Fuji GS645 S pro rangefinder patch Vs GW690iii

[dean-g]

Hi.

Just wondering if anyone’s owned both these cameras and can comment on what the rangefinder patch is like is like on the GS645 S

I’ve shot the GW690iii and am looking to buy a GS645 S from eBay.

I found the GW690iii along with a Nikon +1 diopter really easy to focus. No worries at all. I’m hoping the GS645 S is similar.

Many of the reviews I read/watch regarding the GS645 S say the rangefinder patch is really tiny and it’s a difficult camera to focus. But for many it seems like this is the first rangefinder they’ve owned.

Has anyone shot both and care to comment?

Cheers.

 

[Dali]

No, I confirm, the RF patch of the Fuji 645S is pretty small. To me, it is a clear downside.

 

[dean-g]

No, I confirm, the RF patch of the Fuji 645S is pretty small. To me, it is a clear downside.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[pmargolis]

I have a GS645 and M Leicas, so I'm no stranger to rangefinder focusing. The Fuji is very hard to focus: the focusing spot has faded over the years, and it was small and faint to begin with. I use the Fuji in situations where I can take my time to focus, since the lens is excellent and the 6x4.5cm image is much more detailed than 35mm. If you don't expect to use the 645 like an M Leica, it's a very nice camera.

 

[macfred]

Hi Dean, I use my GW670iii with the Nikon Eyepiece Correction Lens (-2dpt.). This one has 19mm diameter thread and will fit the GS645 series too. Sometimes I use it on my GA645 which is AF.
Another nice and helpful solution is the Nikon Eyepiece Magnifier DG-2. The Nikon DG-2 2x Eyepiece Magnifier provides 2x magnification of the central portion of the finder image.
DG-2 is useful for critical focusing in close-up work. The magnifier flips up to quickly view the entire image area when needed. It has a rubber eyecup and dioptric correction ranging from -5 to +1.

---

 

[dean-g]

I have a GS645 and M Leicas, so I'm no stranger to rangefinder focusing. The Fuji is very hard to focus: the focusing spot has faded over the years, and it was small and faint to begin with. I use the Fuji in situations where I can take my time to focus, since the lens is excellent and the 6x4.5cm image is much more detailed than 35mm. If you don't expect to use the 645 like an M Leica, it's a very nice camera.

Thanks for the reply. Seems like it is indeed a difficult camera to focus but not impossible. At least my expectations are super low now I wish I could find one in local shop to try it out but can’t see, to find any.

 

[dean-g]

Hi Dean, I use my GW670iii with the Nikon Eyepiece Correction Lens (-2dpt.). This one has 19mm diameter thread and will fit the GS645 series too. Sometimes I use it on my GA645 which is AF.
Another nice and helpful solution is the Nikon Eyepiece Magnifier DG-2. The Nikon DG-2 2x Eyepiece Magnifier provides 2x magnification of the central portion of the finder image.
DG-2 is useful for critical focusing in close-up work. The magnifier flips up to quickly view the entire image area when needed. It has a rubber eyecup and dioptric correction ranging from -5 to +1.

View attachment 280464 View attachment 280465


---

Thanks for all the info. I completely forgot about the DG-2. I’ve had one for years and used to use it on an FE2 until I moved to a F3HP which I still use today along with a DK-17M. Very nice combo. I’m hoping the Nikon +1 diopter will be enough for the GS645S but with a DG-2 there should be any issues at all. Especially for the sort of images I usually like shooting.

The GA645 does seem like an awesome camera too. Have to have a closer look at that one. Just had a Ricoh GR1s totally die on me after 2 rolls though, so maybe I should steer clear for now

The GW670iii you have is the camera I’d really love to own at some point. I can’t believe how rare and expensive they’ve become. A GW680iii might be a good compromise though as I like the 4:3 aspect. These are pretty reasonably priced as well.

Cheers.

 

[halfaman]

I had both cameras and, even I admit it is easier to focus with the GW690 patch, I would not say there is any real dificulty with the GS645 patch and I used that camera by night.

 

[250swb]

I don't think there was anything wrong with the Fujifilm rangefinder patches, they were just mean to be used in 'other' circumstances from what they are now. They have become faded over the years, but pretty much all the Fuji GW690/670 cameras were meant to be a tool for the photographers on Mount Fuji and other tourist/devotional locations who were doing the 'I'll take you picture, and pick it up this time tomorrow' . So they are cameras for industry, but now we use them for 'art', accept it.

 

[dean-g]

I had both cameras and, even I admit it is easier to focus with the GW690 patch, I would not say there is any real dificulty with the GS645 patch and I used that camera by night.

Thanks. Nice to hear.

Was hoping they’d be the same but no worries. I think I’ll most likely be able to focus the GS645S with a diopter. Going to have a better look at the shops around here and see if I can find one to test. Not expecting much so I might be pleasantly surprised/

They have a lot going for them. First and foremost for me is the weight and lens IQ. I shoot a Bronica EC-TL and it’s a heavy beast to carry around for hours on end. Occasionally I use the 45 degree prism with it and it comes in at around 2.5kg with the 75/2.8. The Fuji will be a nice light alternative.

 

[jimjm]

Just to muddy the waters here, since you have the Bronica EC-TL, have you considered looking at an RF645? Focusing patch and viewfinder are outstanding and easy to use even in dim light. Standard eyepiece diopter is a -1, but they are easy to swap out. For me, the meter is insanely accurate. My contact sheets from this camera are always evenly exposed. The lenses are sharper than anything else I have, 35mm or large-format.
Weight with a 65mm lens is about 1200g, and it's about the same size and slightly heavier than a Nikon F100 & 50mm lens. I can easily carry this camera all day, and it's my main camera for backpacking and hiking now. Hasn't given me one problem in ten years.
Cost is probably more than the Fujis now, but not as much as the Mamiya 6/7 cameras, which are ridiculous. There is honestly not one thing I'd want to change on this camera.

 

[halfaman]

They have a lot going for them. First and foremost for me is the weight and lens IQ. I shoot a Bronica EC-TL and it’s a heavy beast to carry around for hours on end. Occasionally I use the 45 degree prism with it and it comes in at around 2.5kg with the 75/2.8. The Fuji will be a nice light alternative.

If you want something light and compact with IQ you can't go wrong with GS645, smallest MF camera I have ever seen with coupled rangefinder and metering (there are smaller but without one or both characteristics). Bellows is what you should worry about, originals are shxx and ended with light leaks, they must be replaced with a good one from some alternative manufacturer (mine was from http://www.custombellows.co.uk/).

 

[dean-g]

Just to muddy the waters here, since you have the Bronica EC-TL, have you considered looking at an RF645? Focusing patch and viewfinder are outstanding and easy to use even in dim light. Standard eyepiece diopter is a -1, but they are easy to swap out. For me, the meter is insanely accurate. My contact sheets from this camera are always evenly exposed. The lenses are sharper than anything else I have, 35mm or large-format.
Weight with a 65mm lens is about 1200g, and it's about the same size and slightly heavier than a Nikon F100 & 50mm lens. I can easily carry this camera all day, and it's my main camera for backpacking and hiking now. Hasn't given me one problem in ten years.
Cost is probably more than the Fujis now, but not as much as the Mamiya 6/7 cameras, which are ridiculous. There is honestly not one thing I'd want to change on this camera.

Interesting. I know this camera exists, but never really gave it a thought. I had a quick look in the local classifieds and there is one for sale with the 65mm at a reasonable price compared to eBay. It’s still a fair bit more heavier that the Fuji, but still a featherweight compared to the EC-TL

So when you say the standard eyepiece is removable, does that mean it actually comes off and you can use the camera without it and use your normal reading glasses with it to focus? Is that the idea? I doubt there’d be any diopters floating around for it now. Fuji had the right idea just making the thread the same as the Nikon diopters.

I’ll take a closer look at this camera. Thanks.

 

[dean-g]

If you want something light and compact with IQ you can't go wrong with GS645, smallest MF camera I have ever seen with coupled rangefinder and metering (there are smaller but without one or both characteristics). Bellows is what you should worry about, originals are shxx and ended with light leaks, they must be replaced with a good one from some alternative manufacturer (mine was from http://www.custombellows.co.uk/).

I’ve checked this one out too as it often gets mentioned alongside the S model. Everyone seems to say what you’ve mentioned regarding the bellows. Thanks for the link.

GS645 is also a 75mm compared to the 60mm of the S which I prefer. I do like the normal view of 75 as well, but for a general all purpose street shooter I’d prefer 60-65 on 645.

Cheers.

 

[jimjm]

Interesting. I know this camera exists, but never really gave it a thought. I had a quick look in the local classifieds and there is one for sale with the 65mm at a reasonable price compared to eBay. It’s still a fair bit more heavier that the Fuji, but still a featherweight compared to the EC-TL

So when you say the standard eyepiece is removable, does that mean it actually comes off and you can use the camera without it and use your normal reading glasses with it to focus? Is that the idea? I doubt there’d be any diopters floating around for it now. Fuji had the right idea just making the thread the same as the Nikon diopters.

I’ll take a closer look at this camera. Thanks.

Yep, you remove the rubber eyecup and the square diopter eyepiece slots in place. You can remove it, replace the eyecup and shoot without it, if desired.
The manual states that -1 is the standard diopter that is included with the body. I've never seen any other RF645 diopters for sale online, so I suspect they're hard to find.
I don't really notice a difference with or without the diopter inserted. The focusing patch is very bright and contrasty and the meter display is easy to read. One thing I like is that the meter display is slightly outside the frame to the left, so it doesn't intrude into the image at all.
I normally use +1.5 reading glasses and I've never had any need to change out the standard diopter on the Bronica. I've had to change diopters on most of the Nikon and other SLR bodies I have.
Yeah, eBay prices are crazy now. More than double what I paid ten years ago and Tamron only stopped making these in 2005.

 

[dean-g]

Yep, you remove the rubber eyecup and the square diopter eyepiece slots in place. You can remove it, replace the eyecup and shoot without it, if desired.
The manual states that -1 is the standard diopter that is included with the body. I've never seen any other RF645 diopters for sale online, so I suspect they're hard to find.
I don't really notice a difference with or without the diopter inserted. The focusing patch is very bright and contrasty and the meter display is easy to read. One thing I like is that the meter display is slightly outside the frame to the left, so it doesn't intrude into the image at all.
I normally use +1.5 reading glasses and I've never had any need to change out the standard diopter on the Bronica. I've had to change diopters on most of the Nikon and other SLR bodies I have.
Yeah, eBay prices are crazy now. More than double what I paid ten years ago and Tamron only stopped making these in 2005.

Thanks. Great info, Jim.

Your reading glasses are basically the same strength as mine so I probably shouldn't have any problems at all.

I had a quick scan of the manual this morning and it does look like a really well thought out camera. It even has an AEL button which is a big bonus. I'll see if I can handle one of these in the flesh and check them out.

But, I still think I'd most likely be OK with the GS645 S by the sounds of it. The RF patch is a clear downside of this cam, but I'm sure I'll be able to deal with it. I have a Yashica Lynx 14E which has a pretty mediocre RF patch but get bye OK wearing my reading glasses when focusing it. I suspect the GS645 S will be similar. Hopefully not worse

 

[Diffraction]

Hi Dean,

I don't know if this is a helpful point of reference, but I bought a GS645S recently and also own a Canon Canonet QL17 G-III. Maybe that has a similar rangefinder to your Yashica, I don't know. In any case, the viewfinder in the GS645S feels quite a bit larger, which is nice. The rangefinder spot is, I would say, actually fairly bright and large enough and is at least as good as the Canon's. There is one caveat though: I was surprised that it seems to be very dependent on how I hold the camera to my eye. If I don't look at it the right way, the patch essentially disappears. So I find myself moving the camera around, hunting to find the best view of the patch. That's not something I've noticed on the Canonet. It's not ideal, but it's workable. I'm waiting for my first scans, so there's a chance I may revise this opinion, but overall I'd say it's adequate but not amazing.

 

[dean-g]

Hi Dean,

I don't know if this is a helpful point of reference, but I bought a GS645S recently and also own a Canon Canonet QL17 G-III. Maybe that has a similar rangefinder to your Yashica, I don't know. In any case, the viewfinder in the GS645S feels quite a bit larger, which is nice. The rangefinder spot is, I would say, actually fairly bright and large enough and is at least as good as the Canon's. There is one caveat though: I was surprised that it seems to be very dependent on how I hold the camera to my eye. If I don't look at it the right way, the patch essentially disappears. So I find myself moving the camera around, hunting to find the best view of the patch. That's not something I've noticed on the Canonet. It's not ideal, but it's workable. I'm waiting for my first scans, so there's a chance I may revise this opinion, but overall I'd say it's adequate but not amazing.

Wow. Not only is the patch tiny and lacking in contrast ... but it actually disappears too.

Might start looking at alternatives I think

 

[macfred]

Dean, you should also think about the GA645 series with autofocus - I have the GA645 with the EBC Fujinon 60mm and the GA645Wi with the 45mm lens (both f/4).
The autofocus on both cameras is ''spot on'' - although not the fastest. Exposure metering is reliable too.
Both cameras have a kind of ''AF-lock'' - you first focus with the AF, then press the MF key at the front next to the lens - the focus now is locked.
Then you can meter your exposure in the relevant part of the image (shutter button pressed halfway), re-compose your frame and press the shutter button all the way down.
A little quirky, isn't it ? If you're used to it, it will work perfect for you. I write this because it's not in the manual.

 

[dean-g]

Dean, you should also think about the GA645 series with autofocus - I have the GA645 with the EBC Fujinon 60mm and the GA645Wi with the 45mm lens (both f/4).
The autofocus on both cameras is ''spot on'' - although not the fastest. Exposure metering is reliable too.
Both cameras have a kind of ''AF-lock'' - you first focus with the AF, then press the MF key at the front next to the lens - the focus now is locked.
Then you can meter your exposure in the relevant part of the image (shutter button pressed halfway), re-compose your frame and press the shutter button all the way down.
A little quirky, isn't it ? If you're used to it, it will work perfect for you. I write this because it's not in the manual.

That’s a really cool workaround and seems pretty simple/quick to do.

I’ll check out the GA645. I may be what I go for in the end I think. I’ve pretty much given up on the GS645S as the more I read about it the more it worries me Still, I’ll go and have a good look at the second hand places soon and see if I can pick them up and actually try them.

Thanks

 

[dean-g]

Dean, you should also think about the GA645 series with autofocus - I have the GA645 with the EBC Fujinon 60mm and the GA645Wi with the 45mm lens (both f/4).
The autofocus on both cameras is ''spot on'' - although not the fastest. Exposure metering is reliable too.
Both cameras have a kind of ''AF-lock'' - you first focus with the AF, then press the MF key at the front next to the lens - the focus now is locked.
Then you can meter your exposure in the relevant part of the image (shutter button pressed halfway), re-compose your frame and press the shutter button all the way down.
A little quirky, isn't it ? If you're used to it, it will work perfect for you. I write this because it's not in the manual.

Hello. I ended up going down this path and buying a GA645i from eBay Japan. Very nice camera indeed! Amazingly light with a very contrasty and sharp lens with basically no distortion. It's going to make a nice alternative to my heavy Bronica EC-TL

The method you outlined for an alternative to AEL works perfectly. Thanks!

One issue I am having though, is that the last shot on each roll looks like it has been exposed to light. Please see attached images. It's happened with 3 different rolls. With the 3rd roll I took it to a different lab to be developed just to discount the lab variable and the same thing occurred.

I'm pretty sure I know why this is happening but I could be wrong. The "End Seal" part of the film is impossible to pull out to seal the roll of film. It's very tightly sandwiched between the film and the only way you can pull it out if to raise pull some of the actual film up and back ... only then can you pull out the "End Seal" paper part that you use to seal the roll. I think doing this exposes some of shot 16 to light. I'm pretty sure that's what's happening. These were all with Portra 400.

Can I ask ... is the end seal easy to pull out on your camera? It's very easy on my Bronica and GW690iii. But on this camera it's impossible. I still have a couple fo weeks to unconditionally return it if I want.

Other than this I've been super happy with the camera.

Cheers.

 

[Huss]

..

I'm pretty sure I know why this is happening but I could be wrong. The "End Seal" part of the film is impossible to pull out to seal the roll of film. It's very tightly sandwiched between the film and the only way you can pull it out if to raise pull some of the actual film up and back ... only then can you pull out the "End Seal" paper part that you use to seal the roll. I think doing this exposes some of shot 16 to light. I'm pretty sure that's what's happening. These were all with Portra 400.

Can I ask ... is the end seal easy to pull out on your camera? It's very easy on my Bronica and GW690iii. But on this camera it's impossible. I still have a couple fo weeks to unconditionally return it if I want.

Other than this I've been super happy with the camera. View attachment 285238 View attachment 285239 View attachment 285240

Cheers.

I don't think it is that. Have you ever developed your own 120 film? When you load it onto the reel you have to unwind quite a bit of backing paper before you get to the actual film. You would also see edge fogging if what you say is possible. But you pretty much just see a straight-ish line.
I think there is something wrong with your camera. The easiest way to tell is to unload it in a dark bag or darkroom so it doesn't matter if you unroll it while trying to seal the end. Then if you still see this issue - camera problem.

 

[dean-g]

Thanks for the info.

No, I have never developed my own 120. Only 35mm. It looks like my theory was wrong then and it's something else.

I'll try what you said and see what happens.

Cheers.

 

[MattKing]

I don't see any sign of any edge printing on that negative, which says to me that the image is too close to the end of the film.
Which usually means that the film has been wound too far before the back is closed prior to the first frame.
Unless the problem is with the frame spacing itself.
Can we see an image of the first few frames of the roll, which shows the edge printing and the spacing between frames?

 

[dean-g]

Hi Matt.

Thank you for responding.

I switched off data printing on that roll, but here's some consecutive ones from the previous roll with the edge printing.

To show the space between frames I'll need to take an image of the actual entire strip.

Cheers.