Fuji GW 690 Prices Japan

What the heck happened to GW690 prices recently? They jumped up 30 percent and Im in Canada, so I wont be affected by tariffs if from Japan. Im watching these cameras, trying to get myself another copy of the 6x9 camera since I sold my last one 4 years ago. What used to be 800 Canadian for a Mk 1 camera, you now see them at 1200-1500. These cameras are not worth that price in my opinion, because its a fixed lens camera. And they all need servicing after 999 rolls. Sure it takes great pics, but when I can get a Pentax 67 camera with removable lenses, etc for less, I just can't see why these Fuji's are commanding so much. And there's lots of them out there.

These are a new cult item

BTW, I wouldn't trade my ultra reliable enormous negative Fujis for a 67. I admit the 67 is cool.

I have bought my Texas Leica ten years ago and I will never sell it.

Used to be able to buy them for $500 all day long. Same thing happened to Mamiya 6, they are very expensive now too.

braxus said:

And they all need servicing after 999 rolls.

Click to expand...

Fuji only recommend serving at that point given it was sold as a professional camera, and professionals rely on their cameras to put bread on the table. It doesn't expire at that point, the counter rolls over and starts again and the camera may be good for another 1250 rolls. Given you have no idea how many times the counter has rolled over without servicing choosing one with a low shutter count is meaningless, it may have just done it. The caveat is that an otherwise pristine camera from Japan may have had a hard life sat on a shelf given temperature and humidity and make the 999 service seem optimistic. And complaining it's a fixed lens camera and therefore not worth the price I think misses the point, it's the superb lens that makes the camera.

Indeed, engineering is about trade-offs, no other camera comes close to being as robust, "compact" (hard to say with a straight face given it's size), and lightweight while being able to produce negatives this big.
The drawback is not being able to change lenses, not being able to look through the lens, I feel they could have included a lightmeter, that shouldn't have impacted that much.
Would love a Mk3 version of the GSW (I have the Mk1), because the hood and shutter lock are welcome additions (have them in my backpack when hiking or biking), but not at 1kEUR+(including shipping and taxes) . I think I paid 950 for my GW Mk.3 in Germany, and I found the GSW Mk.1 local in NL for 700, like a year or two ago.

Jarno said:

Indeed, engineering is about trade-offs, no other camera comes close to being as robust, "compact" (hard to say with a straight face given it's size), and lightweight while being able to produce negatives this big.

Click to expand...

The Kodak Medalist would like to have a word with you. More robust, smaller, and 3 ounces less weight. 6x9 negatives.

After that list, the Fuji certainly has a lot of advantages, or at least differences

Dan Daniel said:

The Kodak Medalist would like to have a word with you. More robust, smaller, and 3 ounces less weight. 6x9 negatives.

After that list, the Fuji certainly has a lot of advantages, or at least differences

Click to expand...

This camera was made in 1940s, is it correct?
Is it as sharp as GW690?

Is it good in color? No color shift? No yellow or blue tint?

mshchem said:

BTW, I wouldn't trade my ultra reliable enormous negative Fujis for a 67. I admit the 67 is cool.

Click to expand...

Do what I did. I bought a GW670III about week ago.

Dan Daniel said:

The Kodak Medalist would like to have a word with you. More robust, smaller, and 3 ounces less weight. 6x9 negatives.

After that list, the Fuji certainly has a lot of advantages, or at least differences

Click to expand...

I bought my second Medalist about a month ago and sold it a couple of weeks ago and bought a GW670 III and it's a joy to use compared to the Medalist. Medalist has a great lens but the operation is nuts and can't seem to connect with it. Although it is the coolest looking camera.

campy51 said:

I bought my second Medalist about a month ago and sold it a couple of weeks ago and bought a GW670 III and it's a joy to use compared to the Medalist. Medalist has a great lens but the operation is nuts and can't seem to connect with it. Although it is the coolest looking camera.

Click to expand...

Like I said, things change after robustness, size, and weight with the Medalist vs Fuji! As more of a handheld view camera rather than a street shooter, the Medalist is usable in its idiosyncratic way. For anything resembling most any other handheld camera you have ever used, the Fuji is the choice.

I bought my Fuji GW690iii for €450 in 2019, it was advertised as "almost new, barely used" and when it arrived I swear it really was "new", only 3-4 films put through it, so for once the seller's description was accurate. It's a classic, I love using it, pity about the incredible noise of the shutter linkage mechanism (leaf shutter itself is whisper-quiet).

And the biggest plus of all: no battery! A true "photographer's camera".

Having said all that, I still prefer my Mamiya 7ii + 80mm lens, despite the fact it has a (not very standard) battery. Both cameras have great lenses.

Unfortunately the Fuji 6x9 is caught in the same Youtube influencer vortex as the Makina Plaubel, and originally the Mamiya 7. When the M7 prices skyrocketed, the Plaubel became the affordable cool alternative. When they started to skyrocket too, the Fuji’s were next, or something like that.

Meanwhile Hasselblad 500C’s - and even more so the RB67, both surely the most capable all round medium format cameras ever, remain relatively cheap it seems. But maybe there’s a lesson there for us learned photographers - surely a 500c or whatever would get the job done more or less as well (or better) with the right slow speed film stock?

I don’t own either camera (I own 2 x M7 bought years ago) but I’d guess a 500c w/ 80mm would fit in the same size camera bag as a Texas Leica, albeit oriented sideways. It might be a little heavier esp if you use a pentaprism finder, but unless one is making very large pano prints from drum scans or > 20 inch wide darkroom prints direct from the negs on a perfectly aligned enlarger with a pristine App-Rodagon N 105mm lens, will the format difference or the nominal differences between a Fuji EBC lens and a Carl Zeiss lens be meaningfully visible?

I’m guessing the answer to the above is ‘probably not.’

The 500C has a whole range of widely available excellent glass in a range of focal lengths too!

Another option is a Horseman with a 90mm lens and 6x9 back. Heavier, but you get movements if you ever want them. There are Horsemans going for around $300.

My Fuji GW690 was $500 in 2011. It died 12 years later of shutter grease and no one could repair it.