The ultimate, cheap, travel, medium format rangefinder

<p>I'm planning a long trip (more than 2 months) in extreme conditions (might be below -10 degrees celsius, raining, snowing, windy) and I need a medium format camera to document my journey.<br>

Key features include:<br>

1. price - unfortunately this is very important factor for me, the camera has to be cheap<br>

2. optics - of course this should be on the first place; sharp lens is a must<br>

3. weight/size - ideal camera should be small and light as I will be walking for most of the time with all my stuff</p>

<p>Cameras I considered:<br>

- Mamiya Press / Koni Omega - both are very cheap with apparently nice optics. I'm worried about the size/weight and that these cameras have more than 40 years<br>

- Mamiya 7II - of course it would be ideal but too expensive!<br>

- 6x4.5 format cameras - I considered these as well as they are usually small/light, you can shoot more frames on roll and they are cheaper but I'm worried about the format as I'm planning large prints and also 95% shots are in landscape format<br>

Also I have been shooting 35mm rangefinder for the last two months and I still can't get use to the framing. I lost few good shots because of that but I don't think there is anything apart from rangefinders that could be ok (I'm not interested in square format so no TLRs!). I don't mind having a camera with not changeable fixed focal lenght lens as long as it is wide angle.</p>

<p>A Bronica GS-1 with a 80mm lens, a prism finder and a 120 6X7 back and Speed Grip should not be too expensive. </p>

<p>Is it not too heavy/bulky?</p>

<p>Why not look for an old 120 folder like the many made by Zeiss Ikon, Kodak and others? they are simple, rugged. compact and cheap. The lenses in these older cameras are quite good. In 6x7 or 6x9 you would have an ideal landscape format.<br /> One of the Yashicamat 124 series TLRs would be another option, but your not interested in 6x6 so I guess not.</p>

<p>Fuji GA645 Pro 60mm f/4....apprx 37mm in 35mm full frame equiv. for under $500 used. You can also get the GA645w 45mm f/4.....apprx 28mm in 35mm full frame equiv. for considerably more, say maybe under $1000. They also make a number of others, older and newer than these two. But in my opinion these are the two real choices. Excellent optics, relatively new, no bellows to get pin holes in it, the zoom model lens is slower in aperture speed. Regardless, they are all light and easily transported on travel trips.</p>

<p>I sold mine because I wanted the Mamiya 7 (larger negative).....in case you were wondering.</p>

<p>All medium cameras with a coupled rangefinder are surprisingly big and heavy. My Iskra 1 (cheap, solid, excellent) weights about 1kg and is not really fun to carry around even when folded. The only really "lightweight" options are the modern 645 rangefinders, which are expensive, but feature an internal meter and have fine optics.</p>

<p>However, if you shoot mostly landscape, why would you need a rangefinder at all?!? Just set focus to infinity, stop down a little and you should be set. Zone-focusing vintage folders are not <em>that</em> heavy and you will have a larger range of cameras to choose from (and they cost even less, although a CLA always makes sense, especially if you go on a once-in-a-lifetime trip!).</p>

<p>If you want a wide angle lens, there are <em>only</em> the modern Fuji, Mamiya, Bronica etc. cameras as vintage cameras always sport a normal lens (except for the big press cameras). I don't know how rugged these cameras are... I'd guess that you should start thinking about alternatives to this medium format rangefinder idea...</p>

<blockquote>vintage cameras always sport a normal lens (except for the big press cameras).</blockquote>

<p>

There are a (very) few exceptions. The old Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100 is one that springs to mind. Can't imagine trusting the outcome of the trip to one, though.

</p>

<p>I learn something new every day, Jean-Yves. I knew that the Plaubel Makinas had wide-ish lenses (and those cameras are quite vintage and fragile). But that Brooks-Plaubel looks like an interesting camera, but seems to be rather rare and expensive...</p>

<p>The Moskva/Mockba 5 here weighs in at 871 grams and shoots just fine; it is a clone of the Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta 6x9cm folding camera with RF. The Moskva 5 has a 4 element Tessar type lens; a 10.5cm F3.5 Industar-24 a coated lens. But mine cost 50 bucks and had one tiny pinhole that I goobed up with liquid electrical tape about 12 years ago.</p>

<p>I sure would NOT want to say a camera from 1959 with a leaf shutter is not going to stick at -10 F; that is a massive requirement.<br /> <br />***Probably most of the leaf shutters around folks use today with *no issues* at room temp could get sticky at -10F.<br /> <br /> An old folder has risks; a WORN BENT JACK in the box; thus one might get a poor image.</p>

<p>Getting a used camera before a trip is risky; add the -10F requirement is a tall order; it abust dicates alot of testing; or having your used buy completely CLA'd.<br>

A used unknown camera for a long trip is risky; one might want to carry two of them.</p>

Do realize that if price is important then you will have to look at cameras that are old, large and heavy, and/or optically less than great. It's like the old slogan: "Cheap! Fast! Good! Pick any two!".

 

For cheap and small, you'll have to look at old folders. The optics won't be up to today's standards, and they'll have planty of scope for problems with alignment, leaking bellows and so on. If you want cheap and good, then say hello to weight and bulk, with something like a Bronica or a press camera. For small and good you have the Mamiya 7 as well as the apparently excellent new Fuji 667 folder (which would make a near perfect travel camera), but those are going to eat a fairly big chunk of your money.

 

If there really were a camera that was cheap, small and good, I guess all of us would own it already.

<p>Just using 120 can be risky. when traveling around New Zealand 20 years ago on the North Island; only 3 stores I was at carried 120; camera stores in Auckland; Wellington and Gisborne; and it was a tiny subset of what Franks camera in LA carried. I sure would carry a 35mm camera too; in case you run out of film; or teh film gets lost; stolen; grabbed; etc,</p>

<p>Tom, welcome to photo.net. You are putting some difficult constraints on this, but consider the following.</p>

<p>(i) Low price is a problematic one. If you buy used and you want a reliable camera, you will want to have it overhauled by a good technician before you go away on a long trip. Most of my old shutters get a little sticky around the freezing point, so that may be an issue.</p>

<p>(ii) If you are certain you need a 6 x 7 negative, an obvious choice is a '23'-sized Crown Graphic or rangefinder-coupled Century Graphic with a good lens, like an Ektar. These are bulky but lightweight simple meterless cameras, with interchangeable lensboards and backs. You can read more about them on graflex.org. (Graflex.org has good information on the fixed pages, but the help board is pretty useless these days, so ask your questions here.)</p>

<p>(iii) You will make life easier if you can relax your conditions. A second excellent choice would be a later model Rolleicord TLR with a Xenar, if you can find one in really good condition. You can enlarge a rectangle from a 6 x 6 frame almost as large as from most 6 x 7 cameras. A Rolleicord is a very lightweight meterless bare-bones camera. I've used mine on a couple of backpacking trips successfully. This would probably be my first choice if I were in your shoes. </p>

<p>Medium format rangefinders are still heavy. I have a Bronica 645RF but when I travel I usually end up with an old Lubitel 2 TRL wich is 1/3 the weight (made in 1960). Both are for street shooting. For landscapes, I'd probably need nothing else but a pinhole.</p>

<p>Get a Mamiya 7II and sell it after your trip. The transaction will cost you a few hundred dollars. It will give you the best quality and portability for the money.</p>

<p>Mauro might have the best advice here.<br>

I don't like it when people don't directly answer the OP's question, suggesting they know better about everything, but I'm curious why you want a MF rangefinder for this particular task.<br>

Just for sheer image quality you would probably do as well with an older Canon 5D and a single prime lens, unless you also plan on packing a tripod. And you wouldn't have to schlep all that film, possibly through airport scanners.....</p>

<p> </p>

<p> years ago the Fuijca G690 RF 5x7 cm rangefinder had a following too</p>

<p>Exactly, the Fuji GA645 series is what you seek. Small, lightweight, relatively inexpensive (around $500-$1000 used, depending upon the model), with super sharp lenses, and built in meters.<br>

I have the GA645Zi (35-60mm sharp zoom lens) and it is an ideal backpack travel camera. The only thing is, if you are shooting mostly landscapes, you may want the GA645W as it has a wider lens (28mm).</p>

<p>My $0.02 to an interesting question: I agree that Mauro may have the best answer. The Mamiya 7 (or 7II) is a terrific camera for travel, the image quality is exquisite, and in the medium format realm (short of 4x5) you may get the best photo enlargements from this camera/lenses. While you might do with one lens (e.g., 65mm), two lenses (80mm with 50mm [wide] or 150mm [tele]) would give you much more flexibility, and the lenses are relatively light (also nice to have "insurance" of two lenses). Buy it used, then sell it used. Alternatively, the Fuji GSW690 provides a wide view, nice landscape format, large output, relatively cheap, but not light.</p>

<p>I agree with the recommendations for Fuji and Rolleis. The Fuji GA series are all battery operated, AF. The GS645 60mm/f4 is all manual/mechanical, non-bellows. Quite rugged, and useful for a backpacking trip I took it on once. However, its FOV is closer to a 37mm in 35mm format, so it may not be wide enough for your purposes. It's nice b/c it synchs up to 1/500s, which is a real treat for portraits, say. The lens is multicoated and very sharp. It's a little noisy compared to TLRs. And its native format is portrait. Some parts feel a little plasticky, but seems pretty rugged. If I had to choose, I would go with a Rollei, like an Automat IV, I think it is- I got one at a flea market for $80. Tessar or Xenar 75mm ("normal") lens. Really great photos. And the quietest film camera you'll ever own.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>... long trip (more than 2 months) in extreme conditions (might be below -10 degrees celsius, raining, snowing, windy) and I need a medium format camera ... Key features include:<br /> 1. price ... 2. optics ... 3. weight/size</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Boy, that's a tough one. In particular, I don't know of any commonly available MF camera that'll survive major weather in its native skin. Are you sure 135 won't be good enough? The usage scenario sounds like a good match for an EOS-1something mated to a weather sealed L lens.</p>

<p>Consider also a toughened digital compact as a spare (or primary even.) Take a look at the <a href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1497&page=specs">Olympus Stylus Tough-8010</a>. The big downside is, of course, the compromises of a small sensor digital in as far as noise and contracted dynamic range. However, for scenes amenable to longish exposures, exposure blend. Expect results, to a first order, comparable to what 645 film can yield.</p>

<p>Fuji GSW 690 I/II/III, bigger picture size, wide angle lens, superb optics and a very reliable camera. A little bit on the big side, but come on, it's a 6x9 camera! The only 6x9 camera smaller than that is probably the grandfather's folding camera. Think about the super sharp fujinon EBC lens, perfect for landscape!</p>

<p>The firm requirement for *NO* square formats and *NO* TLR's kills any idea of a Rollie or other 6x6cm TLR by two very solid counts.</p>

<p>That is why I mentioned the old Fujica G-690 RF; it shoots 8 BIG negatives on a 120 roll; has four lenses available too; 65mm; 100mm; 150mm; 180mm. But; It might be too old to consider; it was around 40 years ago and worked with 220 film too. The thing is like a giant Leica; it is abit heavy thuis it weighs 4Lb 7oz with a standard 100mm lens. This was a hot setup for shooting location work long ago.</p>

<p>Another old RF camera is a press/wedding type Koni-Omega; these were great in the 1960's/70's/80's for wedding work. One gets 10 2 1/2 by 2 3/4 negatives; great for nice 8x10 prints; 16x20 prints; it too has removeable lenses.</p>

<p>The Graflex XL RF camera was once a huge system; it had 11 lenses at one time. Standard lens was a 100mm Zeiss Tessar.</p>

<p>The Mamyia 7 II is a great 6x7cm rig too and a modern one too!</p>

<p>Noticed that no one has mentioned this, Plaubel Makina 67 could be another choice for you. It is reported as <a href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/plaubel.htm">"the world's most compact modern 6x7 camera" by Ken Rockwell</a>.</p>

<p>Whatever else you do, don't risk spoiling your trip by buying an ancient camera that will have a greater probability of malfunction over a long trip, and will be a lot more difficult to get repaired. Some of the cameras mentioned as candidates are cheap because they are old. </p>

<p>The other thing to point out is that its much easier to write out a specification for a camera than to find something that meets it. You may not actually be able to get cheap, great lens, light, and medium format all together without buying something very old or in poor condition. And you need two cameras, for to go on such a long trip without backup is tempting fate.</p>

<p>I already have Pentacon Six with 50mm f/4 and 90mm f/2.8 and it's not overlapping. The lens are good as well. It's just I don't like the square format, not for the kind of stuff I'm planning to shoot (please have a look at my 'hackney story' project I've just started and also 'Motherland' by Simon Roberts http://motherlandbook.com/ - my inspiration I guess). I consider 6x6 good for portraits and photographs with central perspective.<br /><br />@Rick Donnelly: these camera are very old, aren't they?<br />@Thomas Sullivan: Yes, I was considering this one as well. I was put off but apparently quite slow and noisy AF. How would you describe the difference between 6x4.5 and 6x7 format? What about image quality between Fuji and Mamiya 7?<br /><br />What about Fuji GS645S?<br /><br />@Bueh B.: That Iskra looks quite sweet. It's a shame it's a 6x6 format.<br />@Jean-Yves Mead: Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100 - interesting as well, quite old though, and only newer versions have f5.6 lenses, the older ones are f8 (very slow)<br />@Kelly Flanigan: Moskva 5 - I learnt not to trust Russian cameras but it looks interesting. It's a shame it has fixed 105mm lens, not very wide, quite old as well. The temperature is not in farenheit. That would be quite extreme indeed :)<br />@Janne Moren: 'If there really were a camera that was cheap, small and good, I guess all of us would own it already.' I guess you're right :)<br />@Kelly Flanigan: I will take my two Olympus 35 SP rangefinders with me as well, maybe also Praktica BC-1 with 28mm and 35mm lens. I haven't decided yet.<br />@Dave Sims: Welcome :) Crown Graphic - isn't it a large format? rangefinder-coupled Century Graphic - I think they only have 101m lenses.These are also pretty old. no 6x6 - see above<br />@Mauro Franic: This is something I might consider. I would have to get a loan then. Or are you thinking about renting it?<br />@Bob Keefer: I have Canon 40D and I haven't used it for a long time. I've just fallen in love with film and 35mm has just not good enough quality for me.<br />@Kelly Flanigan: Fuijca G690 sounds lovely. I need to check the prices<br />@Tse-Sung Wu: GS645 seems a good choice. 37mm is wide enough. I'm just not convinced about the 6x4.5, portrait format<br />@ZHENG PENG: Fuji GSW 690 I/II/III is definately a nice camera, a bit expensive though, the same with Plaubel Makina 67</p>