The New Voigtlander Bessa III 667 camera - Nice !!

[db1]

There is a new medium format FILM camera.

 

In Japan, it will be known as the Fujifilm GF670.

 

Outside of Japan, it will be known as the Voigtlander Bessa III 667.

 

Apparently will be either 6x6 or 6x7 by changing a curtain.

A true dual format camera.

 

It will be available worldwide in the Spring of 2009.

 

Very cool.

 

http://fractionmag.blogspot.com/

[zac_sanders]

Thats awsome any idea of cost?

[starvy]

when i can afford this i am going medium format!

[michaelchristensen]

Does anyone know who will publish the first review of this camera? If the price is reasonable this could bring a lot of people into appreciating a retro-design film camera .. with new lens design that should produce very nice results. Can't wait for some sample pictures and commentary.

[gt1]

This is exactly what I've been looking for. A 6x7 or 6x9 folder with some modern features.

 

Wish it came with around a 65mm lens, though.

[db1]

I keep hearing a price of $1195.

 

I've emailed Voigtlander in Germany to see if they can tell me.

[pavelp]

Yeah, but does it have a dedicated [Print] button?

 

Seriously, this is great news (especially since it may keep Fuji interested in film market). I would never expect that I'll come even close to buying a brand new MF rig but this is changing the landscape.

[john_gleason1]

"Wish it came with around a 65mm lens, though."

 

80mm isn't the worst of choices, though, especially not for 6x7 format where it translates to near a 35mm lens on a 35mm film camera.

[gt1]

On 6x7 a 65mm is similar to a 31-32mm and an 80mm is similar to a 39-40. So with 65mm you're a bit wider than 35mm and with an 80mm you're a bit longer. I'll take the wider.

[john_gleason1]

"On 6x7 a 65mm is similar to a 31-32mm and an 80mm is similar to a 39-40."

 

Not by my arithmetic which, as a matter of fact, I was just doing this morning, for an unrelated reason.

 

To compare 6x7 with 135 you've got to adjust for the aspect ratio --- else the comparisons make no sense at all.

So, compare a 24x30 crop of 135 film with 6x7 or, equivalently, compare the short sides of the two formats. If

you do either, you get a ratio of about 2.25 -- 2.30 for the two lengths, and that means that 80mm on 6x7

translates to about 35mm on 135 film.

 

And 40mm on 135 translates to about a 90mm lens on 6x7 format. The view through the 90 mm lens on the ground

glass of my Koni-Omega is near-identical to the view through the 40mm framelines of my Leica CL --- the CL just

takes in a slightly wider field because of the difference in aspect ratio.

 

Still, it's not a bad choice for this camera.

[gt1]

I'm just going from the Mamiya numbers for the 7 lenses. Yeah, I'll like it more than the 90 on my Omega Rapid.

 

I think I'm going to sell my Mamiya 7ii with 80mm lens, I'm quite happy with my Omega Rapid 100 with 60mm lens, and my RB67 with 50mm, 90mm and 180 lenses. If the Fuji ever comes out in the USA I'll pick it up because as a replacement for the Mamiya 7ii it will be lighter and more compact, and I can use the other cameras for the wider or longer end of things.

[gt1]

I should have said "it will be lighter than the Rapid Omega, considerably lighter, and more compact than the Mamiya 7".

[john_gleason1]

Greg ---

 

I agree --- the new Fuji/Bessa looks pretty interesting. But I don't see anything there about interchangeable lenses --- or did I miss that bit? If 80mm is the only lens, it's not such a bad choice (for me). If there are interchangable lens, then I too would opt for something smaller than 80 (and a second, longer lens).

[john_gleason1]

There's also an active thread about this camera over at RFF. Scroll about 2/3 down the first page to see detailed specs:

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63899

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

I'll keep my Mamiya 7, thank you. It's light, compact, and it's rigid so lens alignment is never a problem (as long as it isn't dropped).

[hclim]

I am so happy!!!

[jeff_drew4]

This was reported also last February in several venues. I remember seeing a model image of the camera, and the retro look was nice.

Patience.

[obakesan]

Hi

<P>

so pleased to see this coming from vapour / conjecture camera to near to a product I can buy. While I'd like the

wider image

too, I'm in two minds. I think that for some images that it might be just as well to have the 90, orient the

camera in portrait and take 3 images pivoting around the nodal point. I've joined images like that with my Bessa

and its better than my 4x5!!

<P>

<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00Q/00QwbP-72847584.jpg" vspace="10" width="509"

height="698" hspace="5">

<P>

Top image is Bessa RF with Skopar lens @ f8 and the bottom is a Fujinon SW 90 @ f11

<P>

So, perhaps this camera will have better lenses and (at least being younger) better body rigidity and lens

alignment when unfolded. I'm very eager, even at <i>a grand</i> it'll be worth it to me (just).

[steve m smith]

The easy, if not totally accurate, way to work out 35mm focal length equivalents is to compare the diagonals. 35mm

frames have a 43mm diagonal, 6x7 is 92. The standard lens is usually similar to this diagonal.<BR><BR>

So for 6x7, a 90mm lens is considered normal (as it is on my RB67).<BR><BR>

80mm is equivalent to 80/92 x 43 in 35mm terms. This is 37mm.

[gt1]

I can't figure out what Mamiya uses for their calculations:<p>

 

<a href="http://www.mamiya.com/mamiya-7-ii-lenses-standard-80mm-f4.0.html">80mm equiv to 39mm</a><p>

<a href="http://www.mamiya.com/mamiya-7-ii-lenses-65mm-f4.0.html">65mm equiv to 32mm</a>

[john_gleason1]

"The easy, if not totally accurate, way to work out 35mm focal length equivalents is to compare the diagonals."

 

Sorry, but I gotta disagree. Comparing diagonals doesn't make a lot of sense unless the two formats have the same aspect ratio. That's the fundamental problem.

 

Perhaps we should move this to a new thread; it's sort of off-topic here?

[k5083]

When the aspect ratios differ there is no single way that "makes a lot of sense". It becomes a personal thing, what you shoot. If you find the framing of your photos constrained mainly by the short axis, then that is what matters to you and you should use that. If the long axis, then that. If neither, then the diagonal makes as much sense as any method and more sense than either axis alone.

[steve_mareno]

I am having a difficult time understanding all the excitement over a MF folder. These things are nice, but most any of the MF rangefinder camera will give you sharper photos, especially at infinity. For $1200 I would buy a Zeiss Super Ikonta for $150, get a good CLA for another $150 and that left over $900 buys a whole lot of film, maybe an acceptable MF scanner, or just sock it in a hole in the ground (no banks right now).

[dan_kreithen]

Have you ever used a Super Ikonta? I have a BX, and, I'll tell you...the lens is overrated. The viewfinder/rangefinder more or less sucks. You have to manually cock the shutter. The front-cell focussing Tessar is not a particularly good lens. I'm sure the Fuji/Cosina/Voigtlander folder will run rings around it. The Super Ikonta is well-built though.

[db1]

we are excited because it is a brand new FILM camera.

 

we are excited because someone made a new FILM camera in the digital age.