New Bronica RF645 Rangefinder

[tony_armstrong]

Just stumbled across some more info on this new release, including UK

prices ...

 

http://www.introphoto.co.uk/bronrf645.htm

[Robin Smith]

The bad thing about this camera in my view is that the lenses are so slow - I would prefer to get the Mamiya 7. I suppose the Bronica is probably a bit smaller, but an f4 standard lens is a bit hopeless for a 645 camera especially when you compare it to something like the Contax 645. I think it probably misses the boat - what do the rest of you think? It is feeding on the current r/f revival, but whether this is really a revival in terms of market share I don't know.

 

The X-pan also has slow lenses but at least that is a 35mm camera and so is small and has the usual 35mm advantages.

[daniel_kreithen1]

I don't know that I agree. I use Leica rangefinders, and have learned that one of the things that rangefinders lack is an easy way of judging depth-of-field. Sure, if you take time to set up a shot, you can use the rangefinder and the scale on the lens to determine what is going to be in sharp focus, and what will not. If you don't have the time to do that, then you have to judge this important factor based on prior experience. Leica lenses are well-known (perhaps notoriously) for having smooth transitions from in focus to out of focus areas, which may Japanese lenses don't (not all, don't want to start a war here!). This fact can (or should) change your shooting style. I found that when I switched from an SLR to the Leica that I tend to shoot many more of my photos at close to wide open (the Leica look, perhaps).

 

The point of all this is that depth-of-field issues are more extreme when moving to a larger format (e.g., the Mamiya 7). I've always avoided this camera for exactly this reason (unless, again, you have lots of time to set up each shot, and then you're carrying the thing as opposed to an SLR mostly for the weight savings). I think a 645 rangefinder is a great idea, it's probably the largest format I would consider using a rangefinder for (due to the depth-of-field issues). Sure the lenses are relatively slow, but then you have to make the choice of whether 35mm using an ISO400 film beats or doesn't beat 645 with 1600 or 3200 speed film. I'm not certain which would win, but I'd bet on the 645. My biggest question about the new 645 is the "look" produced by the lenses. They are probably based on classic Zeiss designs if experience is any guide, which wouldn't be a bad thing. It would also be nice if a very wide angle would be made available. It's certainly not a do-everything camera, though.

 

Sorry for rambling...hope some of this makes sense

[daniel_kreithen1]

Incidentally, the reason for the slow aperture is undoubtedly the maximum "throat" allowed by the #0 shutter (same as the Mamiya 7). Why they didn't go for a focal plane shutter to remove this restriction is beyond me. I guess they're marketing to wedding photographers and people who use flash a lot. That's just the opposite market of the one that Leica pursues, incidentally (incident light photography being the strong point there).

[john_hicks___]

> maximum "throat"

 

Yes, that and the RF base length.

 

While faster lenses certainly could be built they'd be seen as "huge" and they'd be much more expensive....the kiss of death these days when it seems that most everyone has a flash permanently grafted to their camera. Imagine a lens the size of Contax's f2 lens stuck on the front of the little Bronica RF body.

 

Also, to accurately focus a fast lens the RF base would need to be significantly longer; the trend as seen in the little Fuji RF cameras, the Mamiya 6/7 and now the Bronica is an RF base just long enough to focus the slow lenses.

 

Also with faster lenses film flatness becomes more of an issue.

 

What I'd really like to see is the equivalent of a Leica in 645 or 6x6 format with a long-base RF, a selection of fast lenses, a selection of small slow lenses, and some way of holding the film really flat. Unfortunately I don't think there's any way to do that and still use paper-backed 120 film.

 

While we're on the topic of RF cameras and fast lenses, Graflex XLRF cameras abound on ebay and otherwise on the market for low prices. These have a long-base RF and are usually available with an f2.8 Zeiss or Rodenstock lens. Delta 3200 in 6x7 is pretty spiffy.

[andrew_schank]

I have found film flatness problems to be WAY less of a problem with 645--as a matter of fact, both my Pentax 645 and some Fuji's I've used never seemed to have an issue with it at all. F4.0 is fast enough for a 645 lens (The Mamiya 7 lenses are no faster)as long as they are very sharp wide open--like the 60mm f4.0 lens on the Fuji GA645 was. With 645 format, even with Fuji's 800 speed film, 16 X 20 are nearly grainless. If it is well made and has great optics, I think it will take some customers from Fuji who are not happy with having to work with AF all the time, and who want a better selection of focal lengths than the very short zoom on the Zi has--which is an even slower f6.9 at the longer end. By the way, we discussed this new camera a few weeks back, so there is more in the archives on it.

[daniel_kreithen1]

Yes, good point about the rangefinder base...

 

I used to own the Graflex XL with 100mm Planar (and the 58 and 180, actually). Almost a great camera. Lenses were superb, of course (at least the 58 and 100, I was less impressed with the 180), but trying to pack the thing in a reasonable space was difficult and the worst part was the dicey build quality. If you remove the covers to the rangefinder, you quickly realize that the engineering of the rangefinder is less than stellar. Particularly difficult is to get one body to be accurately calibrated with three lenses. I guess it's possible but not likely. This means carrying around three bodies (each one can be calibrated rather well for a single lens, I'd wager). Either that or use ground glass focussing.

 

I'd like to see the above mentioned 645 rangefinder (with faster lenses and a focal plane shutter). A 60mm/f2 lens can hardly be bigger than a Noctilux! It will be interesting to get ahold of the existing 645 to see what it feels like. I'm inclined to believe that the 645 has less of a film flatness issue after having owned the Fuji 645S, which took plenty sharp pictures wide open. Very plasticy feeling, though.

[andrew booth]

Please check the archives before posting! There has already been some comment on this camera:

<p>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0013aK">New Bronica 645 Range finder + 3 lenses</a>

[sal_santamaura]

I used to have a Mamiya 645 Super that, with a long (1 second) exposure, would make double images as the film bulge from reverse curl relaxed while the shutter was open.

[paulm]

I do not quite agree with Robin Smiths answer. I looked quite closely

at the Bronica, Contax and the Xpan at the Photokina. To compare the

Bronica with the Contax 645 is to compare a NikonF5 with a

Voigtlaender Bessa. With regard to the size of the Bronica to the

Xpan, the Bronica is only 155g heavier. The Bronica is 2.5 cm higher

but the Xpan is 2.1cm wider. The only problem that I have is the

format position. I find it strange to turn the camera in the vertical

position to shoot horizontal shots, but then again that is also the

problem with the Fujis. The slow speed of the Bronica lens I do not

think it will be a problem as one can use a slightly slower shutter

speed due to the lack mirror slap, or so I have found with my Texas

Leica

[robin_barnes]

I agree with Paul Mapstone - the relatively slow speed of the lenses (but no slower than the Mamiya 7) should not, for most purposes, be a problem as this is a rangefinder camera. Several Mamiya 7 owners have commented on other threads just how easy they have found it is to get sharp pictures hand-held at shutter speeds much lower than one would dare to use with a medium format SLR. I am more interested in the optical quality and, in view of the high regard in which the latest Tamron/Bronica lenses for the ETRSi are held, there would seem to be good grounds for confidence.

Earlier today I was talking to someone who handled the camera at Photokina - he was very impressed. Furthermore apparently the sales rep. hinted that more lenses will follow.

[pat_byrnes1]

My first 135 format SLR syncs at 1/60. I got so frustrated with that I now do all my flash work with a more modern model with high speed sync capability (the first SLR is now my available light b/w camera). What's kept me away from MF is the fact that sync speeds are typically 1/60 or 1/125 unless one shells out megabucks for leaf shutter lenses. For a while I had my eye on the Fuji 645zi, but f/7 at the long end is just too slow for me. I was about to give up on MF, then this Bronica got announced. Dedicated flash sync up to 1/750--wow! That combined with what for me would be a nearly ideal three-lens lineup for the environmental portraiture I like to do. Fairly compact body and minimal noise and vibration due to lack of a mirror. Good right hand grip contour. Vertical format in standard position. Reasonably priced. This may be "the one." The only wish left would be to have Bronica or Metz match this body with a bounce/swivel flash retaining the full range of sync speeds, plus FEC.

[irving_greines1]

I briefly handled this camera at a recent photo show in Los Angeles. I didn't have alot of time to examine it, but here are some of my quickly-formed impressions:

 

First, the camera is small and light. Like the Fuji, the viewfinder is vertically oriented; to obtain a horizontal shot, one has to flip the camera to what ordinarily would be a vertical position.

 

Second, the camera had a plastic feel to it. It does not look to be or feel to be solidly made.

 

Third, the viewfinder information is situated on the far left and is difficult to see. I had to shift my view to see it. Definitely a big drawback.

 

Fourth, the shutter is extremely quiet--far quieter than the FujiGS.

 

Overall impression: I wish the camera was more solidly crafted. However, the camera will make a great travel camera. I want to spend more time with it, but it is definitely something to consider for light weight transportability or as a second MF body.

[jhbeckman]

I was in the small minority that really didn't like the Fuji GA645's. I had the Wi; the glass was fantastic -- really first rate -- and its size was very convenient. But other than that, forget it: the metering was hopeless, the autofocus often locked on something you weren't aiming at, the flash was hopeless, and the manual was hopeless (was the flash TTL? What was the metering pattern? who knows?), among other flaws. I sold the camera after only relatively little use.

 

Off all the things that bothered me, the autofocus was at the top of my list. I found myself wishing time and again that there was a manual focus 645 rangefinder. But alas...

 

Now it comes. I'll be honest, I wish Fuji were making it -- their lenses are that good. But I am going to take a good look at this camera.

[joseph_albert]

Actually, it appears that the lenses for this camera have leaf shutters. Teh Bronica web site talks about an automatic dark slide that is enable to change lenses and says that each lens has an electronic shutter.

<p>

I don't see why f/4 lenses are too slow for 645. that is like having an f/2.4 lens for 35mm and nobody complains about the lens speed of the Leica miniature camera with dedicated 40/2.4. f/4 is only 1/3 stop slower than f/3.5 and many 645 and 6x6 lenses are f/3.5, f/4, and f/4.5. with a rangefinder, you don't need the brightness to focus, and people don't really shoot alot wide open in medium format anyway.

<p>

From what I can see, the downfall of the new Bronica 645 is that it is pretty heavy for a 645 camera. Body without batteries or lens is 1810gm (and ounce or two shy of 4 lbs). that is already the weight of a Mamiya C220F with 2 lenses.

[joseph_albert]

Correction... 1810gm is what is reported on the web site

<a href = "http://www.introphoto.co.uk/bronrf645.htm">this site</a>, which was given in the first posting in this thread. This may not be correct. At the Bronica section of the <a href = "http://www.tamron.com"> Tamron web site </a> the weight of the body only is given as 810 gm, which is much more interesting.

[john_hicks___]

Note that the 45 lens apparently requires an external viewfinder.

[robin_barnes]

Like Joseph I had noticed that the website of the UK Bronica distributor Introphoto gives the RF645's body-only weight as 1810gms. This has to be a mistake as it would mean that the body is not only heavier than that of the Mamiya 7ii but also almost as heavy as my ancient Bronica ETRS complete with back, metering prism, speed grip and 75mm lens (my interest in the new camera is primarily because I want something a lot lighter to carry on walking trips). The person I spoke to who had seen it at Photokina said he reckoned it was lighter than the Mamiya 7 - so I think we can safely assume it is 810gms not 1810.

 

It will be interesting to see how the actual (discounted) shop pricing works out (Introphoto's suggested price is £1499 including 17.5% VAT - value added tax - which only European Union residents have to pay) as it will be in competition not only with other 645 cameras but also, to some extent, with the Mamiya 7ii and, as a number of US photonet members have noted, that camera is, unlike most photographic equipment, a lot cheaper in the UK than in the States. It would seem wise to keep an eye on Robert White's website - www.robertwhite.co.uk (highly praised on photonet by US customers for their mail order service). Visitors to the UK, however, will probably get a slightly better price at one of the many branches of Jessops - www.jessops.com (NB - prices on Jessops website include VAT those on Robert Whites' do not)

[robin_barnes]

Sorry, I forgot to mention that the price I quoted above - £1499 - is for the body and the 65mm lens.

[robin_barnes]

Following on from my last post of three weeks ago I have, today, got a copy of the November 2000 issue of the British magazine "Professional Photographer" which contains, what it claims is, the world's first test of the RF645.

 

In my view it is more in the nature of a review than a test but nevertheless readers of this thread will probably be interested to hear that it is very positive and the performance of the 65mm lens is described as superb (apparently the other lenses were not available for examination).

 

I don't think that this magazine is distributed widely outside the UK (if at all) so in case anyone from the US or elsewhere wants to try to obtain a copy it is published by:

 

Market Link Publishing Ltd.,

The Mill,

Bearwalden Business Park,

Wendens Ambo,

Saffron Walden,

Essex CB11 4GB,

England

 

and the telephone number of their subscription department is;

 

020 7987 6800

 

NB. As well as having to dial the UK code from your country first you probably have to leave off the first 0 of the above number - that's how it works from continental Europe anyway!

[joe_barbieri]

Just handled one at the NY Photo Show. About the size of the Fuji 645Zi. They have a lot of competion in this area. If the Tamron made lenses prove to be sharp, this could be a winner. It does have TTL with a new Bronica flash. Metz may make an adapter.

[robin_barnes]

Further to my above postings the RF645 gets another very good review in the latest issue(December 2000)of the UK magazine Practical Photography.

 

By the way the metering is not TTL but readings are adjusted electronically to take account of the focal length of the lens being used.

[kirktuck]

I have actually owned the Bronica 645 RF and shot with it for over

a month. It is wonderful. Having programmed exposure and a

matrix style meter make it a great street camera. The lenses are

very, very sharp. I own fairly new Hassleblad optics and these

are contrastier and possibly sharper (though it's hard to

compare as the shooting styles are so different). It is not a

studio camera. The external finder for the wide angle has quite a

bit of distortion so that it is not really a good choice for

contemplative work,,,, but.....when a perfect, spontaneous street

shot pops up, this camera is ready to do business.

 

All in all, I love it.

 

Kirk