Monster Fuji GX680iii vs Graflex 2x3

Hi there!

 

Oh well, we all know how it happens.. A sudden GAS attack!

 

I photograph landscape and urban sceneries, I have been using 35mm and 120 6x6 and lately exploribg the wonderfull world of camera movement with my small Graflex 2x3 with a graflock film back.

It is wonderfull yet slow.

 

While surfing the web I found about this odd camera, the Fuji GX680. It sounded perfect. Sturdy, quality lens, good viewfinder, fast action and the camera movements I like and find usefull.

The downside: weight and size.

 

I dont mind carrying some weight, I have been seen carrying a Pentacon six + 2 lenses, a Voightlander Bessa R and a Hasselblad 501, but is this camera a true boat anchor?

 

Image wise, will I gain all that much?

I know it must be much faster, with the graflex the process is focus with focusing glass, remove it, put roll film back, cock shutter, measure light, fire.

 

To complement my gas attack, there is one available within my country at a honest price...

 

What would you do? If I buy and dont like it, will it be impossible to sell it?

I do not have a graflex (yet), but I do have a Gx680 - they are currently seriously inexpensive considering what they sold new (when I first saw them) and the image size and movements were very attractive. They were designed primarily for studio, but I bought it for field use. It is a seriously big and heavy machine, but still portable in a backpack. If you have carried a Pentax 67 with prism and multiple lenses, that's about the same bulk and weight of a Gx680.

 

The III is worth getting as it uses easily obtainable Li-ion batteries. The I & II are fine if you can get the AA holder (or are OK with re-celling battery packs).

 

2 items worth getting if you like lens movement:

- Magnifying Hood (where the eye oeice can translate to the corners)

- Electronic cable release (the one for the I & II does not work on the III)

Both are rather expensive as they are not commonly available.

 

Due to it's weight and size, you also need a sturdy tripod (which adds to the carry weight)

 

I do not use it that much now, as I prefer to carry less - a Hasselblad kit hits the sweet-spot for me. The Pentacon Six is similar, and despite it's foibles, is really nice to use.

 

For reference, I've hiked in with a Pentax 67 kit, and a Linhof Technika70 kit, both of which are about the same bulk & weight as the GX680 kit. I prefer the GX680 over the Linhof, while the Pentax is better for different situations.

I'm not a professional photographer or an authority on medium format so consider the source of the following commentary.

 

From everything I've read about the GX680's they are excellent cameras that were not very well marketed. That said, the people who've shot with them professionally love their versatility and photo quality which has been compared to a large format product. Like so many of the medium format film cameras, the 680iii hasn't been manufactured since about 2007 and the only changes made to each series (i, ii and iii) were external: they're apparently all the same camera otherwise.

 

Will you gain much compared to what you've been shooting? By the sounds of it, the GX680 could replace both the Pentacon and Bessa by utilizing various viewfinder format masks that can create 6x4.5, 6x6, 6x9, etc. That, and the bellows can twist and turn to allow different angles from one convenient stationary position. As you already know, the big downside to the 680 is its weight so you'll NEED a stable tripod, a remote release and extra battery. The Hasselblad 500 is far more portable than the 680 and would fill the niche that the GX680 cannot.

 

Will the 680 be impossible to sell? Probably. With so many (over-priced), medium format film cameras out there I wouldn't expect it to sell quickly or easily simply because of the unusual 6x8 size that was always the more obscure MF negative size.

 

I've got several MF cameras and assorted lenses: Mamiya 645 1000s, Pentax 645 Nii, and a Fuji GW690iii . I'd been shopping for a Fuji GW670 when you put a gun to my head and forced me to look at the GX680 series. . .which now has me second-guessing my gas for the 670. Thanks a lot! I really need another medium format camera! (snark :-) Thing is, I'd really have to work to convince myself to buy a camera with a bellows: one little pin hole, one small tear and it's game over. . . .finding a new one might not be easy.

 

If you're comparing the Graflex 2x3 (6x9) and the GX680? It doesn't seem like there's much to compare except that the Graflex is lots cheaper and far more portable.

 

Here are some links I found very interesting:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/Fuji GX680/

`thew's reviews: Ken Kirkwood on the Fujifilm GX680

Camera Review: Fujifilm GX 680 III S Professional - Japan Camera Hunter

If you're comparing the Graflex 2x3 (6x9) and the GX680? It doesn't seem like there's much to compare except that the Graflex is lots cheaper and far more portable.

 

One advantage I see to the miniature Graphic vs. the Fuji is in lens selection.

 

Admittedly the lenses made for the Fuji seem to be fairly comprehensive, but from what I can see they are not that common and relatively expensive.

 

By contrast, with the Graphic-just get a lens board and-as they say-"the world is your oyster." Provided that the shutter isn't so large as to not fit on a board(I'm eyeballing my Pacemaker across the room at probably 3"x3" or maybe a bit smaller) and you can get the lens to infinity, you have a huge selection of lenses at your disposal.

 

Again, as long as you are within the dimension confines of the board and the body itself, you can fit a lens meant for 4x5. That MIGHT be snug, as getting the 75mm Nikkor I just bought to infinity does bring the rear element close to the shutter on a 4x5 speed, but it does fit.

Mostly for sure, this isnt a logical acquisition, but GAS is rarely a logic thing :p

I think I will like the camera, and if it was an easy camera to re-sell I wouldnt think much about it, but if I happen to realise itis too bulky, I wont have a chance to trade it for another (even on eBay it should be hard because ofthe weight/postage, and locally the market for such a camera is non-existant).

 

Oh decisions...

Sergio, I've used 2x3 Graphics for decades. I'm sorry, but you're mistaken about their movements. The only movement that's generally usable with a 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic is front rise. 19 mm, and no fall. Shift, 10 mm if I recall correctly, is usable only with lenses that focus with the front standard in front of the bed struts. When shift can be used, it is easy to get unintended swing as well. Swing? No, sir. Backward tilt only, not what's usually needed.

 

If you think you need movements, get a GX and be prepared to swallow the loss if it doesn't work out or get a 2x3 view camera. I have a couple of 2x3 Cambos. I've never played with a GX but I think the Cambos are somewhat more cumbersome than the GX.

 

About lenses, Ben, go shopping. The GX has a wonderful complement of outstanding lenses and they're relatively inexpensive these days because they're very hard to repurpose.

 

About lensboards, Ben. 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic boards and Miniature Speed Graphic boards are 2.5" x 2.5". The largest shutter that fits comfortably on a 2x3 Graphic board is probably the Ilex #3. I have and use one.

Sergio, I've used 2x3 Graphics for decades. I'm sorry, but you're mistaken about their movements. The only movement that's generally usable with a 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic is front rise. 19 mm, and no fall. Shift, 10 mm if I recall correctly, is usable only with lenses that focus with the front standard in front of the bed struts. When shift can be used, it is easy to get unintended swing as well. Swing? No, sir. Backward tilt only, not what's usually needed.

 

If you think you need movements, get a GX and be prepared to swallow the loss if it doesn't work out or get a 2x3 view camera. I have a couple of 2x3 Cambos. I've never played with a GX but I think the Cambos are somewhat more cumbersome than the GX.

 

About lenses, Ben, go shopping. The GX has a wonderful complement of outstanding lenses and they're relatively inexpensive these days because they're very hard to repurpose.

 

About lensboards, Ben. 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic boards and Miniature Speed Graphic boards are 2.5" x 2.5". The largest shutter that fits comfortably on a 2x3 Graphic board is probably the Ilex #3. I have and use one.

 

 

Ok, so the gx is a winner in terms of available movements... Now that could turn my decision towards the Fuji...

Edited April 2, 2018 by sergio_sousa

Forget the Fuji. No parts, no service available. They're tanks best suited to studio work that Fuji designed them for. It's a complex, electronics-based system with zero current support. I looked hard at a mint- outfit a friend wanted to sell for very little $$$ but even he thought it was dicey since Fujifilm.ca had no parts or interest in servicing it. If you want movements, look into an inexpensive 4x5 kit.

[uSER=7320367]@c_watson|1[/uSER] above would scare the heck out of me (if I pondered a system purchase).

I think if land- & cityscapes combined with camera movements are the goal, it might be hard to beat a MF monorail with a slider for chimney finder and roll holder? You'll probably need a tripod anyhow to get a bit of DOF. Movements should be more fun if you have an almost yawn free constructions and everything available at front and rear. Why should GAS end before you finally get the real thing?

 

No helpful personal experience, sorry. I used to shoot a Voigtländer Bergheil 6.5x9 with front shift for fun until the crappy rollholder and low contrast of the Heliar vexed me. That camera weighs close to nothing and isn't demanding on the tripod below. So far I failed to mobilize my Linhofs. I guess it would take at least a side car to get me going with them.

I have been looking at 4x5 from time to time, but it seems much more difficult/expensive to develop / enlarge / scan.

What got me looking into 6x9 was the easy of use and affordability.

Not many alternatives with movements, right?

What about a Linhof M679? Or some baby-Technika? IDK what Arca Swiss are going for these days and who else caters that market.

Hmm the price of the Fuji kit would be 500€ already with a 135mm lens.

Would one of those smaller Linhof have similar price and full movements? Even if price is near, they wont have the ease of use of a SLR, right?

I fear it is hard to check all three boxes for Linhofs. The Technikas (I only know the 4x5"s) don't offer full movements; i.e. you can't shift their backs. But if you are lucky you get them with range meter cammed lenses, that should allow a rather swift handheld shooting, if needed but RM usage demands keeping the camera rigid. Like with smaller rangefinders you'll waste a bit of film real estate to make sure to have your subject framed; i.e. the viewfinders were made "better safe than sorry!" in mind. Double check offered 6.5x9 technikas for front shift. The cheapest I spotted on ebay might lack it according to the few pictures.

 

Monorails offer full movement but seem outside your mentioned price range, especially when you want something complete and convenience optimized. New Linhofs are horribly expensive.

"Ease of use" seems relative? - The Technikas (and Speed Graphics) seem meant as a compromise. Once rigged up, they aren't much slower to shoot with their rangemeters and viewfinders than your average Mamiya RB, assuming you are doing a portrait or fashion session. Having to open a bed and pulling the lens out takes longer than removing a lens cap but the granted portability seems worth the effort.

 

Monorails score when movements are needed. you can do them faster without compensating focus head & tripod adjustments. some lenses came with ears to slam the aperture closed while you slide the roll holder into the focal plane. after closing and recocking your shutter.

 

I don't know how much ease of use is left to sane average MF landscape photography. - I was happy snapping with pushed T-Max 400 in my hand held TLR and think I was faster than somebody with a tripod. But I doubt to be able to handhold 1/250 for huge enlargements from fine grain film and shooting at f5.6 is probably not a good idea either...

 

Still: Is a soon to be paper weight or doorstop with a long standard lens what you are after and worth 500 Euro (and whatever it takes to get hold of two more lenses)? - I'd surely buy such stuff in the digital realm and shoot products till it falls apart. With film gear I am more confident if it is all mechanical and maintainable by independent repair shops. And for landscapes I'd want some wide lens too.

USing a 4x5 with 6x9 back could work well or is just stupid? A 4x5 Graflex View camera would be a much better solution, yet affordable? How about the super? Are the movements more usefull?

Oh boy... Am I lost...

If you want an inexpensive 4x5 monorail camera, look for a Cambo SC.

 

Oh, and by the way, not to denigrate photo.net but it isn't the best site for getting advice about LF gear and using it. The US LF site largeformatphotography.info is the best anglophone LF site. To my taste the French LF site galerie-photo.info is better but its mainly for francophones.

 

If you go to to the US LF site, make sure to use all of its resources including Where to look for information on LF (mainly) lenses, which is about much more than lenses.

I never really understand the strong aversion to electronics, they are typically more reliable than the mechanical, and the most common failures are mechanical (ie: switches and contacts). The GX680 is so inexpensive today, that you probably would not repair it, as the replacement cost is the same. This is becoming true for a lot of old cameras. Mechanical cameras typically require more maintenance to keep them accurate.

 

There are unique issues with electronics, specifically the battery dependence. But all digital cameras today are, and most people deal with it.

 

The GX680 is really nice to use, not so nice to carry. It has a 50mm wide angle lens (with limited shift) that cost more than the others, mostly because of the demand, but the lenses are typically really inexpensive today. And there is not a bad one in the set.

 

All that said, there is something really nice about a all mechanical setup - the Hasselblad arcbody comes to mind, but that cost of ownership is still pretty serious. A (mini) view camera with a 6x9 back is also attractive, but I personally preferred the GX680 work-flow over the view camera. But if you are happy with a view camera setup, there really are a lot more options there.

USing a 4x5 with 6x9 back could work well or is just stupid? A 4x5 Graflex View camera

"it depends"

Anything "field" or even worse "press" camera is a bad idea. They tended to come with a lot of bellows to permit macro shots with a portrait lens. With a wide angle you have to compress that bellows very hard and with a 6x9 WA you 'll most likely need recessed lens boards and alternative focusing mechanisms which will exclude or at least drastically reduce movements. A monorail with interchangeable bag bellows is more desirable.

 

Monorails were brewed in different ways: There are the simple unlock, move by hand, lock ones which must have been quite OK for the bigger formats. (Their shakiness might vary depending on manufacturers.) The other approach is having (almost) every movement geared for precisely controllable movements. I think such a camera should make you happier with MF film. I will not double reduce my own 13x18 to 4x5" to accept roll holders in the end. I don't say it won't take pictures that way; I simply doubt doing so to be great fun. But I am no expert & YMMV.

I also don't know which monorail represents a sweet spot compromise between handling precision and portability.

I'm not familiar with the Fuji, but my understanding is that it only has front movements, which can be limiting. A monorail is a lot more versatile in that way, with pro 4x5 ones being pretty cheap now. I have used Toyo 4x5s for the last 30 years and have found them to work well despite being pretty inexpensive. They aren't light--my 45F weighs 9 lbs. without a lens and my 45 G weighs 12, but they are solid when they are set up and don't shake or vibrate. The ground glass for both of them comes with a fairly accurate set of markings for 6x7 and 6x9 roll film backs, and the bellows are interchangeable so that if you're working with short focal lengths you don't run out of camera movements due to bellows restriction. I have worked quite a lot with Calumet 6x7 backs with these cameras--at one point they made 6x9 and 6x12 as well. These backs slide in under the ground glass like a regular 4x5 film holder so they are reasonably convenient to work with. Obviously, using one of these necessitates a heavy tripod and anything hand held is out of the question. And I certainly wouldn't buy one of these in the expectation of quick resale in the event that you decide that it isn't for you.

"it depends"

Anything "field" or even worse "press" camera is a bad idea. They tended to come with a lot of bellows to permit macro shots with a portrait lens. With a wide angle you have to compress that bellows very hard and with a 6x9 WA you 'll most likely need recessed lens boards and alternative focusing mechanisms which will exclude or at least drastically reduce movements. A monorail with interchangeable bag bellows is more desirable.

 

Jochen, are you sure? I ask because my humble Century Graphic and my nearly as humble 2x3 Crown Graphics will focus my 35/4.5 ApoGrandagon to infinity, also my 38/4.5 Biogon, 47/5.6 Super Angulon and of course longer lenses too. All on flat boards, recessed boards are impossible with these cameras. And all with the built-in focusing mechanism, no trick devices as some small Linhofs use are needed. Front rise is possible with all of these lenses, but as I pointed out in post #6 above practically speaking these cameras have no useful movements.

 

About a lot of bellows, well, 2x3 Graphics will go to around 1:1 with a 100 mm lens, i.e., with a normal lens for 2x3. The longest non-telephoto focal length that can be focused, and not comfortably, to infinity on a Century Graphic is around 200 mm. The longest tele lens I know of that will work comfortably on a 2x3 Speed Graphic is the 12"/4 TTH Telephoto as made for Vinten F.95, Williamson F.134, and AGI F.139 cameras. It makes infinity with the standard inside the box. In barrel, too big to go into a leaf shutter so useless on a camera that lacks a focal plane shutter.

 

I also have 2x3 and 4x5 Cambo SCs. They are all larger, heavier and more cumbersome than my little Graphics. My hybrid Cambo (2x3 front so it can use my lenses on 2x3 Graphic boards as can my 2x3 Cambo, 4x5 rear so that I can shoot 6x12) will focus all of the lenses my Graphics will, all on flat boards except for my 60/14 Perigraphe, which goes on a 2x3 Cambo recessed board with an adapter to accept a 2x3 Pacemaker Graphic board. Full movements with everything but the 35 and 60.

I referred to 4x5"s and admittedly only know 2 Linhofs hands on.

Ups.. i have news...

 

Went to a local camera store, it looks almost like a thrift store of cameras, and I was looking for large format cameras. He didnt have much, mostly LF studio cameras on a rail, but.... there was a Fuji GX680!!

 

It was filled with dust and had no battery. I know these first generation batts were not good and are out of stock, but I knew there were solutions to convert to AA.

The guy told me he would trade the camera "as is, untested by me" for a Pentacon Six I had taken for a possible trade.

 

I went out to think a bit, but after 15 minutes i returned and decided to gamble.

 

I just got home, connected some crocodile jaws electrical cables to a Canon 5d batt, and "voila": Everything works like it should!!! wow...

 

It came with Fujinon 135mm 1:5.6 and I am happy and looking forward to film test it :) All in all, I think this was a bargain, now I will try to make a proper batt adapter and burn a lot of fim :)

 

Now I can think with more time about a proper 4x5 camera, but with more time :)

 

Thank you all for the help and ideas, and lets hope this Fuji doesnt become a brick anytime soon :)

For landscapes, the Fuji would be great. Yes, they are seriously big and heavy (when I took mine out of the box I was so shocked at how big it was that I put it back in and sent it back), but I assume you will have one on a tripod for this sort of shooting. For urban scenes, neither camera sounds good to me. The Fuji would really attract a lot of attention due to it's size, and neither camera is going to be quick to shoot. I always used 35mm for street, and usually w/ at least a 90 lens so you didn't have to be right on top of people for head shots.

 

Whoops, I didn't go to page 2. I see now that you ended up w/ the Fuji. If you can manhandle it around for street shooting you'll enjoy the sharp Fuji optics. For me, anything bigger than 35mm was just too big and slow for that, but we're all different. Post some shots from it when you get a chance.