Fuji GF670 as a Perkeo II upgrade/replacement?

[Arcturus]

I can't decide which way to go here. I currently use a Voigtländer Perkeo II as my carry along travel camera. I fly a lot and it fits well into my slim document bag, but I keep thinking about replacing it with a GF670. The reasons are; While I'm pretty good at zone focus, a meter and coupled rangefinder would be a big help, and also the modern lens of the 670 looks great. The Color Skopar is more than sufficient for 8x10 or 8x8 prints, but it has to be used just right to get the most out of it. It doesn't take well to all lighting situations. On the other hand, the 670 looks huge. The whole point is to be small and low profile, and if it's not then I probably wont end up using it so much. I have other cameras that I use when a big camera is needed. The listed dimensions of the 670 make it considerably larger than even my 6x9 Bessa. In pictures it looks almost close to a TLR in size. If you've used one, does it seem bulky compared to a Perkeo II or other classic folder? Does it make a good low profile travel camera or should I just stick with the Perkeo?

 

[frank]

It looks to be about 2x the size of the Perkeo. But you can only get quality 8x10 prints from the Perkeo? Something must be wrong. Or you may have super high standards. One can get great 8x10's from a good 35mm camera. Maybe switch.

 

[Regular Rod]

Stay with the Perkeo II. I love mine!

Are you sure 8x10 is the limit? I'd be happy with 24x24 especially with ILFORD films...

R

 

[gone]

You're right, it is huge. It's REALLY huge. Looks out of scale in fact. Much bigger than a TLR. If you're Texas sized yourself, then it might work, but when I opened the shipping box on mine several things happened. First, I was amazed at the size when I pulled it out. Next, the wife burst out laughing. Lastly, I put it back in the box and returned it to KEH. Never was impressed w/ Fuji glass anyway, having owned their much smaller 6x4.5 cameras. Sharp, but no character, if you get my meaning. Boringly sharp. Personally, I'd consider a TLR w/ a Tessar or Rokkor or Planar lens. While considerably bigger than your folder, they get good reactions from people, especially women for some reason. You are using a proper hood on the Scopar, right?

 

[jp498]

I traveled once with my yashica TLR, plenty of film, laptop, and some clothes for three days in a very modest pelican 1400 case.

I don't own a gf670 but observed someone using one. I'd say it's midway between an antique 120/620 folder and a polaroid folding camera. Austin Granger does good work with the gf670. I'm happy with the rolleiflex automat tessar TLR presently and it does get nice reactions from people.

 

[Arcturus]

No, 8x10 is not necessarily the limit, but handheld and without critical focus I will usually print to 8x10 which hides camera shake, estimated exposure, or slightly off focus pretty well, and still gives that wonderful medium format tonality. Stopped down the Skopar is very good, and wide open it has an interesting out of focus area, slightly "swirly". It can be affected by flare which can enhance certain shots, but not all. I wouldn't mind a modern lens, but unless it's tripod mounted there probably wont be much of an improvement in sharpness. I just feel that with the skopar there are certain shots that work well with it and others that just don't. I imagine the Fuji to be a much more versatile lens in that regard. I don't use a lens shade with this camera, or filters, or an accessory rangefinder as I'm trying to keep my camera stuff to a minimum when I take this camera. A nice bright coupled rangefinder would be great too, but I don't know if the space tradeoff will work for me.

 

[Nick Merritt]

Your 6x9 Bessa won't do?

 

[Arcturus]

Your 6x9 Bessa won't do?

The Bessa is what got me into folders to begin with, and I found it was so convenient and easy to use I used my tlr much less after I got it. It has an older uncoated skopar though which is a great lens for certain shots, but it's not for everything. Also, I prefer 6x6, I don't care for the 6x9/35mm aspect ratio when printing. So I got the Perkeo and it gets a lot of use, but I'm again asking myself the same questions about newer stuff again.

 

[Chris Lange]

Mamiya 6? Or a Zeiss Super Ikonta?

 

[frank]

So, the new folding fuji 667 is clown-like, like the older rigid gw670.

 

[Chris Lange]

Or get a small shoemount RF for the perkeo...

it's not coupled obviously, but it's better than nothing.

 

[eclarke]

I like mine..remember, it does 6x7 and 6x6 and folds..It's easy to cut sharpness back but it's really hard to make fuzzy sharp.

 

[Oren Grad]

I've owned them both - had a Perkeo II with the 80mm Color-Skopar. The GF670 is far bigger than the Perkeo, comparing either open-to-open or folded-to-folded. The folding mechanism of the GF670 feels more delicate. The lens on the GF670 is vastly superior by objective measures of optical performance. Subjective character is, well, subjective - neither would be my favorite, though on the whole I prefer the lens on the Fuji. YMMV. Focusing the GF670 with built-in RF is much handier than fussing with a separate RF on the Perkeo. Film wind on my GF670 was more reliable and thus simpler than in my Perkeo, where the auto-stop was flaky and I had to use the red window.

EDIT: I should have added, the viewfinder of the GF670 is larger, clearer, and has frame lines that correct for both parallax and field size. The GF670 is functionally superior in almost every way except for size - but size is a major consideration for your intended use. Also re the importance of size, see the comments that David has added just below.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have a Perkeo II, and for something that fits easily in a jacket pocket or a small pocket in a briefcase, it's hard to do better. I had a Bessa II for a while, but it didn't work so well for me ergonomically, though it was otherwise an excellent folder and quite compact.

I've thought seriously about the GF670, but seeing how large it is in person, it doesn't serve the same function as the Perkeo II, as an ultra-compact pocketable medium format camera. I have a 2x3" Linhof Tech V, which is bulkier than the GF670 and lacks the single-window rangefinder/viewfinder, but it's otherwise much more versatile, so in the end, I don't feel like I need another camera to fill a gap between the Perkeo II and the Linhof.

The compactness of the Perkeo II also makes it a nice option for travel in combination with another camera. When I had an ultralight 4x5" Gowland Pocket-View, for instance, I would bring both of them and use the Perkeo for handheld shots and the Gowland for tripod shots. Now I often carry a small bag with the Perkeo II and a Noblex 150, so I've got the option of a normal 6x6 perspective or swing-lens panoramic with two cameras that can use the same type of film.

 

[RattyMouse]

I can't decide which way to go here. I currently use a Voigtländer Perkeo II as my carry along travel camera. I fly a lot and it fits well into my slim document bag, but I keep thinking about replacing it with a GF670. The reasons are; While I'm pretty good at zone focus, a meter and coupled rangefinder would be a big help, and also the modern lens of the 670 looks great. The Color Skopar is more than sufficient for 8x10 or 8x8 prints, but it has to be used just right to get the most out of it. It doesn't take well to all lighting situations. On the other hand, the 670 looks huge. The whole point is to be small and low profile, and if it's not then I probably wont end up using it so much. I have other cameras that I use when a big camera is needed. The listed dimensions of the 670 make it considerably larger than even my 6x9 Bessa. In pictures it looks almost close to a TLR in size. If you've used one, does it seem bulky compared to a Perkeo II or other classic folder? Does it make a good low profile travel camera or should I just stick with the Perkeo?

My GF670 fits inside the pockets of my winter coat. Folded, it is so easy to carry thatI will travel with it (internationally) without reservation. Open while shooting, I feel absolutely at ease and immensely enjoy the shooting experience. The viewfinder is as good as it can possibly get. Very large, very bright, with focusing a breeze.

I have not shot a single roll of 35mm film since getting my GF670, the experience of shooting it is that pleasurable.

 

[Nick Merritt]

If you like 6x6, and want something compact, then I'd suggest you consider a postwar Zeiss Ikon folder with a coated Tessar, like an Ikonta. The so-called Mess-Ikonta (uncoupled rangefinder) is compact -- substantially smaller and lighter than the Super Ikonta, for instance.

 

[xya]

IMHO you should get yourself an old folder with a coupled rangefinder. I have plenty of them as I wanted to find out which one would be the best for me. I love the Super Baldax and the Mamiya Six. the Super Ikontas (III and IV) feel more solid and they have the best finders, but I'm not too fond of the LV system of the IV, although it has a light meter. then I came across a Konica Pearl III (4,5x6) and I just love it. quite a bit smaller than a 6x6 but still gives a good negative. I rented a GF670, just too see. nice, but ways too big. the next step was a Fuji GS645 and then a GA645(W). the GS is nice, the GA is just another world. frame and shoot. never out of focus, exposure just right, forget all those light meters, winding etc. it's bulkier, but still fits in the pocket of a jacket.

so for me it's the GA for running around and shooting or the Konica Pearl that sits in my pocket just in case. funny outcome if were just looking for a 6x6 folder.

 

[Pioneer]

I have the Fuji GF670 and I have the Agfa Super Isolette. Both are really terrific cameras. I used to travel exclusively with the Super Isolette because it was smaller and the image quality was very good, maybe not quite as good as the GF670 but close enough that it wasn't really an issue for me. But, as I have become used to the GF670 it goes with more and more frequently. Yes, it is larger but it has many other advantages.

Some of those advantages are;
a) bigger viewfinder
b) better lens shade/hood
c) auto exposure
d) newer lens with better coatings
e) easier to find and use filters
f) ability to shoot 6x7 or 6x6 format
g) ability to use 120 or 220 film.
h) very accurate electronic leaf shutter
i) exposure compensation in Aperture Priority
j) hot shoe for flash

I still own the Super Isolette and I doubt it will go anywhere soon, but I am beginning to appreciate what a modern folder can bring to your film workflow.

Obviously there is a downside, and it isn't size. The camera is battery dependent. But the CR2 Lithium is not exactly a huge battery so it is pretty easy to pack a spare or two.

EDIT: Ooops! I forgot the framelines and parallax compensation in the viewfinder. Doesn't seem like much but it sure comes in handy at close range.

 

[Arcturus]

Thanks for all the opinions, helps a lot! I've constructed a GF670 out of paper using its listed dimentions to see if I'd like it. Bigger than it seems in pictures, but it might be manageable. 2.5" thick when folded seems excessive, but it's hard to ignore all the benefits of a nice new camera. I think I'll be going back and forth for a while on this....

 

[RattyMouse]

Thanks for all the opinions, helps a lot! I've constructed a GF670 out of paper using its listed dimentions to see if I'd like it. Bigger than it seems in pictures, but it might be manageable. 2.5" thick when folded seems excessive, but it's hard to ignore all the benefits of a nice new camera. I think I'll be going back and forth for a while on this....

2.5" thick and it is a fully modern medium format camera. Not excessive, it is a miracle.

 

[smolk]

No Perkeo but

I do not have a Perkeo, but I do have the trio Agfa Super Isolette, Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta IV (534/16) and Balda Super Baldax (Ennit 2.8/80mm).
The picture does not really show all that well that the Balda is the smallest, and certainly the lightest, of the three. This version is with the Tessar-type lens, cheaper lens designs were perhaps more common.
It is good, but does not fit my (slightly crippled) hands too well, so I prefer the other two, but then again I do not care much about weight or size. (I carry a Pentax 645N or Rolleiflex 6008i around as well.)
The Agfa is probably the best among them, I am waiting for the results of the Super Ikonta IV, but the Balda has unit focusing, which the Zeiss Ikon has not. If the Balda would fit your hands, it is light, has a good lens, has a convenient focus knob (unlike the incredible ribbled ring of the Zeiss Ikon), and is probably the cheapest of the three.
I once had the Certo Six which is also very good and probably somewhere in the middle in terms of weight and size. Mind, I love the Agfa, it is a great taker.

Alternatively, the Plaubel Makina 67 is very good, smaller than the Bessa III/Fuji 667, with a great lens that has character and bokeh. Only thing is that the metering is fragile and the camera is too collectible. But if you think the Fuji too big, I'd go for Plaubel. You can still have them serviced at the original Plaubel factory in Germany… It will cost you some, but quality has its price. I had to sell it for financial reasons (twice!).

 

[36cm2]

Had the Perkeo II - loved it. Always such a fun camera to use and the results were good for what it is. Wanted something with easier focusing, metering and shutter options - got a Makina 67. Very cool rangefinder. Much bigger, but the quality is great. Liked it better than the Hassy, but very different given not an slr. I don't buy the fragility claims if you take care of it. Had to decide which to keep last year. Pm 67 and rolleiflex are still here. Perkeo was sold, but it was soooo cool. Hassy was sold - anything I did on it I could do better in LF. If size is the primary concern, you will not beat the Perkeo. If you want a hard core rangefinder, go pm67 or gf670 and don't complain about the weight or size.

Haven't been on Apug in a while. Life's been busy. Missed you all.

Thanks,
Leo

 

[Stealth3kpl]

I've upgraded from a Perkeo 2 to a GF670. I'm seriously impressed with it. I can't believe people think it's big. I've never felt so at home with a medium format camera, it's superb. In fact, I'm now on the look out for the GF670Wide.
Pete

 

[Pioneer]

I've upgraded from a Perkeo 2 to a GF670. I'm seriously impressed with it. I can't believe people think it's big. I've never felt so at home with a medium format camera, it's superb. In fact, I'm now on the look out for the GF670Wide.
Pete

I agree 100% with this. I own 120 folding camera ranging from sometime in the early 1930s through the 1960s. I find each one a joy to use in a different way. But the GF670 really is in a world all its own. The fact that someone actually built an honest to God folding camera with all the modern amenities in this day and age is wonderful. That they were able to do it in away that everything works together so well is a miracle. It is a medium format rangefinder folder with coupled rangefinding and exposure that is no harder to pack around and use than an M9.

 

[Arcturus]

After careful consideration, I think for my purposes the Perkeo can't be beat. It would very nice to have a moden folder, but with size being a primary concern I think I'll stick with the Perkeo. Now I just need to fight the continued desire to buy a 670 anyway just because, even though I already have similar cameras that do the exact same thing.