645 SLR that works without batteries?

[Donald Qualls]

I'm getting pretty engaged with the 6x4.5 format -- I like the aspect ratio, 16 on a roll is just the right length, and the negatives are still a bit more than twice the size of 35mm -- small enough to get deliciously grainy if I push a 400 film to 1600, but big enough to be almost grainless in pretty good sized prints with a slow film.

I've got a couple folders that can shoot 645 -- a Wirgin Auta, 6x9 with masks, and a Daiichi Zenobia that has a very nice lens (but is completely dependent, for carry, on a case that needs the stitching redone in the worst way), and a 645 back for my RB67 -- but the RB is heavy and the lenses I have are long for the format (and the wider lenses are more expensive than the ones from 90mm up), plus the available lenses are comparatively slow -- I'd like to get to f/3.5 or f/2.8, if not faster.

I've been using separate metering for fifty years, I have both a Sekonic L238 and a Pentax 1/21 Spotmeter, both seemingly accurate, and I prefer a camera that doesn't require a battery to operate (i.e. fully mechanical), though I enjoy a built-in meter if the camera doesn't depend on it to work.

What options are there for a 645 "system" SLR that's light enough to carry around, doesn't require a battery to give all shutter speeds and apertures, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg (ideally, I'd like something in or below the same price range as the RB67 or Bronica S2/S2a). I prefer a dedicated 645, as 645 backs on larger format cameras inevitably come with extra weight and larger/heavier lenses than needed for 645 -- and the cameras often aren't designed to be turned on end for vertical/horizontal framing.

Seems like this might be a pretty short list -- are there any at all?

 

[Dennis-B]

There are Mamiya 645's, which might fill your needs. The older 645, 645j, and 645 1000s are battery independent. No interchangeable backs, inserts only. And all Mamiya manual focus lenses work. You can go waist-level or prism finder (for vertical).

Downside, is that the older Mamiyas are really long in the tooth, and repair parts come from cannibalized cameras. However, they are very durable.

 

[John Will]

As far as I know all Mamiya 645's have electronically controlled shutters and therefore require a battery to operate.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Komaflex, another way of spelling "Are you sure you want this?"

[edit, mental slip] I finally woke up and remembered that the Komaflex shoots 40x40 on 127 film. Not what the OP wants. Sorry.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

As far as I know all Mamiya 645's have electronically controlled shutters and therefore require a battery to operate.

This is correct.

Jeremy

 

[John Will]

A Hasselblad 500 series with A16 back.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I think the mamiyas are electronically controlled shutters so won't meet your standards. Perhaps surprisingly, there isn't really anything that does exactly what you want. I think your best bet is a Hasselblad with the 16 back. Yes, it's heavier than it would have to be if it were natively 645, but it's in the same ballpark of about 1.5kg.

 

[Donald Qualls]

A Hasselblad 500 series with A16 back.

I think the mamiyas are electronically controlled shutters so won't meet your standards. Perhaps surprisingly, there isn't really anything that does exactly what you want. I think your best bet is a Hasselblad with the 16 back. Yes, it's heavier than it would have to be if it were natively 645, but it's in the same ballpark of about 1.5kg.

Okay, how is the Hasselblad better than the Bronica S2 (that's typically half the cost and virtually the same size and weight)? Wouldn't I still need an eye level prism on either to shoot verticals? The film advance is driven a gear from the body on a 'Blad, so obviously the film back can't be remounted at 90 degrees.

Alternatively, how about if I expand the field to include coupled RF with interchangeable lenses? Does that add any options?

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I thought about recommending the Bronica, it's a nice choice also, and a good budget pick, nice lenses, good price, light and compact. You could probably get what you want for $375 if you budget $100 for the body, $75 for the 645 back (uncommon), $100 for the standard lens and $50 for the prism. Alternatively, you could get a Hasselblad for $200 for the body, $250 for the standard lens and $100 for the back and $25 for the prism (all available at that price right now at adorama, except the back...) All in it's a $200 difference, which I think is worth it to get something that's top of the line, has a great reliability track record, is very repairable (both from people who repair it and availability of parts).

But yeah, the Bronica would also be a good choice.

 

[MattKing]

Buy dog caller batteries for the Mamiyas - $1-$2 per battery, in packages of 10 or more.
I prefer using the much more expensive (and long lasting) silver oxide versions, but the cheap alkaline are functional.
Remember of course that any camera you use will need an eye level viewing system - using a 6x4.5 with a waist level finder is a PITA if you want to photograph something in a vertical (usually) orientation.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

I thought about recommending the Bronica, it's a nice choice also, and a good budget pick, nice lenses, good price, light and compact. You could probably get what you want for $375 if you budget $100 for the body, $75 for the 645 back (uncommon), $100 for the standard lens and $50 for the prism. Alternatively, you could get a Hasselblad for $200 for the body, $250 for the standard lens and $100 for the back and $25 for the prism (all available at that price right now at adorama, except the back...) All in it's a $200 difference, which I think is worth it to get something that's top of the line, has a great reliability track record, is very repairable (both from people who repair it and availability of parts).

But yeah, the Bronica would also be a good choice.

The one thing no one has talked about is viewfinder brightness.

I own both the Bronica S2A and also a Hasselblad 500C. My 500C is one of the later ones, but not late enough to actually be an early C/M with the (easily) replaceable focus screen. The Hasselblad viewfinder is dark, not as bright as a Mamiya 645. And the Bronica is darker than the Hasselblad. My RB67 viewfinder brightness puts them all to shame.

Jeremy

 

[grain elevator]

I get the preference for fully mechanical, but as you see it can only be done through the compromise of a 6x6 SLR. If you're thinking of hand-held use ( I assume because you have a RB67 which is great on a tripod), IMHO the Pentax 645 is very ergonomic also for vertical, and cheap, maybe consider it anyway.
Btw, aren't there vertical format 645 backs for Hasselblad? Maybe for Bronica as well? IIRC then the orientation isn't a problem if you're not opposed to changing backs.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Btw, aren't there vertical format 645 backs for Hasselblad? Maybe for Bronica as well? IIRC then the orientation isn't a problem if you're not opposed to changing backs.

I don't know, are there? For a Hasselblad, at least, you'd need some complicated gears in the back to drive the spool for horizontal transport. I think Bronica works about the same way.

 

[flavio81]

and a Daiichi Zenobia

Wow, you too? I think we are in a very very very select club.

and a 645 back for my RB67 -- but the RB is heavy and the lenses I have are long for the format (and the wider lenses are more expensive than the ones from 90mm up), plus the available lenses are comparatively slow -- I'd like to get to f/3.5 or f/2.8, if not faster.

I do have that back too, and I think the RB is excellent for 6x4.5 due to the rotating back. For vertical shots, much better than my Bronica ETRSi (and I do have the action grip).

RB lenses aren't expensive! They are the best deal in medium format right now!

What options are there for a 645 "system" SLR that's light enough to carry around, doesn't require a battery to give all shutter speeds and apertures, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg

Why the fear of a battery? The Mamiya M645 is extremely frugal with batteries. Same for the Bronica ETR series. Both use the 4LR44 battery which is tiny to carry and easy to change.

 

[grat]

There are 6x4.5 backs for the Bronicas. I think it's the "E" for the S2 and "J" for the SQ series. They're going to be landscape orientation, though.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hmm. Arax. Never heard of it, but they're apparently selling them new for about $300. Uses a Pentacon/Praktica 6 mount, so inexpensive Russian/FSU lenses. Must investigate the Arax!

 

[Kino]

Hmm. Arax. Never heard of it, but they're apparently selling them new for about $300. Uses a Pentacon/Praktica 6 mount, so inexpensive Russian/FSU lenses. Must investigate the Arax!

Yes, ARAX bought up the remaining inventory of parts for the Kiev 60/88 line of cameras from Ukraine and build/rebuild/repair/modify those cameras along with making new lens adapters and such. I keep meaning to send 3 of my Kiev 88 bodies to them to CLA and repair, but the shipping always is a hurdle...

https://araxfoto.com/

 

[Donald Qualls]

Yes, ARAX bought up the remaining inventory of parts for the Kiev 60/88 line of cameras from Ukraine and build/rebuild/repair/modify those cameras along with making new lens adapters and such. I keep meaning to send 3 of my Kiev 88 bodies to them to CLA and repair, but the shipping always is a hurdle...

https://araxfoto.com/

I think I might have found it. I can get a new Arax 645 MLU (mirror lock up), TTL meter prism finder, and a genuine Zeiss lens in the 45-80 mm range (slightly wide to slightly long -- roughly 40-70mm equivalent for 35mm) for around $500 plus shipping from a couple sellers (likely take 3-8 weeks for everything to get here). This is warehouse new, with a warranty on the body. It's a little bigger than it absolutely has to be (because it's converted from a Kiev 60), but the only place to even put a battery is in the prism and that's already converted to use alkaline cells.

This needs to go on my tax refund list (or maybe I'll get a second economic impact payment, though I'm hearing those won't be universal if they happen at all).

Thanks for the pointers, guys!

 

[GRHazelton]

Komaflex, another way of spelling "Are you sure you want this?"

[edit, mental slip] I finally woke up and remembered that the Komaflex shoots 40x40 on 127 film. Not what the OP wants. Sorry.

Right. I have one which needs a thorough CLA. If 127 film were more available and less expensive I'd have that done; the Komaflex S is a nice shooter with a good lens.

 

[outwest]

I had a brand new Arax/Kiev 60 once. Beautiful camera. Lasted all the way through 2 rolls. I have 2 Ikonta As. They always work. I also have a Mamiya 645j with an adapter for Pentacon 6 lenses. It has worked well so far and the lenses are something else.

 

[reddesert]

It's possible to write down a set of specs that can only be met by zero or one model (of cameras, or anything else).

Often when this happens it's a good idea to revisit the specs to see if some of them are too restrictive and can be relaxed while still meeting the original goals of the project. This is a critical need in good engineering to avoid overbuilding or overly complex solutions.

In this case, I wonder if the requirement of "mechanical 645" leading to an Arax 645 is crowding out everything else. For example, an Arax 645 (Kiev 60) might only be a smidgen lighter than an RB67. The reliability, vertical format, etc you have to make up your own mind about.

 

[Donald Qualls]

According to the web site, the body alone is 1.4 kg, which is a bit lighter than the RB67 body -- but that includes the film transport/frame counter, as well as the shutter. Lenses are lighter, because a little smaller, and faster because they don't have to funnel through a shutter (and cheaper because they don't have to incorporate a shutter).

Yes, it's bigger and heavier than a ground-up 645 design would be.

The only specification that narrowed things this far is having a mechanical shutter. I'm not concerned as much by availability of suitable batteries, as I am by the fact that mechanics can be repaired more readily than electronics (especially integrated circuits on complex flexible circuit boards).

A camera that depends on a battery to fire the shutter does so because the shutter is either controlled or operated electrically/electronically.

Obviously, some folks here thing the Arax is a bad idea, because it's based on the Kiev 60/Pentacon Six/etc. family -- which has a bad reputation.

So instead, I should get an electronic Mamiya 645 for which there are no longer electronic spares, and hope I get good service out of it before the electronics fail?

 

[MattKing]

So instead, I should get an electronic Mamiya 645 for which there are no longer electronic spares, and hope I get good service out of it before the electronics fail?

A lot of the original Mamiya 645s are 50 years old but still chugging along.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

So instead, I should get an electronic Mamiya 645 for which there are no longer electronic spares, and hope I get good service out of it before the electronics fail?

Given my experience, I say take a chance on the 645 Pro/TL series. Lots of good glass, lots of accessories. Many have never had a failure. And I think the mirror stop issue is over-blown.

Jeremy

 

[alanrockwood]

Not trying to be a smart aleck here, but have you considered just using a 6x6 or 6x7 camera and cropping? Unless you are a very prolific shooter of 120 film, it's probably cheaper to do that than to buy a 645 system to complement a 6x6 or 6x7 system that you may already have.

Of course, there are other reasons for getting a 645 system, such as those cameras being lighter/more convenient, and not having to change rolls as often, as you mentioned. As far as portability is concerned, there is a lot to be said for using a TLR.

I have a Kiev that has been converted to 645. I haven't used it yet. I also have some 6x6 Kievs. Strangely enough, I actually like the way they handle and feel in the hand.