robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Can anyone say what their experience is of using this camera is, with the standard 65 mm lens? How is it to change film? Is the 1m close focus limiting? Is f4 a limit, or are there effective workarounds? What about the extra bulk, is that greatly different from the M? I've handled one in a shop, but that really wasn't enough, I'd like some feedback from someone who has had time to use it and consider the advantages/disadvantages. I do a lot of environmental portrait work, but also want the flexibility to do group photos which will hold the detail when printed large. I'm put off by the 10 snaps per role of the 6X7's and I already have a Rolleiflex 2.8F. I want something that is a little faster to operate and smaller and lighter to lug through the himalaya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diego_k. Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 My experience is with a mamiya 6mf, more compact then the Bronica (tested side by side), I can only say that when I had to take only 1 camera it was the mamiya and not the Leica. When colapsed its as deep as an M with a cron 50mm. add 2-3cm on the side and up, and thats all. The bronica does not collapse, so its actually bigger in the pouch-bag then the Mamiya 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al_kaplan1 Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 The average 6x6 negative ends up geting cropped to 645 format anyway when you make prints so you're comparing a 65mm lens to an 80mm lens as far a perspective goes. The second concern would be reliability. Rolleis aren't really that heavy but they about never malfunction. I'd stick with what you've got and buy more film with the savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miguel_curbelo Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I own both an M4 and the Bronica Rf 645. The Bronica is an excellent all-rounder. It is bulkier than the Leica, but it is so well designed that it never feels uncomfortable in your hand. In fact, it feels better to hold than the M4. It is not too heavy either -it was the camera I took with me last summer to the Canadian Rockies (where, by the way, its vertical viewfinder did not prove to be a problem at all)and it was never a bother to carry it for hours hanging off my shoulder. It works pretty well as a street shooter (although, in this case, I find I focus faster with the Leica). It is also a sturdy camera: I have shot with it in Sweden in winter under very harsh weather conditions, I have accidentally dropped it down some stairs, I have shot with it in the rain, and it is still as good as new. Low light shooting is its weak point, but since it is a MF camera you can shoot at 800 ASA and get away with it. Changing film is easy and straight forward, the lens hoods are particularly well designed and compact and the 1m focusing limit hasn't been a problem for me, but I suppose that will depend on the sort of shots you take. The 65mm lens is great, and so is the 45mm wide angle. The 100mm is a sharp optic as well, but I don't find it is long enough to be useful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feli Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I prefer the Rolleiflex over something like the RF645 or Mamiya 7 for travel, because: - The Rollei is 2 stops faster (f2.8 vs f4.0) and you can't get a lens faster than f4 for the Bronica or Mamiya. Interiors are dark, especially in the countryside. - The Rollei is more compact. With a lens mounted the RF645 or Mamiya are actually quite bulky. The shape of the Rollei is more space efficient. I also think the Rollei weighs less. - The Rollei is nearly indestructible, although I have also heard good things about the other two cameras. - You can shoot the Rollei with the wait-level finder, which can be an advantage if you are trying to keep things low key. But, the Rollei doesn't have a meter, unless you get a GX or FX. Not sure how compfortable you are handling the Rollei. The other two cameras handle just like a giant Leica. I would send the Rollei in for a CLA ( www.rolleirepairs.com), before you go. Harry went over both my GX and 2.8F and did a terrific job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Al, I don't get your point about a crop from an 80mm lens giving the same perspective as a 65mm. Doesn't cropping either leave the field of view the same (at least on the side that one doesn't crop when one goes fom 6x6 to 645) or decreases the field of view, giving the impression that a longer lens was used? Cropping square from the 65mm on a 645 might give you the equivalent of an 80mm lens. The Rollei has just had a CLA and is working perfectly, but I'm afraid it is about 1350g compared to the Bronica's 1150g with the 65/4. As to bulk, my memory (I didn't compare them side by side) is that the Bronica is a little (mms) smaller. The Rollie also has a meter, which works well, given the limitations of such a broad sweep of metering - of course using a separate spotmeter is a much more accurate but slower and more cumbersome affair. I thought that perhaps the Bronica might score here with a more modern and perhaps more accurate (narrower) meter like the Leica. I find it much quicker to use the Leicas than the Rolleiflex (the Leica more ergonomic and the rangefinder v the Maxwell screen is more positive) so I am asuming the Bronica will also be the same. Why should it be easier to focus the Leica than the Bronica? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Feli, your point about the one stop increase in speed of the 80/2.8 is indeed an important one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Will you be able to find 120 film? What about its bulk, Vs 35? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 I can pick up 120 film in Bombay without a problem - it's a bit bulkier but not much more than 35mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 An unboxed roll of 35 takes up about half the space of an unboxed roll of 120...and you have half as many frames per roll...equal bulk represents 4X the shots in 35mm. Maybe not important with Sherpas :-) Another question has to do with relative ease of loading rapidly or in bad weather. If it was me, I'd take TWO cameras, one of them a Pentax waterproof IQZ (38-105)with spare batteries...excellent optically...about Leica-size, lighter and far more rugged. Don't leave home without one :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 John, thanks for the advice on the bulk of 120 and the waterproof camera, but, I'm really looking for experience with the Bronica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob haight Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I have the Bronica RF645 and its a great camera. Easier for me to focus than the Rollei. But, if you don't need the larger negs, I would stick to the Leica for remote travel, far superior in every way to the Bronica and not battery dependent. If you need MF, you cannot go wrong with the Bronica. The meter is spot on and its a joy to use. Loading is very simple and it will take 220 if you can get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Bronica RF 645 alongside a Leica M Lets go for a really boring camera....guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 you cannot go wrong with the Bronica. But nobody buys it because it's boring. Is there anything worse than boring? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 And i might add it's a bit tatty, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Lets be honest we all like a bit of a fondle. Even my mate Brad has got a Canon 20D....A REALY NICE PIECE OF KIT AND A PROPER FONDLE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rj Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Allen, please don't take this the wrong way, but are you drunk? ;-) Robert, I use this camera alongside my m many times, in fact if I was going to take one camera and just go, it would be the Bronica. Its just a great all around camera, fits the hands well, all the controls are where I would put them if I was going to design a camera, and for the price of a used m6ttl, I got the camera and three lenses with the little flash that has come in handy more than once (used from a camera shop with a warranty no less). This camera's price is a definate plus. I also have found the vertical orientation a plus. Its a wonder why more of my photos aren't shot vertically. The f4 is a limit, I would love an f2 normal lens, but I don't think it is coming, but you have to remember that you are dealing with a piece of film that is almost three times larger than 35mm, meaning that you can push the film or use a faster film and still not see ridiculous grain. The f4 hasn't been the disadvantage that I thought it was going to be. The lenses: Like I said, I have all three and I usually have the 65 or the 100mm on the camera. I shoot them wide open quite a bit and have not seen any problems with doing so in the final images, the sharpness is great wide open. The viewfinder is much contrastier than the leica finder of my m3. I find I can focus on it just as quick as I can with the m3 so I have had no problem with it. When I use the 45mm, I don't use the accessory viewfinder(I find it a huge pain) and just use the whole normal viewfinder, works fine. Also, the lens shades are small and do a great job, and they don't cost fortune if you loose them. I haven't noticed any flare from any of the lenses. I find the film loading to be much easier than my pentax 645, and I like how the film reels pop out with a push on the little pins, they pop back in snuggly too. This camera is small compared to the pentax, I mean it is like half the size and weight. Aint bad for something that shoots the same size film I would strongly suggest that if you are going to think about this camera, you read the reviews and articles in the equipment pages and the sunday morning photographer, I find Mike Johnston has written a pretty accurate summation of the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Robert, you might also consider a Plaubel Makina 670. It's 2.8/80 is tack sharp wide open, the negs are massive and it takes 220 film (20 exposures/roll). It handles very nicely, coming from a Leica M you will be soon at ease, and it has a very accurate meter, too. There's a bunch of info out there on the net. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saotome_genma Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 If you want a MF rangefinder, take a look at Fuji, there are many models to choose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 I've got the RF645 and I find it extremely quick handling and I feel I get superb results. I've used the small dedicated flash for it more than expected as it's easy to dial in just the right amount of fill for many situations. The post about the Fuji RF's is actually what prompted me to respond.... I love my GS645 folder. It occupies a narrow slot in my 35 bag and is there for the times I need the larger negative when traveling light. It has a very capable lens that should please almost anyone. It's so compact that I actually have it with me when I need it and my MF slr system seems to spend more and more time at home, unused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Hi Lutz, The Plaubel is a camera I have often considered, since it has that nice f2.8 lens, and it's small. There are some things that put me off though, a couple of which you may be able to comment on: it's expensive and hard to find (I've never seen one); it's noisy; and worst of all, it has an inherent weakness where wires are kinked as it folds - leading to breakeage eventually (at least, so I've read). Also, since I don't know where to get 220 film, it has only ten pics on a reel whereas the Bronica has 16. One major advantage for me though, since I shoot mostly landscape format, is that I wont have to continually turn the thing - not that I don't think I could cope with that in the Bronica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Sounds like you got a real bargain there Roger. Thanks for the info on using the 45 without the external finder (I hate those things). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted March 17, 2005 Author Share Posted March 17, 2005 Craig, don't those things have a lot of trouble with the bellows? What is the viewfinder and rangefinder like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squareframe Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 Al Kaplan's response makes little sense. you have this beautiful 6x6 negative and you feel compelled to crop it? sorry Al, in this day and age you can print square ... a format preferred by many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim Ghantous Posted March 17, 2005 Share Posted March 17, 2005 FWIW I second the above motion: the square is nice. Very nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now