jim_peterson2

<p>Just for the record; all Zenza Bronica cameras were focal plane shutters until the final three were released. The final three are the ETR (645), the SQ (6x6) and the GS-1 (6x7). There were multiple versions of the ETR and SQ so you will see names like ETR-s, ETR-si, SQ-A, SQ-Ai etc. but these three were all leaf shutter cameras. Unfortunately each one had a completely different lineup of lenses but Bronica was pretty thorough in making full lineups for all three cameras.</p>

<p>David, you are right. The lens shutter doesn't completely eliminate the need for MLU. But if I could rephrase, MLU is a much bigger issue with the Pentax 6x7 than it is with the GS-1. </p>

<p>RB and RZ are actually probably more suited to studio work than field work. The close focus ability, the revolving back etc. are beneficial anywhere but most significantly in the studio. Having said that, I've been using my RB in the field and love it.<br>

Both the Pentax and the Bronica are more portable and can even be handheld, although its a bit of a stretch with the Pentax. But the Bronica is actually quite easy to handhold. The biggest difference is that the Pentax is a focal plane shutter and mirror slap is huge so MLU gets used for almost every shot. The Bronica is a lens shutter, thus eliminating the need for MLU.</p>

<p>If you are looking for something smaller than an RB/RZ for hiking and landscape I would suggest either the Asahi Pentax 6x7 or the Bronica GS-1 (assuming that you want to go with a 6x7 frame) If you want to go square (6x6) the Bronica SQ-A is very nice and easy to transport, and also costs much less than a Hassy. If you are ok with 645, there are lots of options. I have the Bronica ETRs and Mamiya Pro TL and used to have the Pentax 645 (orig). I would recommend all of them. The Bronica and Mamiya are modular so you can choose whether to go with a powered grip and AE finder which will make it feel and work like an SLR, or you can go with a hand crank and WLF which will make it feel and work like something much more traditional. <br>

All of my MF cameras have cost less than $200 (except for the brand new RB). I don't see any point in waiting for lower prices!</p>

<p>Yes, I did check the battery. Previously I sent an AE-III finder for my ETRs in for repairs and Tamron quoted me something like $350 for repairs so I passed and managed to get another working one by other means...</p>

<p>The AE finder on my SQ-A has started to give inaccurate readings, leading to photos that are 1-2 stops underexposed. It was working fine as recently as this past summer. I have cleaned all the contact points on the finder and body and lenses, and confirmed that it does this with multiple lenses. Is there anything else I can do myself before giving up and shopping for a new finder or sending it in for repairs? What causes these meters to go bad?</p>

<p>Steve; the original ETR back was not fixed; it was removable. Only the ETR-C had a fixed back.<br>

Brian; according to the Wiki article the updated and unnamed 2nd version of the ETRs came out in 1982 and one of the changes was that the lens release button was moved to the side.</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>ETR-S:</strong> Introduced January 1979. Improved version of ETR with an extra contact to support auto-exposure mode with the metered prism finder AE-II and later AE-III.</li>

<li><strong>ETR-S:</strong> A modification introduced July 1982. Unnamed change to original ETR-S model. This version is sometimes referred to as the "plastic" body ETR-S and back, for the change in the side panels of the body and backs to polycarbonate. Lens release located on left side of body, backs released using two independent tabs.</li>

</ul>

<p>Alan;<br>

I just got a role back from the lab today. Every year around the 20th of December the sun sets directly behind Mt. Fuji from the perspective of where I live in the western burbs of Tokyo. Metering was a real crap shoot and basically I just relied on my DSLR, but the result was that many of my film shots were underexposed. I was shooting with the Pentax 6x7, a 200mm lens and a 2X T/C. At first I tried the TTL VF but it seemed wildly inaccurate when pointed right at the sun so I didn't use it at all.<br>

<img src="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/image/131398365/original.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/image/131398367/original.jpg" alt="" /><img src="http://www.pbase.com/revdocjim/image/131398368/original.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Alan; I've done more early morning sunrise stuff than late afternoon; but in either case I have not had any sophisticated method. I have either simply relied on the built in light meters on my MF cameras (SQ-A, ETRs, Pro TL, Pentax 6x7) or in the case of the RB I have used the DSLR as a light meter/polaroid back and just tried to make an educated guess. I still am only scratching the surface in terms of proper metering methods...<br>

Thanks for taking the time to view my gallery! :)</p>

<p>I've gone back and forth on this one too. My light meter is a Minolta Auto-meter III. I received it from a friend with only the dome shaped diffuser. Later I picked up the 40 degree reflected light attachment. I mostly shoot landscape with my RB and other MF cameras so I don't really understand how incident light readings can help other than as a general starting point. Although it measures the light source, it seems to me that how the different surfaces in the frame reflect that light is going to have a huge effect on metering. So I stick mostly with reflected light readings. I like the 40 degree attachment since I use standard lenses most frequently. But in the end, I still end up pulling out my DSLR and checking quite frequently... Unfortunately the DSLR is awfully big. I think this makes a good case for a compact digi-cam with a zoom lens. Someone mentioned the G11. Are there other good suggestions? I would think the ability to easily switch between matrix, center weighted average and spot metering would be important.</p>

<p>So do we get a detention or something... :)</p>

<p>SQ-A if you need mobility.<br>

RB is you are staying in one spot. The rotating back and the lack of battery are the biggest advantages, as well as the 6x7 format.<br>

If you want the mobility of the SQ-A and 6x7 format check out the Bronica GS-1. I think it's actually lighter than the SQ-A.</p>

<p>Well, they had a whole bunch of them on the shelf starting at just over 10,000 in case you're interested. (Fujiya)</p>

<p>I had the bug for a good quality yet affordable film rangefinder so today I shopped around. In particular I took close looks at a Contax T2, a Ricoh GR-1, and a Fuji Klasse. They were all in the $90 to $140 range. The Ricoh is probably the most popular of the three here in Japan and has a very loyal following. But honestly, it was way too modern looking for me. Part of my desire to have a rangefinder is to have something that feels a bit retro. The Ricoh is black plastic, extremely thin and the lens looks really cheap. So as popular as it is, I simply ruled it out based on appearance.<br>

The Contax felt really nice. It has a very sharp response, it has lots of helpful info in the VF, and it has a pretty nice look to it. But I wasn't crazy about the titanium color. Also the flash function was a bit limited in aperture priority mode. And even though having the aperture control on the lens is a nice touch, the lens just looks so chintzy that I found myself turned off a bit. The dedicated dial for ev comp. is very nice. The guy at the store was trying to convince me to buy this one.<br>

Finally the Fuji Klasse was a silver version of the original Klasse, not the newer S or W versions. The Klasse was closest to the look I wanted. I like the dials, I like the silver finish, I like the look of the lens, and the flash is very versatile, even in aperture priority mode. The ev comp. is not nearly as intuitive to operate as the Contax was with it's dedicated dial, but in the end I brought the Klasse home with me.<br>

I shot a roll of Superia Premium 400 tonight at a party. Tomorrow I'll probably try a roll of reversal if the weather is nice. Can't wait to see the results. :)</p>

<p>Yes, it's the 77mm one. I'll definitely be giving it a good testing before doing anything else. Besides, at this price I really don't have terribly high expectations. Thanks for the info though!</p>

<p>I think I would have locked that one up in a glass case! :)</p>

<p>Thanks! I kind of like it too and don't have any immediate plans to change it. :)</p>

<p>The lens you've found at Vistek is the later "N" version. Mine is the pre-N version. The focus ring is visibly different. But either way, I am fully aware that the 45/2.8 is not a rare lens. It is the fact that this one is branded "SAMPLE" and has a very low serial number that has me wondering.</p>

<p>After completing a huge project of digitizing my late father's square photos taken between 1955 and 1964 I have gained a huge appreciation for the square format and didn't think twice when I saw a nice Bronica SQ-A on the shelf.<br>

But as far as aesthetics are concerned I think my favorite is the 6x7 dimension. I like square better than 645 or 35mm but like the look of 6x7 best. But that's just me... </p>

<p>No, no... I'm just curious. I have every intention of keeping and using this lens, as I have been looking for an affordable WA for my ProTL.</p>

<p>I found a Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8 lens today in the junk bin for something like $60. It is rather dusty and the focus ring feels a bit stiff but other than that it seems ok... no mold! which was my biggest worry since I didn't have a good flashlight with me when I was at the store.<br>

Anyway, the unusual thing about this lens is that on the front ring right between where it says "Mamiya-Sekor C" and "1:2.8 f=45mm" there is the word "SAMPLE" in red print. Also, the serial number shown on the same ring is No.10009<br>

Is this some sort of first production run lens that was made to be used as a sample? Has anyone seen this sort of thing before?</p>

<p>Fascinating! Thanks for the fun info. I found the Pentax 6x7 ad really interesting. Only $15 extra for the MLU model! And the TTL finder is more expensive than the body! But then so are all of the lenses. Did anyone notice the typo... in the headline of that ad they talk about the 105mm f/2.5 lens... :)</p>

<p>I'm using the Pro TL but I think it is similar. If the scene involves strong backlight I will usually switch the finder to spot metering. If my subject isn't in the center I'll temporarily put it dead center just to see what kind of readings I get. From there you can either use EV comp. or manual mode to duplicate those readings. One situation in which I tend to use negative EV comp. is when I'm shooting nature and there is a lot of evergreen in the frame. My experience is that evergreen trees fool the camera into overexposing; probably because the green just absorbs so much light and doesn't reflect much at all. So depending on how much of the frame is that color I will use anywhere from -1/3 to -1.</p>

<p>Thanks Frank. That is comforting to hear! </p>

<p>I recently found a speed grip for my GS-1 in beautiful condition for something like $25. (Now if only I could find some cheap lenses!) The instructions say that the folding winding lever on the body needs to be removed and replaced with the protective cap when using the speed grip. I see why they say this because in the folded position the lever hits the neck strap lug when winding. But in reality the lever is designed in such a way that it spins freely counter clockwise, so in practice, when the lever hits the neck strap lug I think you can still wind with the speed grip and advance the film. Granted, I haven't tried this with film in the back since I don't have any lenses yet, but it seemed like it should work. <br>

Am I right? If so, does the manufacturer tell us to remove the lever simply to reduce wear and tear? The reason I'm asking is because the speed grip I got didn't come with the little protective cap that is attached to the body when the winding lever is removed so I am hesitant to use the camera without anything covering that area. It looks rather sensitive to dust or other foreign particles.</p>