Bronica ETR Question

^^ So I'm curious how it's turned out , got any pics you'd like to show us from the ETRC ?

I'm a long time lover of the ETRS(i) models , tough and dependable , both good attributes

when traveling abroad. Peter

^^ So I'm curious how it's turned out , got any pics you'd like to show us from the ETRC ?

I'm a long time lover of the ETRS(i) models , tough and dependable , both good attributes

when traveling abroad. Peter

Whatever I click or post will not do justice to Bronica. It is an outstanding camera. I can print/scan any size I want and the results stay sharp. I had very little grain on Pro 400H. Ektar had no grain at all. And neither did Acros (rest in peace). I feel unworthy of having MF gear since I shoot nothing important.

Nice sharp images

Which film was that ?

Nice sharp images

 

Which film was that ?

flower with a church on the background is Ektar. A decommissioned train is Fuji Pro 400H. and this black and white is Acros 100. I wish there was any cheap 120 format film though, with adequate quality of course. Results are outstanding, but I get only 15 frames instead of 38-39 at a same price.

"If you're looking for a single lens medium format camera, then why not get a folder or a TLR?"

That's what I would do as well. They're much easier to tote around, and yes, the image quality is as good or better than the Bronica, AND you get 6x6 negs.

The first shot below was taken with a Rolleicord (cost $120) that had my favorite TLR lens, the 3 element Triotar. The shot below it is from an Agfa Isola ($30) tube camera, and the last shot was with a Zeiss Ikonta w/ another of my favorite 3 element lenses, the Zeiss Novar (camera cost was $150). There isn't much to choose between them in terms of image quality, and all the cameras can take very nice portraits because you can crop a 6x6 neg and still have a lot to print. The cameras aren't quite as capable as a medium format SLR, but they are much easier to shoot, and you can take them places you couldn't take a Bronica. TLR's always get a smile from people when you take their picture, and these cameras have very quiet shutters. Film was Tri-X in D76 and scanned on an old Epson 2450 flatbed.

Sorry about the large photos. I just started using Imgur to host them, and can't yet figure out how to make them smaller. No matter what size I upload, so far I get the same size photos to post.

I wish there was any cheap 120 format film though, with adequate quality of course. Results are outstanding, but I get only 15 frames instead of 38-39 at a same price.

Spare a thought for those of us who shoot 6x9 - only 8 frames per one 120 film

To keep cost down I've resorted to buying 220 film, but it's only plentiful in Velvia 100. Buying it right, Velvia 100 220 can be more than US$1.00 cheaper per half roll than 120 Velvia 100. "Half" roll is how I do the price calculation for 220 film, so it can be directly compared to the price of a 120 roll. 220 Velvia can be cheaper than 120 color negative film per image if the prices are monitored carefully and by buying the cheapest

That forces me to do E6 developing though, but Velvia is a quality film I'm looking forward to using. For B&W I use Ilford FP4 but I also use cheap Chinese Shanghai 100 which if developed in high dilution developer for long developing times, it will produce acceptable results

Shanghai GP3 100 - Camera Mamiya C3 80mm

Spare a thought for those of us who shoot 6x9 - only 8 frames per one 120 film

Frame count was a main reason why I went for 645 actually, for there were TLRs available at a same price too, which took 6x6 negs.

Spare a thought for those of us who shoot 6x9 - only 8 frames per one 120 film

 

To keep cost down I've resorted to buying 220 film, but it's only plentiful in Velvia 100. Buying it right, Velvia 100 220 can be more than US$1.00 cheaper per half roll than 120 Velvia 100. "Half" roll is how I do the price calculation for 220 film, so it can be directly compared to the price of a 120 roll. 220 Velvia can be cheaper than 120 color negative film per image if the prices are monitored carefully and by buying the cheapest

 

That forces me to do E6 developing though, but Velvia is a quality film I'm looking forward to using. For B&W I use Ilford FP4 but I also use cheap Chinese Shanghai 100 which if developed in high dilution developer for long developing times, it will produce acceptable results

220 is somewhat of a dying breed too, as much as I can tell. And well, I had to accept the fact of medium format being an exclusive thing for special occasions. A thing with single lens weighing as much as my OM-4 with three lenses and 2.5 times fewer shots is an item for seldom use. So it is what it is.

Thanks for posting the pics , I enjoy them both . And yes , there's pleasure in getting more (excellent) shots on 6x45 compared to

6x6 or larger negatives .

It has been a while. After selling my ETRC, acquiring TLR and a folder, I finally came right back where I started: assembled ETRS piece by piece, again. I don't think I'll be parting with this one anymore. I also found that with a little bit of trickery I can squeeze 16 frames on 120 film using 220 back, instead of standard 15.

I have an original ETR, with a set of MC lenses, speed grip, metered prism, and a bunch of backs, both 120 and 220. It soldiers on without missing a beat and the MC lenses get the job done despite what their critics say.

I liked it so much I got another body (an ETRS) plus a 75mm PE lens and the 45-90mm PE zoom.

kmac, was your Mamiya C3 pic above made with the silver-faced 80mm that was normally standard for that body? Very very sharp!

Most of my lenses are black barrel, but I keep one old silver 105mm f/3.5 because it looks great on my older C220, the shutter has been unusually reliable, and it images differently from my black 105mm DS. The silver was closer to a Tessar optical formula, the black is more of a Heliar. Differences are subtle, but the silver barrel has a certain something when shooting particular portraits and flowers that the black barrel lacks (as improved as the later lens is in most circumstances). The focus falloff from sharp to background/foreground is exceptional with the silver 105mm Sekor.

Mamiya TLR was THE entry-level medium format interchangeable lens system for decades, but as prices for SLR gear got very cheap post-digital its become a forgotten stepchild (doesn't help that it lacks the bling-y hipster jewelry factor of Rolleiflex TLR, or portability of Yashica- Minolta- Ricoh TLRs). But its functionality and versatility is as great as it always was, most lenses go for peanuts, repairs are very simple (and rare aside from shutter re-lube). You can get a late-model C220F with superb bright and contrasty factory-original focus screen in mint condition with complete multicoated 80mm for about the same price you'll pay for just the Maxwell screen upgrade for a Rolleiflex. Its all-black utilitarian appearance borders on ugly, nobody walking down Bedford Ave in Williamsburg would even notice it, but damn if it isn't an amazingly useful, motivational TLR. Larger and heavier than a Rollei or Yashica, yes, but not by THAT much given the extra features (and probably half the size/weight of your venerable old C3: that indeed is a cinderblock).

Having tried (and enjoyed) almost all the major MF SLR systems (Hasselblad, Bronica S2A, Bronica SQ, Kowa Six, Mamiya RB67), I keep circling back to the C220F TLR more than I used any of the others. There's just something endearing in how it works. Still keep my Hasselblad kit around, and add to it now and then (because, hey, its Hasselblad: how can you resist?), but the Mamiya C220F has slowly become my go-to MF camera.

Of course, a Bronica ETR with AE prism and speed grip will kill most any TLR (or Hasselblad) in a fast-moving outdoor portrait session. I learned that the hard way. ;)

kmac, was your Mamiya C3 pic above made with the silver-faced 80mm that was normally standard for that body? Very very sharp!

Yes it was the silver faced 80mm, it's the only lens I have for my C3. But I've stopped using the C3 because other cameras have taken my fancy, but that doesn't mean I don't like the images taken with it, they look superb on A3 size out of my Epson R2400 printer. The glass is spotless, a well judged ebay find, as much as you can judge description photos that is, I counted my lucky stars after I cleaned years of dust from it when it arrived, to find a pretty good camera underneath all the dust with great glass and accurate shutter. It had light leaks which I fixed. I'll definitely get back to using it though and run some more film through it

I have an original ETR, with a set of MC lenses, speed grip, metered prism, and a bunch of backs, both 120 and 220. It soldiers on without missing a beat and the MC lenses get the job done despite what their critics say.

 

I liked it so much I got another body (an ETRS) plus a 75mm PE lens and the 45-90mm PE zoom.

I have added Speed Grip E to the system and although it's cumbersome now, ergonomics have improved. I have a feeling that I can drive nails into a plank with it.