Any reasons for not getting Bronica SQ series?

[Alan Gales]

I don't know about modern Bronicas, but the last time I used one I thought I may need earplugs when pressing the shutter.

After the ECTL, Bronica designed cameras that used leaf shutter lenses.

I heard a story about a wedding photographer who was shooting a wedding in church using an early Bronica with the focal plane shutter. The reverend made him quite shooting because of the loud shutter noise from the
camera!

 

[dhosten]

Okay, I'm a little behind on this topic, and the OP did say that he was probably just going to hang on to his Mamiya C330 and his 6 lenses, and Paramender 2, but I recently just forked over some dough for a nice little kit and I'll tell you why. As a caveat, I'm a former C22/C330 user, with Paramender. I apprenticed with a wedding/portrait photographer in the 90s who used an ETRS, so am familiar with Bronica basics.
I'm just returning to film after a decade sojourn into a mostly digital world, and decided after buying a couple old folders that I wanted something for more serious photography. I considered Mamiya 645 Pro, Hasselblad, Bronica ETR, Rolleiflex 6000 series and of course the Contax 645. In the end I decided to keep my older 'fun' cameras (TLRs and folders) and to go with the Bronica SQ-A system. I bought 2 bodies with standard 80/2.8 lenses, a 120 and two 220 backs, a metered prism, a Pro4 filter holder/lens shade and a couple other bits for just under $500. Did I mention that included in the price was a Zenzanon S 40mm lens with caps and pristine glass? For that price I would have been lucky to get a 500C Hasselblad with lens and back. Luckily for me I live in a city with a remarkable camera repair man (Roger from CamTech Photo) who repairs Hasselblads, Bronicas, Mamiya, folders and large format lenses as his bread and butter. needless to say I send everything I buy on the Bay for a checkout, and everything checked out except one 220 back, which I got a partial refund for.
With my basic setup I am able to do what I want for the most part. I suspect that I will spring for a portrait lens of some kind. Bronica lenses do not have the sharpness of the Hasselblad or Mamiya RZ offerings, however they are good enough for most purposes. Scanned properly, they can produce amazing images at 36" square and bigger.
Yes, the backs can be a problem, but I did cussed this with Roger and he said $45 would allow him to overhaul a back to give years of worryfree service.
So, what do I have? A pretty good system for general photography. I am able to eat and not have to worry about blowing my savings on Hassy lenses and gear. Having a sharper lens is no guarantee that your images will be superior. Edward Weston was nonchalant about the camera body and lenses he used for the most part, not being a devotee to technical image perfection like St. Ansel.
Also, one last thing, which I will post and hope I don't regret it. The kids today, from Filmwasters, FPP and elsewhere love the sprocket film look that goes over well on Holga blogs and sites. I found out what my 220 backs will be doing; I'm converting them for 35mm sprocket photography. Sure, I hope to do work with this gear, and get paid for it if I can, but I also want to have fun.
So you folks sitting on the fence, 220 backs sell for peanuts (until people read this article I suppose), and getting a basic SQ/SQ-A body with basic finder and 220 back can be had for very little. You can shoot 120 in a 220 back, but you can also shoot panorama style sprocket film.. which just seems like a whole bunch of fun to me.
Sorry for being so long winded, but as a former C330 user as well, I have to say it is a great camera in a great system, with sometimes better lenses, but the Bronica SQ series will hold its own any day of the week.

Bronica 220 back sprocket How-to
http://www.flickr.com/photos/86265840@N05/sets/72157631972143051/ (not mine)

 

[Tony-S]

Bronica lenses do not have the sharpness of the Hasselblad or Mamiya RZ offerings, however they are good enough for most purposes.

I've never shot a Hasselblad, but my Bronica GS-1 lenses superb.

 

[dhosten]

I've never shot a Hasselblad, but my Bronica GS-1 lenses superb.

My Bronica lenses are sharp enough for me too, but I was just going by the information provided by Chris Perez.

 

[Tony-S]

My Bronica lenses are sharp enough for me too, but I was just going by the information provided by Chris Perez.

Those are resolution charts. Remember, "sharpness" is a function of two things - resolution and contrast. You can have high resolution lenses but with poor contrast they'll be less sharp. And vice-versa.

 

[Oscar Carlsson]

My Bronica lenses are sharp enough for me too, but I was just going by the information provided by Chris Perez.

Now, this is an old thread, but I've seen these resolution test figures and I wonder if the Chris Perez simply failed in some of his tests.

For example, the results for the SQ-Ai 80 mm PS lens:

67 53 53 f/2.8
67 67 60 f/4
60 67 60 f/5.6
60 60 60 f/8
60 67 60 f/11
53 53 53 f/16
53 53 53 f/22

A lens that does not improve as stopped down? That is...unlikely.

For the Hasselblad 80 mm Planar CT*:

68 68 38 f/2.8
60 60 34 f/4
96 96 54 f/5.6
96 107 60 f/8
85 76 60 f/11
68 68 60 f/16
54 48 48 f/22

The digits around f/4, what's up with that? And why the sudden jump in resolution up to f/5.6 from f/4?

It makes me curious and eager to test my system myself, how hard can it be?

 

[MrRogers]

None.

It's a superb camera system that will take superb photos.

What more could you ask for?

The resolution figures above should not be taken seriously, because they do not reflect what the camera is capable of. I also doubt they are accurate.

 

[piu58]

> A lens that does not improve as stopped down? That is...unlikely.


If a lens suffers most from chromatical lateral aberration it will not improve when stopped down.

 

[Dali]

Resolution tests are somewhat valid for the tested lens only. I means that your lens might give a different results, better or worse, you will never know anyway.

The most important in this regard is how YOU judge YOUR negatives? Is the sharpness an issue? Try to find how to improve it (MLU, tripod, shutter speed) before putting the blame on the lens.

 

[Oldwino]

KEH will repair Bronica. They've worked on my S2A in the past and did a great job, for a reasonable price.

You sure can get a lot of Bronica for the price of just a Hassy body and lens.

 

[Cheryl Jacobs]

I've used Bronicas the entirety of my professional career (and before) and have nothing but love for them. I shot with a Hasselblad for a year or so, given to me by a friend. I didn't like it. I gave it back.

If you look at my site, there are almost no images there that aren't Bronica. Here's one from yesterday. I swear by them, and they are not hard to replace or have repaired.

 

[hoffy]

KEH will repair Bronica. They've worked on my S2A in the past and did a great job, for a reasonable price.

You sure can get a lot of Bronica for the price of just a Hassy body and lens.

Geez, I wished KEH would allow for international repairs. Mine has been on the shelf of a local repairer for a few months now.....waiting on parts...

I've used Bronicas the entirety of my professional career (and before) and have nothing but love for them. I shot with a Hasselblad for a year or so, given to me by a friend. I didn't like it. I gave it back.

If you look at my site, there are almost no images there that aren't Bronica. Here's one from yesterday. I swear by them, and they are not hard to replace or have repaired.

Absolutely stunning work Cheryl!

Regardless of the repair issue at the moment, I love my SQAi. As for the S2A....lets just say, I am slowly warming to it (its a very fine conversation piece when you rock up to Hot Rod shows with that thing hanging around your neck!)