ike k Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 Just wondering guys, cause i'm really interesting to get the texas leica (that's what they said bout' this fuji range finder), i know how good leica is and no doubt, so has anybody compare these two side by side> in terms of sharpness, contrasity, bokeh, etc....It's good thing if this fuji lens is amazing as many said and the negatives size is just big (6x7 or 6x9).So do you think is a good buy ( used is around &600-$700 something on ebay),photo sample is appreciated. Ike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew n.bra hrefhttp Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 I owned and used for a while the GW-III 670. Excellent lens. Nice big negs. But the camera is <B>LOUD</B>! You may as well blow a trumpet when you take a photo as the shutter is so loud people on the other side of a busy street will hear you.<P> I finally had to face facts and got rid of it for this reason.<P> However if you are taking non-candid, non-people photos then it will work just fine. Indeed I would recommend it to MF'ers who want a not-too-expensive camera they can travel with and use hand-held. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd frederick Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 I used a few Fuji 645 cameras for a year or so. Without reservations, they had the best lenses I've ever used. The big problem was the plastic construction and a very high operational noise level...one of the loudest cameras I've ever used. On the other end is the Konica Hexar which is one of the quietest cameras I've ever used...except for some Leica LTM units (and I used the "noisy" Hexar Silver edition!) with a lens equal to the Leica 35mm Summicron (IMO!). My choice, hands down, for a "Texas Leica" (whatever that means) would be any Hexar AF camera...price plus quality plus features, can't be beat...wish I still had one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayh Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 Mamiya 7. Smaller than the Fuji and quieter than a Leica M6. No kidding. Plus interchangeable lenses. Check it out. Clay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 I use the Mamiya 6 (predecessor to the Mamiya 7, see earlier post, but with collapsible lens and 6x6 format) alongside my Leica. Though it sticks in my throat to say it (on account of the relative cost of the Leica gear) the images from the Mamiya are superior on all fronts. Add in the facts that it is not so much bigger/heavier, and is even quieter than the Leica, and you have a formidable outfit. It's also built very well. If you want a medium format equivalent to the Leica, I think this is it: interchangeable lenses, rangefinder focussing, compact, quiet, well made. The 7 has the advantage of being current and has a wider range of lenses. Format is 6x7. The 6 has the collapsible lens for compactness and the 6x6 format means you never need to invert the camera and can crop to rectangular if you need to.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 Should have said: photo taken with Mamiya 6 + 50mm lens, Fuji Velvia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dante_stella Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <title>Untitled Document</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body> <p>I have been using the original Fuji Texas Leica (G690) for about three years now. It is a convenient way to shoot 6x9, but as you can see below, it could eat your Leica for lunch and still have room left over for desset.</p> <p><img src="http://www.dantestella.com/technical/comp2.jpg" width="268" height="162"></p> <p>I have been using the 100/3.5 (wow!) and 180/5.6 (hot) interchangeable lenses, and I just acquired the chimeric 65/8. I was going to buy one of the more modern wide models, but there is some viewfinder blockage when the main RF shows a 28mm-equivalent picture. On the G690, the 65mm uses a separate finder. It is my experience that for black and white shooting, the Fuji blows my Leica M3 out of the water, in several ways.</p> <p>The first is lens quality. A Fujinon may peak at "only" 90lp/mm, instead of 120lp/mm like some modern Leica lenses. To put it bluntly, you can't get 90lp/mm from most modern lenses, Leica and otherwise. Consider that for a 25% resoluion loss, you are enlarging a 6x9 negative less than half as much as a 35mm negative. This means that all other things being equal, the Leica lens is going to lose in resolving power when you get to a print.</p> <p>The second is tonality. Despite the fact that you can use Microdol to get & quot;4x5" quality out of slow Tech Pan and Gigabit films, people use medium and large format because the tonality is superior. More enlargement means more contrast and more tonality loss. 6x9 gets you 90% of the results of 4x5 without resorting to using a camera that takes single sheets (although the older Fujis can take 2x3 sheet film too). Tri-X is actually a good film for 6x4.5 and up.</p> <p>The third is lack of grain. You can shoot Tri-X at 1250 and have absolutely no grain. This is a boon to N+2 development fanatics.</p> <p>The fourth is ease of printing. You can actually see a 6x9 contact print, and printing 6x9 negatives to, say, 8x10 involves a lot less spotting. The downside, of course, is that 6x9 enlargers are hard to find (you can jump up to 4x5 to do it, but it is not fun).</p> <p>The big drawback for portraitists is that with a 1m close-focus limit, you can get only as close as a head-and-shoulders shot with the 100. Interesting thing about the teles is that due to their close-focusing distances, they provide no more magnification on a close subject than the 100 does. Seems that they are more landscape lenses. The modern Fujis only come with a 90mm lens as the longest (although the G690 teles reappeared as GX lenses).</p> <p>You can read my comments about the original series <a href="http:// www.dantestella.com/technical/g690bl.html">here</a>.</p> </body> </html> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted January 1, 2003 Share Posted January 1, 2003 I owned a GS670-III. Like every medium-format camera I've owned (Hasselblad, Rolleiflex 2.8 Planar, Fuji GS645Zi, Yashicamat 124G, Horseman VH-R, Pentax 67 and even an ancient Kodak Viligant 620 with 105/4.5 Anastigmat) it blew away anything I've ever owned in 35mm including Leica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_blakeslee Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 My Mamiya 7. It's the same size as a Nikon F5, but the negative is five times larger. The lenses are some of the best ever made. And sure enough, it is quieter than a Leica M6. I love my Leica, but I don't try to kid myself into thinking that the little negative can equal a 6x7 negative in quality, all else being equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymond_tai Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I was shopping around for a new 90AA-R the other day and it was only $400 less than a new Pentax 67II, AE prism, and 105mm f/2.4 kit I saw this morning. I think I'll stick to second hand R lenses and upgrade to the Pentax at some point. I have read a lot of good things about the 55mm F/4 and the 105mm and that should do it for me. Jay, any experiences with these two lenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_barnett2 Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I am with the Mamiya 7 school of thought. Its much more similar to a Leica than the Fuji, not least because of its interchangable lenses. Which also just happen to be spectacular in quality. The build quality and the ergonomics are likewise very good. And the shutter on the Mamiya is quieter than my new Leica M7! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografz Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I also use the Mamiya 7II along with a Leica M7. The experience is similar but the results are not. I routinely make 16X20 prints from the Mamiya that look better than 8X10s from any 35mm I own (from a purely technical POV). The camera is small, and exceedingly quiet. Because of that, it is the real "Texas Leica" to my way of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I'm interested to see that there are so many Leica/Mamiya users around. Can I add one more plus and one minus for the Mamiya: 1) Ergonomically, it is superb; with its right hand grip and its size/shape, it seems to sit in my hands solidly so that camera shake is easier to control than with the Leica. 2) It would be better still if it had the frame preview lever in Leica fashion but it doesn't, so you just have to get used to imagining them. Sorry if this thread is deviating OT into a chorus of admiration for the Mamiyas, but I suspect that if everyone who was thinking of buying a Leica spent a day with a Mamiya first, few of them would be lashing out the extra cash for the little red dot from Solms... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oliver_s. Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Another vote for the Mamiya 7/7 II. If money matters, buy a used 6 MF. OTOH I doubt any user's willing to give her/his away.<p>Many owners of the 150mm lenses to these systems commented how hard this lens is to focus. Others pointed out that the eye must be centered precisely behind the finder--then focussing wouldn't be a problem.<p>I always found the Mamiya finders superior to the Leicas' ones, but AFAIK I'm alone with this ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyuri Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Dear Ike, I have a Fuji GW690III, and a Leica M2 with an Elmar 50/2,8. I am over 1000 expo with the Fuji, and I like a lot. The shutter noise is loud on the Fuji, but not so loud, like a Hassy, or a Rollei 6008, what I heard side by side with my Fuji last week. My friend (the owner of the Rollei) first words were: what a silent shutter... The pictures: The Fujinon is not so sharp, like a high end Leica lens, but in contrast, and colour rendition is pretty good, as good, as the today high end optics! As Dante Stella wrote, the MF has never so sharp, as the Leica format, but in the case of Fujinon, Zeiss, and Mamiya, I think it is really close. But You can use a 400 film instead of 50.. or You can change the film often if You want (yes, it is an advantage for me, when I use the Zone system..) You can retouch easily if You want, and so on. I have tried the Fuji G645Zi, and I was shocked by the result. For the price of a new Leica lens, You can get a great compact 645 camera, with plenty of features, and a marvellous optics! I was checked it with one of my friend, who is working as a repro photographer for a museum (with Mamiyas, Hassys, and plenty of LF lenses), and He told me, that this tiny zoom lens is really pair of the Leicas, or the high end Zeiss optics. So I can tell You, that the Fuji optics are one of the best (especially, if You choose the EBC coated wersions!). Few links: http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/ http://members.aol.com/subgallery/byfl.htm Sincerely, Gyuri www.hege.tk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_sampson Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Well for image quality, the big negative beats 35mm every time. It seems lens speed would be a deciding factor, and all those MF cameras have slow lenses. f/4.5, f/5.6...not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_drew4 Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 <<. . . has anybody compare these two side by side in terms of sharpness, contrasity, bokeh, etc....>> Having used both types of RFs this thread argues about apples vs. oranges! Equating Lens quality (?) of Leica (35mm) vs. fuji GW670III (6x7cm or 6x9cm) is a waste of time & space. Each fills different niches in photography and offers different perspectives. tossing Mamiya into the fray for lens interchangeability is also silly. Which lens on the Leica . . .yada yada . . . Medium format films generally blow 35mm out of the water in every category! Excellent glass in either Fuji, Mamiya or Leica lenses. . .so the rest is up to the operator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 I should weigh in on this. I just sold my Mamiya 7. It's a great camera, but I couldn't afford a SECOND system with optics as expensive as Leicas. I personally felt that my 20 year old Koni-Omega Rapid M is just as good except it is nowhere near as elegant to look at, nor as light, nor does it have automatic exposure. But the cost of good used Koni-Omega gear is 10 cents on the dollar compared to the Mamiya 7. AND, the Koni Omega has interchangeable backs. So I have an entire Koni-Omega system, with 2 bodies, 3 backs, and 3 lenses (58, 90, 180), for HALF the cost of my Mamiya 7, with just the 80mm lens. And the image quality between the two systems is indistinguishable, and in both cases, blows any 35mm images, including those made with a Leica, out of the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell_brooks Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I've had two of the 645 Fujis, the Mamiya 7 with all lenses, and many Leicas and lenses. I sold the medium format stuff and kept the Leica. Why? Speed. The pictures I take are often in poor light so a 50mm f1.4 is much handier than a 80mm f4. Also I get more depth of field (read: slop) with the Leica. So for me I was looking at something like a 3 1/2 stop increase in speed, plus the additional "slop". Medium format cannot approach this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diego_k. Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Just another vote for Mamiya 6, have it with 50 & 75, and an M3, and a G2. The Leica is the gem, Contax does everything the 6 doesnt & the 6 is the best camera I ever had. 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