR? I once had a Fuji GW670 III that was fun to use, but it's size was too much to carry

around all the time, and although I like the sharpness of my GS645s the Fuji lenses just don't do it for me. A

bit too clinically sharp or something. The Mamiya TLR the guy used at the exhibit had a lot of character to the

photos. Maybe a Mamiya 6 or 7, or a Bronica RF? I am guessing that the better film to lens alignment in the TLR

and RF cameras is what's giving the sharper photos.

Yes, there are only a few modern rangefinders -- Mamiya 6 and Mamiya 7 and Bronica RF645. All are terrific with excellent viewfinders and awesome glass, but they all are rather exepnsive (especially the Mamiyas and their wide angles). It's hard to say if they are worth it for you, but if you have the chance, check them out in real life and see if you like their operation and size. I cannot say if they also produce a "bit too clinically sharp" look, maybe this is just you.

<p>

On the other hand, working with a waist-level finder gets pretty natural after some practice and is in fact a great way to use a medium format camera, as critical focusing is much easier to control due to viewfinder magnification. While all *LR cameras are bigger and heavier than rangefinders, a small Mamiya M645J with an 80mm f/2.8 standard lens and <abbr style="border-bottom: 1px blue dashed;" title="waist-level finder">WLF</abbr> is not too taxing to carry around.

The sharpest rangefinder for the money is the Koni-Omega which has excellent lenses but is large, heavy and bulky, just the opposite of what you're use to with a folder.

I used a folding Fuji for many years, now use a Bronica RF645 and Mamiya 7 system. I know what you are referring to when you talk of the clinically sharp look of the modern glass. Over the years, I've had all manner of medium format gear and looking back at Mamiya TLR, Koni and Rolleiflex negatives/prints vs what I'm doing now, the look is different but controllable. With modern glass, I've settled on PyroCat for my "go-to" soup and favor HP5+ for the things that I do. By controlling the highlight densities, these negatives almost print themselves as it's quite easy to get all tones into a nice use of available tones on paper and not be as concerned with blown highlights. It also brings back some of the smooth gradation in the middle tones and is especially pleasing for skin tones. The only reasonable pocketable choice seems to be the Fuji folder and with the right film and materials, I think you can tune in the look that will please you and be easy to control and print.

 

In practice, even the small Bronica isn't very pocket friendly. I always end up with a bag when using it and can't recall just using a jacket/vest pocket for an outing. Part of this is the sense of wanting the other optics with you "just in case". Like the Mamiya, the optics are superb and easily in the same league as the vaunted Mamiya glass. The Mamiya gives you more choices, though. The little Bronica is satisfying as a solid, precise feeling instrument while my Mamiyas have a slightly plasticky, hollow sense in comparison. I mentioned this before regarding this but the Bronica feels German and the Mamiya feels Japanese, if that makes sense. The Bronica has a strange sound when the shutter is released, kind of a "zzzzt" following the actual shutter trip. The Mamiya sounds much like the Fuji if I'm remembering my now-gone Fuji correctly.

A Kodak Medalist is heavy, but physically much smaller than other 6 x 9, or even 6 X 7, cameras. I re-spooled 120 film onto 620 spools for several years until my Medalist II needed a CLA; then I had it converted to 120.

Second the Koni-Omega Rapid's. However, these things are not exactly light and pocketable. The film back is a definite wear item, and many will have problems with finicky film advance.

 

The best of the MF rangefinder crop is probably the Mamiya 7's. The optics specifically, are amongst the best available. I also think the 6x7 aspect ratio is lots more useful than square. However, this is not an inexpensive camera system to buy into.

Thanks for the feedback. It's hard to put into words what it is about the Fuji glass that I don't like. Maybe it's like the comparison of the Zeiss (branding anyway) of a Contax G camera and Leica glass. The Contax is sharper, but I can see the difference in the Leica's way of rendering images like night and day. The difference between the more modern Fuji lens and the older folders has some of that effect. I've tried to emulate the older glass in photoshop w/ the Fuji and sometimes it sorta works, other times not. I like using the folders like a SLR. Usually remove the little straps and use it's hooks to put a shoulder strap on them and just shoot that way. Sometimes I'll even leave them open to speed things up, but that's risky. Could always bump them hard sideways and bend the struts or worse. Oddly no one looks twice when I am out in public. The Fuji GS645s get the stares because it is bigger than people are used to, and that camera is much, much smaller than the Fuji GW690 III I once had. It's coming down to the only real choices it looks like. The Mamiya 6 or 7 or the Bronica RF's. I know that a lot of people say don't worry if you have a noisy shutter, and I agree that the photographer is usually the only one to notice it, but it is really annoying. Had the same problem w/ a Leica R5, and after selling it and trying out the alternatives finally went back to one because it gets the job done.

 

I'll look at your development tips Craig to see if that can lead me in the right direction. It was an eye opening moment going into that gallery and seeing the prints from the Mamiya TLR. One of those times when you say, uh oh, I am not doing something right here. The Mamiya's prints were not overwhelmingly different than mine. It was just that when you got a bit closer you saw that the details were really sharp and it was just in a different class than mine.

Why not try a Mamiya C series <abbr style="border-bottom: 1px blue dashed;" title="twin-lens reflex camera">TLR</abbr> if this camera produces the look you are after? Or is the size/weight too much for you?

Another camera close to the Rapid-Omegas is the Mamiya Universal and Super 23. Large and bulky, but far cheaper than the Mamiya 6 and 7's.They have one of the best film flatness backs avaiable. They are very rugged and dependable. Some were used in Vietnam. The backs take 6x7, 6x9 and Polaroid, (which woud be Fuji film now). The Super 23 has a back with some movements. Also possible to put a groundglass on the back. They were made up to the 90's.

Steve, I understand what you mean when you differentiate between Zeiss and Leica glass, the Leica looks more

dimensional due to better handling of the image's micro contrast. And because of that you might prefer Schneider to Zeiss

as Schneider's design philosophy comes closer to Leica then Zeiss does. So have you considered a Rolleiflex with a

Schneider Xenar or Xenotar lens instead of the equivalent Zeiss ones? Granted a Rollei isn't as portable as a rangfinder

but it is still light in weight and very quiet. And you do get used to the reversed image after a while.

How's about a Hasselblad Superwide C or C/M? 38mm Zeiss Biogon lens, you barely need to focus at all, the Zeiss Biogon

has a very nice look to it, and in fact, these things work surprisingly well as point 'n shoot cameras. Very quiet, with

minimal shutter lag. Years ago, I got a nice late-model SWC with T* coatings for $1K from a big dealer because it had a

scratch on the lens which did not seem to affect the photos at all. Downsides? You have to lower it from your eye in order

to advance the film.

 

I owned a Mamiya 6 with 75mm lens and it was rock-solid, but if you want a vintage German look, this is probably not the

camera for you.

The Bronica RF645 is very nice, and the optics are excellent. But the 100mm lens is expensive and difficult to find. In addition, I have no faith in its film transport. Mine was serviced under warranty and again out of warranty. That's why I sold it and bought a Mamiya 7 II. No regrets on the Mamiya!

Mamiya 7 would get my vote and they can now be picked up for 300 pounds sterling in the uk. This is of course used but both the bodies I have are pre owned and work perfectly ok. You would have to add a lens for about the same amount.

 

Mamiya lens' are, in my opinion among the best in the world and I have never been dissappointed by them. They are also very light and unobtrusive to use with wisper quiet shutters.

 

Google www.ffordes.com which is the dealer I usually use.

 

Good luck

Steve,

 

See if you can find a clean Plaubel Makina 6x7.

It is a folding camera (non-interchangeable lens) and has more Lens Mojo than the Fuji's or Mamiya (which I have used a

lot).

 

It is also much more compact than the Mamiya 7 and of course the Fuji's.

 

I sadly sold my Plaubel as I really want cameras that can close-focus (none of the Rangefinders really do).

The photos I took with it sat very well with my Rollei, Hassy and Leica shots.

BRONICA RF645! What else?

I have a Zeiss Super Ikonta III and a Mamiya 7. They are both sweet, but the Mamiya lenses are sharper and have more contrast

so it gets the most use. I have tried the Fuji and Bronica 645's and hated the feel of the Fuji and the portrait orientation of the

Bronica.

 

I originally got the M7 as a modern, sharper equivalent of the older Zeiss folder. It works well, and it is light and robust.

I have a Mamiya 7ii, a Mamiya Press Super 23 with 65mm and 100mm, and two Koni Omega Rapids (a nice one with 58mm and a beat up one with 90mm).

 

The Mamiya Press rivals my 7ii in terms of sharpness but it is the largest and heaviest of the above cameras, I love it the most because of the 6x9 back and the comments it gets when I'm using it in crowds.

 

I use the Rapid with 58mm the most because it's smaller and lighter than the Mamiya Press, I do a lot of hanging out drinking at night with crazy fun bicycle people in Los Angeles and I'm not going to take my 7ii in those situations. Plus the rapid's coupling of the film advance and shutter cocking is a major plus when I'm shooting quick candids on rides, parties, etc.

 

I'm thinking of selling the 7ii but not having to carry a meter with it is pretty nice every once in awhile.

You may not like the Fuji but I have an early Fuji GW690 and a Mamiya RB67, a Rollei 2.8C Xenotar, an MPP Microcord, a Ross Ensign 820. The Fuji wins hands down on results, the Rollei wins on film loading and the others do the job that they were intended to do. My first choice is the Fuji. Make up your own mind!

Thanks for the feedback Norman. Asking for feedback from other people is all about making up your own mind.

 

While the Bronica attracts me, it seems they have some built in issues that could be costly as Robert pointed out. I think it would be smart to go w/ the Mamaya 7 or 7II, if for no other reason than they're newer than the 6 cameras. The Plaubel is very interesting and people love it's lenses, but it could also be a fragile camera, and is more money than I want to invest.

 

The main thing I got out of all this, besides the obvious help that everyone has been so kind to offer here and helped me to make a decision, is it pays to go out and look at other people's work in galleries. Seeing that exhibit the other night and realizing that my folders, while great cameras, could never produce images like the photographer's Mamiya TLR was a good thing. Otherwise I would probably have gone down the road that I did w/ my Nikons. I amassed a lot of pics w/ them until one day I finally bought some Leica gear and saw that everything I had shot w/ the Nikons just didn't cut it anymore. My 8008s and F4s were great picture getters, and for moving subjects it still pays to have fast auto focus, but their lenses were a bit handicapped compared to the glass at the top of the food chain.

Great answers all round. No free lunch. But an affordable upgrade/tryout would be a Mamiya TLR w/ 65mm and 80mm

lenses. They almost go for a song and are pro quality. I like the Mamiyaflex C2-it's lighter than the C330 cameras and is

knob wind, which I also like. In using the TLR, you can focus with the ground glass and then view through the sportsfinder

for the exposure. There is a reason however, why TLRs are so superb for portraits-we are NOT looking down on the

superb. Good luck. The Mamiya TLR, Press and RB lenses are great values.

I have a Mamiya 7ii which I really like.

Pros:

-easy to use

-easy to carry- much lighter than most of the other cameras mentioned here

-reasonable built-in lightmeter

-reasonably sharp (although there are sharper cameras out there)

 

Cons:

-expensive

-i prefer 6x9 to 6x7

-don't think it is terribly robust- mightn't survive a fall for example

<p>Since I posed this question I purchased a Mamiya 7 w/ 80 lens. It's SHARP! But beware that old Chinese curse "may you get what you ask for". I don't like the Mamaya. Shots, though very nice, remind me of very sharp Nikon pics. Nothing wrong w/ that, but not what I'm after. A lot of people love this camera, and it is a great camera w/ an excellent meter, but it didn't give me what I was after. My Welta Weltur folder is nearly as sharp as the Mamiya, which I'm selling. The Welta is off for a new shutter and a CLA and will be my main everyday shooter. Keeping the Super Ikonta 531/A too. Sold the Super Ikonta III w/ the Novar, immediately regretted, and bought another one. The Novar is a very fine lens stopped down.<br>

<br /> I've come to realize there is more to photography than having a razor sharp lens. A lot of these old folders, if set up correctly, make beautiful photos w/ a special look all their own & are a joy to shoot. Not to mention that for much less than a modern MF camera I can buy several folders that will cover 6x6, 6x4.5, and 6x9 (old Moskva 5 that cost $35 and takes beautiful photos).</p><div></div>

<p>2nd Welta Shot.</p><div></div>