645 SLR that works without batteries?

[flavio81]

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..

As a 6x4.5 and 6x7 user, i'd say there's a big difference between having 15 exposures and having 10 exposures. It's a 50% increase, so significant.

And, more importantly, for me there's a big difference between my 6x4.5 camera (ETRSi) and my RB67: the 6x4.5 camera is so small and light, that it's as heavy (or as big) as some bulky 35mm cameras (i.e. Nikon F4, F5). With such a quality, it becomes a good alternative to a 35mm camera!

The RB67 i consider as a "viable, more portable and faster alternative to a 4x5 camera" !

 

[Donald Qualls]

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

Right. I've got a couple radios that are 50+ years old; one works, because it was gone through before I bought it; the other doesn't, because I don't have the skill to fix it myself.

Why isn't it okay to not want an electronic camera?

As a 6x4.5 and 6x7 user, i'd say there's a big difference between having 15 exposures and having 10 exposures. It's a 50% increase, so significant.

And, more importantly, for me there's a big difference between my 6x4.5 camera (ETRSi) and my RB67: the 6x4.5 camera is so small and light, that it's as heavy (or as big) as some bulky 35mm cameras (i.e. Nikon F4, F5). With such a quality, it becomes a good alternative to a 35mm camera!

The RB67 i consider as a "viable, more portable and faster alternative to a 4x5 camera" !

Exactly.

I can shoot 6x4.5 with my RB67 (I get 16 on a roll); I've got a back for that format -- but it's still a ten pound camera even with only the 90mm lens and waist level finder. I don't have a grip for it yet -- that competes for money with more glass and I still want/need a wide or two (65, maybe even a 50).

What I can't do with my RB67 is carry it when I'm just walking around; it doesn't balance well on the strap until I get the 250mm lens on it. An Arax 645 is shaped like a 35mm SLR; if the strap lugs are at all well located, it should balance like one. And at present, it looks like the only choice for a non-electronic 645 SLR.

I got no response earlier -- am I correct in thinking there are zero interchanging lens 645 RFs with fully mechanical operation (at least as an option)? Like a half-frame Texas Leica?

 

[John Will]

I got no response earlier -- am I correct in thinking there are zero interchanging lens 645 RFs with fully mechanical operation (at least as an option)? Like a half-frame Texas Leica?

How about a Mamiya Universal Press. Rangefinder, fully mechanical, interchangeable lens, replaceable backs (including combo back 6x4.5 - 6x6 - 6x9), not that expensive.

 

[flavio81]

Right. I've got a couple radios that are 50+ years old; one works, because it was gone through before I bought it; the other doesn't, because I don't have the skill to fix it myself.

Why isn't it okay to not want an electronic camera?

Because there's an irrational perception of "mechanical = reliable" and "electronic = unreliable". This perception should have died by the late 80s but here we are.

Camera electronics can be really reliable and I dare to say i've seen and experienced more mechanical failures than electronic failures. Usually when some camera electronics appear not to work, it's very simple things like corrosion of battery terminals! Electronics in cameras like Canon A-series are very resilient -- if something is wrong wirh the camera, it's almost NEVER a fault of the electronics.

Usually electronics problems are simple -- corrosion, broken wires, cold solder joints. Those are really easy to repair. While mechanical repairs can be not so easy. A
mechanical speed governor invariably will get dirt in the governor and will need disassembly. And this dissasembly can be complex. To do a CLA on a leaf shutter, for example, isn't so easy stuff. An electronically controlled leaf shutter mostly only has the electromagnet to fail, and when it "fails" it is probably dirt between the solenoid and the magnet....

Mechanical parts that rotate can wear down. Springs can break. Many cameras are adjusted by bending some plates; this adjustment will drift after decades.
Camera electronics doesn't really wear down except for some capacitor types, LCD displays, some unsealed CdS cells, and very badly manufactured ICs. It doesn't get affected by dirt. Only by humidity, but you should never store a camera or lens in a humid place.

An electronic camera is often simpler mechanically...

Camera repairmen often prefer mechanical cameras because their training only covered mechanical stuff and little about electronics stuff. But if they knew more about electronics they would change their minds. Camera electronics are often simple to solve, compared for example to solving analog synthesizer electronics...

An Arax 645 is shaped like a 35mm SLR;

The Arax 645 is essentially a Kiev 60 and that's a heavy thing, not really ergonomic! (I've handled one).

Note that "shaped like a 35mm SLR" or "controls like a 35mm SLR" doesn't tell you a lot about ergonomics. The Pentax 6x7 is "shaped like a big 35mm SLR" but in my opinion the RB67 handles better. I have owned both machines, sold the Pentax. Honestly, shaping medium format SLRs as 35mm cameras isn't a great idea.

 

[MattKing]

Why isn't it okay to not want an electronic camera?

It is okay!
But if you had one, maybe you would start to like it .
Some people express that wish because they are concerned about batteries - my reply was probably influenced by them.

 

[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.

 

[Donald Qualls]

@flavio81 You made my point: most camera service people are trained and experienced with mechanical work, while few (outside of factory-sponsored shops that work on only a single brand and hard cutoff service some set number of years after a model is discontinued) have useful levels of electronic skill. Further, as @raizans pointed out, relatively new electronics with microcontrollers and firmware are less repairable than the older ones that have component-level electronics, even if your repairer has the skillset to troubleshoot and repair component electronics.

Furthermore, I have a personal history of repairing mechanical cameras, starting with disassembling an Exa II down to the mirror box and shutter and reassembling it successfully, when I was 14. I've cleaned leaf shutters and done minor repairs, cleaned and adjusted (and modified) the frame counter in my Super Ikonta B, repaired damaged focus threads and reset the focus sync on my Kodak Reflex II -- that is, I have a fair chance of repairing at least some things that might go wrong with a mechanical camera, and I'm pretty good a troubleshooting mechanics (I repair mechanical, pneumatic, and electrical -- but not electronic, we replace electronics as modules only -- items for a living).

I have no such skill or history with electronics. I don't "get" them.

Therefore, I'm much more comfortable with mechanical cameras than with ones that depend on electronics for the most basic operation. Metering is fine, I have three working M42 bodies with TTL (stop-down) metering, and have no objection to a camera that has a built-in meter -- as long as I'm free to ignore it and the camera will continue to work if the meter electronics fail or the battery is removed. In the end, I don't much care how "reliable" late-generation electronics are. The electronics in cars are pretty reliable, too, but take a look at the number of electronic-related recalls any given year.

I get more and more impression that the Arax 645 isn't the right thing, either -- as noted, it's a 6x6 SLR with a mask and adjusted film advance; it's bigger and heavier than a 645 needs to be. But apparently, no one ever thought to make a 645 SLR until after you couldn't sell a professional camera without it depending on batteries and electronics.

 

[Kino]

As you probably know, you can get 6x4.5 magazines for the Kiev 88 (not common, but not unobtainable), and you don't have to turn the camera on-edge to put the long edge of the negative to the horizon.

I have a Kiev 60 and enjoy shooting with it. Frankly I don't see how a smaller body with a huge medium format sized lens hanging off it would be more of an advantage.

Looks like your are stuck with a rangefinder if you insist on your size and weight requirements.

 

[Donald Qualls]

First, a lens that covers 6x4.5 need'nt be anything like as large as the ones I have for 6x7, even if they're faster (again, because they likely don't have a shutter in the lens).

Sure, the Kiev 88 (or Hasselblad 500) with a 6x4.5 magazine has horizontal framing as default -- but then you have to turn the camera on its side to shoot verticals, and that's much less practical with the standard waist level finders on these cameras than with the ($$$) eye level prisms. And Kiev 88 seems to be a very fragile, unreliable camera that's hard to get repaired.

I've never handled any 6x6 SLR, either the Hasselblad/Bronica/Kiev 88/Great Wall style, or the Pentax/Pentacon/Kiev 60/Arax style. The RB67 is the only 6x7 I've handled.

And there don't seem to be any RFs that meet my needs. I just learned about the Bronica RF645, but examples currently on eBay are running $1500 and up with a single lens, and this camera, introduced in 2000, is dependent on electronics -- and has no third party anything because it never took off (bad timing, came out just as digital started to eat film's lunch). At least an Arax/Pentacon/Kiev 60 all share lenses and most accessories.

 

[Kino]

Looks like unobtainium to me!

The Kiev 88 is fairly robust if you operate it properly. My main camera has worked fine for over a decade, but I'd like to get it CLA'd just for protection, as it was used when I purchased it.

My other 2 bodies were purchased broken from users who were sloppy in operation.

One has a hole in the titanium shutter which clearly is in the shape of a finger and the other has a detached wind mechanism which was undoubtedly caused by changing the shutter speed BEFORE the camera was cocked and then forcing the wind lever.

Also, another major gripe is magazine spacing; It's NOT a Hasselbad, and there is a very precise way to load the magazines or the spacing will be off and overlap the image.

There are some absolute maxims of operation that if you violate, it's a surefire wrecked camera.

Anyway, not trying to convince you to buy the camera, but the predominant theme online that the camera is totally junk and that it breaks instantly is hardly accurate. Don't buy a Kiev and treat it like a Hasselblad; its not one, but it can be a useful camera if operated with care.

Good luck in your search...

 

[Donald Qualls]

So, in general, it's looking like the only improvement I'm going to get (in terms of weight and handling, while staying fully mechanical) over my RB67 is Hasselblad-style SLR of an old enough design to be fully mechanical, including an eye level prism to allow horizontal/vertical shooting and a 645 magazine. Whether that's H 500 series with A16, Kiev 88 with equivalent, or a Bronica S2 and similar setup. And all of those get me a 6x6 SLR for the cost of another film magazine.

 

[johnha]

The Arax 645 looks like it has vertical framing by default (horizontals would need a prism). The lenses, body & finders are probably designed to cover 6x6, so they are unlikely to be smaller/lighter than a 6x6. I'd prefer a 6x6 with WLF (no bulky/heavy prism needed) and 'put up' with a few fewer frames per roll (trading them for the convenience and versatility).

 

[Kino]

The Arax 645 looks like it has vertical framing by default (horizontals would need a prism). The lenses, body & finders are probably designed to cover 6x6, so they are unlikely to be smaller/lighter than a 6x6. I'd prefer a 6x6 with WLF (no bulky/heavy prism needed) and 'put up' with a few fewer frames per roll (trading them for the convenience and versatility).

The 645 is just a modified full frame camera body.

Frankly, I haven't bought one because having to reorient the camera in a manner exactly opposite of a traditional SLR would probably drive me to distraction...

 

[Donald Qualls]

The Arax 645 looks like it has vertical framing by default (horizontals would need a prism). The lenses, body & finders are probably designed to cover 6x6, so they are unlikely to be smaller/lighter than a 6x6. I'd prefer a 6x6 with WLF (no bulky/heavy prism needed) and 'put up' with a few fewer frames per roll (trading them for the convenience and versatility).

You're correct, the Arax 645 is a converted 6x6. All the lenses are made for 6x6 SLRs (this is the same core design as the Pentacon 66 and Kiev 60, and same lens mount). Worse, it's a design that's well known for its short life -- the Pentacon especially has a reputation for failing, requiring expensive repairs, based on my reading, and the Arax cameras are converted/upgraded from Kiev 60 bodies left in the factory warehouse after the line was shut down.

@Kino I have a Debonair and a Daiichi Zenobia, as well as an Olympus Pen EES-2 -- I have no problem with cameras that are natively vertical.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

6x6 TLR's like the 500C and S2A, even with a prism, are clunky to use on their side. Adding a handle helps but at that point weight starts to really creep up.

Another plug for the Mamiya 645 Pro/TL - with the prism and handle its still less weight compared to a RB67 and handles like a standard SLR. I have both the metered prism and the non-metered with the adjustable diopter. I prefer the non-metered since I usually use a separate light meter and the diopter really helps me nail focus while keeping my glasses on.

I know it has a battery but if you let that one parameter creep back in I think you'd really like using that camera.

Also, with the way Pro/TL prices have been rising over the last couple of years, you probably could get all more more than what you paid if you use it for a bit and decide you don't like it.

If you were local to me I'd let you borrow one of mine to try it out.

Jeremy

 

[Donald Qualls]

Not only is that newer model Mamiya much more electronic than I want, it's at the very upper edge of my price range. If not a little out of it.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ensign Speed Film Reflex.

Ian

 

[Donald Qualls]

Apparently, there aren't any "less expensive" genuine 645 (as opposed to converted 6x6) SLRs. At least with my RB67, I can just rotate the back; the camera stays upright and the only thing against the waist level finder is that I'm not tall enough sometimes.

And that's funny, @Ian Grant I'm looking for a 6x4.5 and you show me a 6x9. Lighter than my RB67, though, no doubt, and seems electronics-free...

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd forgotten it's 6x9, it's about the same size perhaps a little smaller than my Mamiya 645 1000s. There were some German 645 TLR's I think, Welta and maybe Zeiss, they were hybrid folding TLRs. EArly MAmiya 645's ork at 1/100 with a dead or no battery but that's not very flexible.

Ian

 

[Donald Qualls]

The Welta Perfekta was a 6x9 folding, revolving-back (at least in some versions) TLR. I've got two folders that shoot 6x4.5 (one also shoots 6x9 if I take out the masks). There were Graflex SLRs before the First World War as large as 5x7 -- but those are bigger than I'm interested in. I've got a 6x7, don't care about a 6x6 (and if I did, I'd get a Bronica), but I'd really like an affordable, non-battery-dependent 6x4.5 SLR -- effectively a shrunk version of my RB67 or of a Pentax 6x7 (the old one). Apparently such a thing doesn't exist, aside from Hasselblad-type or Pentacon-type 6x6 with conversions of one sort or another.

 

[flavio81]

I posted a thread a few months ago about electronic vs. mechanical shutter repairability:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...ring-cameras-with-electronic-shutters.172715/

The main idea I took from the discussion was that older, more primitive electronic cameras (not shutters, specifically) are more repairable than later, more sophisticated electronic cameras that have CPUs. Although CPUs are very reliable and later electronic cameras shouldn't malfunction more often, when the CPU does fail the only thing you can do is replace them, probably by cannibalizing a parts camera. More primitive electronic cameras can be serviced at the component level, but that will involve a new skillset. We have reached the point when CPUs are starting to fail, e.g., a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II might be toast while a Mamiya RZ67 Pro might be repairable.

How CPUs relate to electronic shutters is something the thread didn't cover. Anyone know if electronic shutters are independent components that can be repaired whether or not there's a CPU issue?

Right now, my sense is that something like a Mamiya M645, Pentax 645, or Bronica ETRS should be a safe bet. Maybe avoid the later Mamiyas, the Pentax 645N and 645NII, Bronica ETRSi, Contax 645, etc. Hopefully a real repair person can clarify the situation and say what's what.

As I work with computers and have tinkered with computers and electronics since i was about 14 years old... I feel compelled to say that i have never, ever, ever, seen a CPU chip die by its own means (i.e. without getting a significant voltage surge, or some of its pin contacts shortened, or receiving a big static discharge.)

Considering camera electronics often use higher-grade components than the ones in computers...

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

Batteries are cheap most of the time and easy to find, easy to pack. If you're going to shoot 645 do yourself a favor and get a system with modern lenses. I can easily tell the difference between the cheaper Mamiya glass and the newer stuff, same with some Pentax optics. Where as Zeiss Contax images fairly sing. Smaller formats benefit from better lenses.

The only mechanical way to shoot 645 that I can think of though is a Hasselblad 500x with a 645 back. Not a bad way to go at all. To me 645 is all about the conveniences of 35mm in a medium format body though. Gimmie that meter, auto advance, and AF when I can get it. Otherwise I'd just rather use a larger format, or 35mm itself.

 

[MattKing]

Just use a Mamiya 645 Super. If the electronics fail, you will always have 1/60 second.
Sort of like you will always have Paris!

 

[abruzzi]

Just use a Mamiya 645 Super. If the electronics fail, you will always have 1/60 second.

And a Bronica ETRSi always has 1/500. While it varies depending what and where you shoot, but for me, 1/500 is a more useful fallback speed.

 

[flavio81]

Furthermore, I have a personal history of repairing mechanical cameras, starting with disassembling an Exa II down to the mirror box and shutter and reassembling it successfully, when I was 14. I've cleaned leaf shutters and done minor repairs, cleaned and adjusted (and modified) the frame counter in my Super Ikonta B, repaired damaged focus threads and reset the focus sync on my Kodak Reflex II -- that is, I have a fair chance of repairing at least some things that might go wrong with a mechanical camera, and I'm pretty good a troubleshooting mechanics (I repair mechanical, pneumatic, and electrical -- but not electronic, we replace electronics as modules only -- items for a living).

Basic camera electronics are far easier than some mechanical things you already do.

I mean, how hard is to use a multitester to check for good continuity, and to use a solder to repair cold solder joints. And to use some sandpaper and/or metal polish to restore contact conductivity? Re-aligning a leaf switch that is out of alignment is a mechanical task, yet affects electronics a lot: For example an electronically-timed SLR like the pentax ME or Nikon EL can go completely wrong if the mirror switch or "memory lock" switch doesn't give proper electrical contact or is misaligned. Dumb repairman will say "the CPU is fried", clever repairman cleans the contacts and realigns the switch.

It isn't hard.

Yet those silly problems (bad conductors, misaligned switches), that are easy to repair, are what make electronic cameras fail. Easy to repair stuff!