....
The Bronica is what I use more than any of the other dozen or so cameras that I own. I have an AE-II prism (the metering of which works well but I almost never use it, favoring some form of handheld meter) and the Speed Grip E. The grip helps me balance the camera, I like it better than a crank, it puts my shutter finger in a familiar position, and it has a hotshoe which I use very often for a wireless trigger. The thumb winder on the grip is two throws per frame advance. I have no idea why the engineers couldnt gear this thing for a single throw. Im so used to it now that it doesnt really matter.
...
It's not too bad with a waist-level finder and 110mm f/2.8 - I'll happily walk all day with that on the L-grip. It's no Hasselblad 500c but it can be pretty portable; just be aware that the eye-level prism finders are about the size and weight of a 35mm SLR.
You want a 6x7 cinder block? Try a Linhof Technika 70.
I also have an RB67 system which is also great for field work. I haven't tried to use it as a street camera. The things holding me back from using it as a street camera are weight and 10 shots per roll of 120.
I've had bad luck with lenses on the Bronica system. Once the shutter goes you need a whole new lens and repairs can be more costly than another second hand lens. Parts are no longer available.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
That's why i stress the benefit of interchangeable film backs -- you can change to a fresh roll of film very, very quickly.
And i always thought that one would NEVER hang any pro camera from the neck. Ouch!! Nor from the shoulder. Ouch!!
I always make sure cameras are hung on the opposite shoulder, so the camera rests firmly against the torso. In that way, at least two support points are ensured.
My dad loved the lenes on his press 70, but the damn transport system was so unreliable - and that camera with the 3 lens set up was HEAVY (he made me carry the 3 series Gitzo around on outings when I was a kid)It's not too bad with a waist-level finder and 110mm f/2.8 - I'll happily walk all day with that on the L-grip. It's no Hasselblad 500c but it can be pretty portable; just be aware that the eye-level prism finders are about the size and weight of a 35mm SLR.
You want a 6x7 cinder block? Try a Linhof Technika 70.
You can also get a 645 back for a Hasselblad if you are so inclined. (And I think there's one for the RB 67 too, if you want the biggest, heaviest 645 camera on earth. (Well no, come to think of it, there are 645 roll film backs for 4x5 cameras. For that take an 8x10 camera, put a 4x5 reducing back on it, and then use a 645 under-the-ground glass Calumet RF holder...)
Yesterday I visited a camera store and I held a Bronica ETR...I was expecting a bigger camera, definitely well made but it felt...primitive.
Also they wanted £299 which is too much for my taste.
I assume I should get the Mamiya Pro or better Pro TL, but its design (wave of plastic) doesn't warm me up, it looks like the dashboard of the 1993 Mondeo.
It's a pity a lot of people warn me about the Super, to be honest I liked that camera more and I don't understand the drawback in comparison to the Pro, besides age.
(And I think there's one for the RB 67 too, if you want the biggest, heaviest 645 camera on earth.
YAnd I think there's one for the RB 67 too, if you want the biggest, heaviest 645 camera on earth.
I do use that back and it's wonderful. You can shoot vertical 6x4.5 without any kind of neck ache. Try that with most 6x4.5 SLRs...
And it'll be one of (or THE) sharpest 645 cameras around.
I'm not so sure, in theory a lens specifically designed for the 6x4.5 format would be sharper. But i don't complain about the results using the RB67 and the 6x4.5 format! In any case, a 50mm lens becomes a "32mm lens" (in 35mm format terms) in 6x4.5, and a 90mm lens becomes a "56mm" lens; both really usable focal lengths. And with no vignetting at all, of course.
Also, i have cropped many times from 6x7 to about 6x4.5 and enlargements were just fine.
If the format is using the "sharper" center area, I don't see why it actually wouldn't be sharper edge to edge (the 4.5cm width).
Because the "sharp center" rule of thumb is not always true; depending on the lens designer, a lens can be optimized to have (for example) good center and good extreme definition at the expense of the middle sector; or for example good edge and middle sector at the expense of central definition, etc.
This is what has happened, for example, for some FX (full frame 35mm) lenses that have been tested on APS-C digital format with unimpressive results, but when mounted on a full frame 35mm DSLR, they do show very good performance.
Of course, this is just armchair analysis, at the end, as I said, the RB lenses work just fine for 6x4.5.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?