Fuji 680 GX Pro Camera Vs Fuji 690 Rangefinder

[braxus]

I currently have a Pentax 67II and 645N cameras. Im wanting something a little wider then 67, but not a smaller negative of 645. I already have 4x5 in a Graflex, but rarely use it due to its bulk and slow use. I do like the 4x5 when I want to take my time, but on shoots when I can't spend a lot of time on the shot, SLR gear works better.

First off- what standard print size do you get from either 6x8 or 6x9? Which one is closer to 4x6? Also how many shots per 120 roll do you get with either of these?

A local dealer has a Fuji GX Pro 680 camera with 100mm f4 lens. He says its a great camera with a really sharp lens. How that lens compares to my Pentax cameras, I cannot say. The Fuji is a more modern camera though. Im told it is a heavy camera, but my Pentax 67II is not light either. I tend to use tripods when shooting my 67 camera due to mirror slap and camera movement. Am I going to notice any difference in quality going to the Fuji 680 vs my 67 camera? I know the negative is slightly larger and Im a big fan of bigger is better.

My other option is the Fuji 690 rangefinder. Bigger negative yet, but not SLR. And Im not sure the lens on that camera can be as good as the Fuji 680. Plus shooting portraits with a rangefinder can be complicated. So Im not sold on this camera, other then the negative size.

Can anyone comment on these cameras and help make a choice? I do use digital as well, but I still love using film. On important shoots, I bring both. I currently have a D800 camera for digital.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

A GX680 is more like a large format camera in that it has perspective control movements and is very large; it's really intended for studio use . It's much bigger than a RB67.

Until you've seen one, you don't realize how large it really is. If you think the Graflex is bulky, the GX680 will exceed that.

http://camera-wiki.org/wiki/Fuji_GX680

 

[braxus]

The Fuji is bigger then the Graflex? I find that hard to believe, as the Graflex is a large camera in itself. Since it will be on a tripod, I don't know if size of the camera will be an issue. Its the results of using it Im looking at. Also does the GX 680 Pro allow different backs like 6x6, etc? Or is that just for the 2 and 3 versions?

 

[Theo Sulphate]

It can expand


Here are some good details, including table with weight and dimensions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuji_GX680

 

[braxus]

Im starting to wonder if maybe the Fuji GW 690 II might be more to my liking. People have admitted to using it for portraits with the 90mm lens, and the camera is lightweight enough to be handheld. Plus I can get a wide angle lens for it. Any comments there? How is the rangefinder for portraits? Also how good are the lenses on the 690?

 

[braxus]

After a little more research into body versions and lenses, it seems the best one to go with is the Fuji GL690 with the 100mm lens. Its an older camera, so hopefully the mechanisms still work. I heard the bokeh on the 100mm is way better then the 90mm, plus the 100 focusses closer which is better for portraits. Im also told the look the lens gives is better then the 90, even if the 90 is newer with better coatings, etc. So I guess I'll go this route. Price is right too.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... maybe the Fuji GW 690 II might be more to my liking. ... Plus I can get a wide angle lens for it. ...

Not really. The wide angle lens for the GW690 is the GSW690 camera! - essentially the same camera, but with a wider lens. The GW... series cameras all have fixed non-removable lenses.

I have a GW690III, but the II versions are very nice. Go for the GSW690 ( II or III) if you want the wide angle.

For 6x8, there is, I believe, only the III model.

The lenses are excellent. The rangefinder patch is "okay". It's not as contrasty and bright as a Leica M6. The absolute best rangefinder patch, with brightness, contrast, and definition is, in my opinion, that of the Mamiya 7 cameras.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

After a little more research into body versions and lenses, it seems the best one to go with is the Fuji GL690 with the 100mm lens. Its an older camera, so hopefully the mechanisms still work. I heard the bokeh on the 100mm is way better then the 90mm, plus the 100 focusses closer which is better for portraits. Im also told the look the lens gives is better then the 90, even if the 90 is newer with better coatings, etc. So I guess I'll go this route. Price is right too.

What you got is some bucket load of personal opinions, nothing less, nothing more. The GL is so old, you would have to pay more than "price is right" for a really good / little used one and likely more than for a GW in same or even better condition.

And "bokeh is WAY better" ? "100mm gives better LOOK" ? what is all that? at best personal opinions, but BS nevertheless. This is not how ones buys a camera. Hit flickr and see what people have shot with each, especially if "look" each gives is what sells you one.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I've heard that the 690 series cameras have some film flatness issues just because there is so much film to hold. Is there any truthfulness to this or just a myth from early 6x9 folders?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

I've heard that the 690 series cameras have some film flatness issues just because there is so much film to hold. Is there any truthfulness to this or just a myth from early 6x9 folders?

I say absolutely none, not in mine and in none I have known owners of. Mine was hardly used when I bought it (GW690 II) but I can't see a single reason to think things will slacken up with extensive use. Some others will come back at you with all kind of evidence how crappy these cameras are, from film flatness to loudest operation etc. Myths are part of our lives. 690 are not macro cameras, but if one examines negatives at now so-popular pixel peeping levels, then perhaps there is some truth to that flatness of film thing. This is the worst part of digital that ever hit film shooting: hybrid thinking and not getting away from computer screen

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I've heard that the 690 series cameras have some film flatness issues just because there is so much film to hold. Is there any truthfulness to this or just a myth from early 6x9 folders?

There is no problem with film flatness; the large pressure plate is more than adequate to keep the film flat.

 

[Paul Howell]

The 680 is one hell of a system, designed for studio work, heavy, in my thinking too heavy for field work, not that it can't be done, strong back and legs or a pack mule. When folks were dumping their film gear a local camera shop had very nice outfit, 2 bodies, 3 lens, backs, I was really tempted, but passed could see myself lugging it around in the field.

 

[xya]

have you ever considered a mamiya press or universal? the 6x9 backs are considered to be the best concering flatness, except wide angle lenses (75 and 50mm) the big and clear rangefinder is also a viewfinder and the cameras and lenses are quite cheap. the grip is extremely sturdy, so it is easy to carry around.

 

[voceumana]

If you want a system camera, go with the GX680, if you want a big "point an shoot" (after focusing and setting exposure), get the GW690II or III (or GSW690 II or III). The latter cameras are fixed lens cameras, as already discussed--of you want 2 focal lengths (65mm and 90 mm) you get 2 cameras. Different camera styles for different approaches to shooting. But, if you have a real interest in the system camera, consider Mamiya RB67 Pro SD. You'd have access to more available lenses and accessory equipment since they are very common--the GX680. Probably lower cost, too.

I am a fan, though, of Fuji lenses in general.

 

[villagephotog]

The 680 is one hell of a system, designed for studio work, heavy, in my thinking too heavy for field work, not that it can't be done, strong back and legs or a pack mule.

There's no question that the GX680 was designed primarily for studio work, as you said, particularly product and tabletop photography where its movements could be very helpful.

That said, in the 1990s I had a landscape photographer friend with a great, great eye, who inherited a chunk of money from a well-to-do uncle (swear to God this is true). First thing he did was quit his job, buy a Toyota Land Cruiser, and order up a well-provisioned GX680 system. Then he hit the road, all over the American west. Later, he opened a gallery on the main street of our California town for awhile.

He did some amazing, beautiful landscape work with that camera, especially landscape detail work. Just great stuff (and I am not the hugest landscape fan.) As I said, he was one of the most talented photographers I've known (and my three careers have brought me into contact with literally thousands of them, including dozens of very famous ones.) He was also not that big a guy — maybe 5'8" and 150 lbs. The Land Cruiser helped, of course, but somehow he hauled that beast around on his small frame.

Unfortunately, he had some serious health issues shortly afterwards (not photography or GX680 related), but if he had been able to shoot seriously for longer, I think he had a shot at becoming a 'name' in the landscape photography world. He made that GX680 sing.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

There's no question that the GX680 was designed primarily for studio work, as you said, particularly product and tabletop photography where its movements could be very helpful.

That said, in the 1990s I had a landscape photographer friend with a great, great eye, who inherited a chunk of money from a well-to-do uncle (swear to God this is true). First thing he did was quit his job, buy a Toyota Land Cruiser, and order up a well-provisioned GX680 system. Then he hit the road, all over the American west. Later, he opened a gallery on the main street of our California town for awhile.

He did some amazing, beautiful landscape work with that camera, especially landscape detail work. Just great stuff (and I am not the hugest landscape fan.) As I said, he was one of the most talented photographers I've known (and my three careers have brought me into contact with literally thousands of them, including dozens of very famous ones.) He was also not that big a guy — maybe 5'8" and 150 lbs. The Land Cruiser helped, of course, but somehow he hauled that beast around on his small frame.

Unfortunately, he had some serious health issues shortly afterwards (not photography or GX680 related), but if he had been able to shoot seriously for longer, I think he had a shot at becoming a 'name' in the landscape photography world. He made that GX680 sing.

IS there a place to see his work?

 

[villagephotog]

IS there a place to see his work?

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there is. I went looking last night and found nothing; he doesn't have a web site and the galleries that used to show his work are evidently closed. I'd prefer not to post his name without knowing more about his situation these days; I haven't heard from him or about him from mutual friends in about 15 years.

 

[Roger Thoms]

I have both, and real like the 6x8 format. The range finder is nice because it’s so portable, I’ve got it in a small camera bag and have a FLM travel tripod to go with it, these fit easily in my carry on bag if I fly and behind the seat of my truck if I’m driving.

The GX680 is a beast, with three lenses, two backs, compendium hood, light meter, etc, the whole kit weighs in a backpack weights 26 pounds. I use a Ries J100 tripod with a J250 head so add another 13 pounds. The camera itself with a lens is about 10 pound, and physically as big as a 4x5. That being said, I absolutely love the camera, it’s a pleasure to use and I bought it specifically for the perspective control and for the great selection of lenses and accessories.

I often bring both cameras, using the whichever camera suits the situation. In other words I use the rangefinder if it suits the subject otherwise I drag out the beast.

Roger

 

[Roger Thoms]

Just realized that your title mentions the 690 rangefinder which is fine. As I mentioned I have the 680 which while not as common is not hard to find. Really just a personal choice, but I found I like the 6x8 format a lot more than the 6x9. Just works better for the way I see. Also fits the standard paper sizes better, for instance I like to print with 1” borders, which works out nicely with 6x8 on 11x14 paper.

Roger

 

[MattKing]

The 6x8, 6x4.5 and 110 (and micro 4/3) formats all have approximately the same aspect ratios.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that there is. I went looking last night and found nothing; he doesn't have a web site and the galleries that used to show his work are evidently closed. I'd prefer not to post his name without knowing more about his situation these days; I haven't heard from him or about him from mutual friends in about 15 years.

I understand. Thanks.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I have both, and real like the 6x8 format. The range finder is nice because it’s so portable, I’ve got it in a small camera bag and have a FLM travel tripod to go with it, these fit easily in my carry on bag if I fly and behind the seat of my truck if I’m driving.

The GX680 is a beast, with three lenses, two backs, compendium hood, light meter, etc, the whole kit weighs in a backpack weights 26 pounds. I use a Ries J100 tripod with a J250 head so add another 13 pounds. The camera itself with a lens is about 10 pound, and physically as big as a 4x5. That being said, I absolutely love the camera, it’s a pleasure to use and I bought it specifically for the perspective control and for the great selection of lenses and accessories.

I often bring both cameras, using the whichever camera suits the situation. In other words I use the rangefinder if it suits the subject otherwise I drag out the beast.

Roger

Does its controls provide for better DOF focusing with landscapes?

 

[Roger Thoms]

Does its controls provide for better DOF focusing with landscapes?

Yes, you have swing and tilt. Although the movement I use is rise so I can keep verticals vertical. There is also a GX680S that doesn’t have movements.

Roger

 

[Theo Sulphate]

You may not care, but the GX680 is a fully electronic camera; even the film back takes batteries. To get aperture priority, you need the AE finder.

As much as I wanted 6x8 and as much as I wanted perspective control in medium format, I passed on getting the camera because I didn't want something so totally dependent on electronics in its subsystem components.

 

[Roger Thoms]

No don’t care about the electronics, did replace the batteries in my two backs. Of course it’s not lost on me that the the Fuji rangefinders are totally mechanical, which I also like. Normally if I’m shooting with the GX I also have the GW680III with me. Always good to have a backup. I do really like my Fuji rangefinder and probably shoot it a little more simply because it’s so portable. As far as image quality I can’t tell which camera I used she looking at the negatives, both cameras produce excellent images.

Oh yeah AE finders are pricey, doubt I’ll ever get one of those.

Bottom line, if I had to choose one over the other I’d probably choose the rangefinder.

Roger