Pentax 67II vs. Bronica GS-1 - I can't keep both. Which one should I sell?

[Steven Lee]

I was on KEH earlier this week and I was pleasantly surprised to see how affordable GS-1 platform is, so I've added two more lenses to my kit: the 200mm and 250mm. They were in EX condition, around $400 for both.

When they arrived, I've decided to set up a test scene and carefully shoot it on all GS-1 lenses I have, using mirror lock-up and the remote. My observation of the results is that all PG-series lenses are easily competitive with their Hasselblad counterparts. Razor sharp wide open in the middle, as examined with a 10x lope or on the 8,000x8,000 scans. Looks like Bronica sacrificed some usability (varying sized front elements and corresponding filter sizes) for optical excellence, and their lenses are a bit shorter than Hasselblad's.

Speaking of unpleasant surprises, I could not get rid of shake blur with the 250mm lens at longer shutter speeds. I used MLU, I tried two different tripods, I even moved the camera to the back yard where I placed the tripod on concrete, and yet - when shutter speeds drop below 1/60s or so, I clearly see some shake blur in the images and it gets really visible at speeds of 1/4 and slower. That's a headscratcher.

 

[abruzzi]

the only expensive part of the GS-1 system is the 80mm, and thats just some sellers equating scarcity with value. A few months before I bought my GS-1, the 80s were selling for ~$200. One I bought in, someone jacked up their price to $1250, and ever since, ebay sellers have been try getting over a grand (but I've never seen one sell for that much.)

 

[Tony-S]

the only expensive part of the GS-1 system is the 80mm, and thats just some sellers equating scarcity with value. A few months before I bought my GS-1, the 80s were selling for ~$200. One I bought in, someone jacked up their price to $1250, and ever since, ebay sellers have been try getting over a grand (but I've never seen one sell for that much.)

The only two I don’t have are the 80mm and 500mm. No plans to acquire them.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The only two I don’t have are the 80mm and 500mm. No plans to acquire them.

Come on! Who is going to support the used camera equipment market? It is time for you to pull your weight! Get GAS!

 

[halfaman]

There is about 6 years between the two, so the screen technology probably did not change that much. There is a balance between brightness and focus-snap for manual focus, and that depends a lot on the designers preference at the time. I had the P67, but never tried the P67II, I did not find the older P67 screen any better than the GS1.

Ok, here is my best effort to compare the viewfinders of the Pentax 67II and the Bronica GS-1 with Rick Oleson BrigthScreen MPD screen. Both cameras have their respectively 200 mm lens mounted and closed to f/5.6. The photos were taken with the same camera, lens and exposure (Canon 5D MkII and Canon EF 50 mm f/1.8 MkI; exposure of f/1.8, 1/8 seconds with ISO 1600). The vignetting is caused by the position of the DLSR on the viewfinder, and part but not all of the color balance difference is because I set the Canon white balance to "auto".

Bronica GS-1

Pentax 67 II

Conclusions:
The central patch of Rick Oleson screen is as bright as the Pentax, it has even better contrast and definition. So my impressions of dim viewfinder on the Bronica are caused by the rest of the screen which is less bright for some reason than Pentax didn't have. I have also noticed than Pentax microprisms are bigger and more obvious than Rick Oleson's which makes for me easier to focus.

 

[manfrominternet]

Ok, here is my best effort to compare the viewfinders of the Pentax 67II and the Bronica GS-1 with Rick Oleson BrigthScreen MPD screen. Both cameras have their respectively 200 mm lens mounted and closed to f/5.6. The photos were taken with the same camera, lens and exposure (Canon 5D MkII and Canon EF 50 mm f/1.8 MkI; exposure of f/1.8, 1/8 seconds with ISO 1600). The vignetting is caused by the position of the DLSR on the viewfinder, and part but not all of the color balance difference is because I set the Canon white balance to "auto".

Bronica GS-1
View attachment 348382



Pentax 67 II
View attachment 348383


Conclusions:
The central patch of Rick Oleson screen is as bright as the Pentax, it has even better contrast and definition. So my impressions of dim viewfinder on the Bronica are caused by the rest of the screen which is less bright for some reason than Pentax didn't have. I have also noticed than Pentax microprisms are bigger and more obvious than Rick Oleson's which makes for me easier to focus.

This is terrific! Thank you so much for uploading these!

Since I have the grid-only focusing screen for my Pentax 67II (without any focusing aids), I’m wondering if I should just buy the Oleson BrightScreen MPD (the one with the diagonal split image in a microprism collar), instead of shelling out $500+ for the same genuine Pentax equivalent. I just wonder if the metering will be the same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Any input/suggestions out there on this?

Also, regarding the Bronica PG lenses, I notice that they develop haze rather quickly. I found some haze in my Bronica PG 100mm and PG 50mm lens elements that I luckily caught early; I had to carefully disassemble these lenses and do a fair bit of cleaning. It’s a good reminder to be sure to store ALL of your lenses in their proper case/bag with one or two of those silica desiccant packets to keep everything nice and dry, and not just out in the open like I idiotically did.

 

[Steven Lee]

@halfaman You may want to try the G-type screen for GS-1. It is a simple matte screen without focusing aids. It is brighter than the screen you have. I actually prefer it to the Oleson and yours for slow and critical focus, like shallow DOF portraits on a tripod.

 

[tom williams]

@halfaman You may want to try the G-type screen for GS-1. It is a simple matte screen without focusing aids. It is brighter than the screen you have. I actually prefer it to the Oleson and yours for slow and critical focus, like shallow DOF portraits on a tripod.

Steven, the GS-1 user manual component chart indicates that there are 7 'G' screens - which one are you thinking of? The image below is from the user manual. I assumed that I had the 'Matte' screen, which was quite dull (even after cleaning).

 

[Steven Lee]

@tom williams Mine is Matte (standard type) and it came in a box which simply said "G" on it, so I assumed it is the type name. Judging by the photo posted by @halfaman above, it is brighter than his because the entire screen is as bright as the center spot.

 

[itsdoable]

Ok, here is my best effort to compare the viewfinders of the Pentax 67II and the Bronica GS-1 with Rick Oleson BrigthScreen MPD screen. Both cameras have their respectively 200 mm lens mounted and closed to f/5.6. The photos were taken with the same camera, lens and exposure (Canon 5D MkII and Canon EF 50 mm f/1.8 MkI; exposure of f/1.8, 1/8 seconds with ISO 1600). The vignetting is caused by the position of the DLSR on the viewfinder, and part but not all of the color balance difference is because I set the Canon white balance to "auto".
<snip>...
Conclusions:
The central patch of Rick Oleson screen is as bright as the Pentax, it has even better contrast and definition. So my impressions of dim viewfinder on the Bronica are caused by the rest of the screen which is less bright for some reason than Pentax didn't have. I have also noticed than Pentax microprisms are bigger and more obvious than Rick Oleson's which makes for me easier to focus.

Is the difference the same with a 100mm/105mm lens at 2.8?

Screens and Fresnel's are designed for specific lenses (or cone's of light), usually the standard lens. Vignetting on the focus screen is cause by the diverging cone of light from the lens, the corners have light diverging away from your eye (which is at the center), which makes it darker looking. The Fresnel component of the screen redirects the light to your eye, but that is usually optimized fo the most common lens. Longer lenses with a narrower f-stops have a narrower cone of light, which gets over-powered by the fresnel, causing the corners to look darker.

The focus aids usually have the same brightness on all screens (provided they are not blacking out) because they are pass through prisms.The matte surface is where the difference in brightness occurs, which is a function of the Fresnel power, and the texture of the matte surface. A general rule of thumb is that the texture that created the brightest screen (usually a lensmatic or prismatic texture) dose not reproduce the out-of-focus areas accurately, and often has lower contrast or focus pop. It's always a bit of a balancing act.

 

[norphot]

If you have metering trouble, maybe the rotary finder could help - I believe it has both spot and average metering, though haven't testet it myself.

Re. GS-1 lenses, I think they are all plenty sharp (calling them faulty makes no sense) - the normal ones (100mm/110mm) are basically copies of the Zeiss Planar. I even have the 80mm, which is a updated modern design, but compared to the 100/110mm via GS1/NEX adapter on a Sony A7, I think it only gains contrast (fine detail is about the same).

 

[braxus]

Pentax 67II is nowadays unrepairable and each body cost around $3000. Mine is broken with no Pentax official technical service or independent shop willing to even touch it.

There's two repair shops in North America that will repair the Pentax 67II, but the repair isn't guaranteed in the sense it can be repaired. They do their best, unless its a circuit board issue needing replacement. The magnets in the shutter on the P67II make it unreliable as well, compared to the version 1. But when I did have the P67II, I loved using it, though my shutter was not reliable. Im back to the version 1.

 

[halfaman]

There's two repair shops in North America that will repair the Pentax 67II, but the repair isn't guaranteed in the sense it can be repaired. They do their best, unless its a circuit board issue needing replacement. The magnets in the shutter on the P67II make it unreliable as well, compared to the version 1. But when I did have the P67II, I loved using it, though my shutter was not reliable. Im back to the version 1.

As one technician explained to me, the camera calibration requieres a software that any shop not involved with Pentax would have, so it is most likely impossible to guarantee that any issue affecting the main functions is really repaired. On the other hand, Pentax discontinnued the camera and they don't service any parts to official shops so they automatically reject any repair enquiry.

Pentax 67 was also an alternative I considered because they rely far less in electronics so there is some hope to get them repaired, but they are also expensive these days. More than a Bronica GS-1 for sure.

 

[halfaman]

After one year, I am really satisfied with the Bronica GS-1, except for one thing: Film backs. So far I had four 120 film backs. Two of them malfunctioning from day 1 and returned, the third died yesterday after 5 months (frame counter doesn"t work). Only one is sill working. Besides the disturbance and waste of film, each one cost $200-250. It is no peanuts.

Is this just bad luck or it is a known current issue of this system? I am in love with the image quality, to the extent of considering the sell of my whole Pentax 67II gear... if film backs are reliable.

 

[abruzzi]

I've bought one back that didn't work, and the seller refunded me for it. I have four others that have worked fine. The one odd thing isall of them are broken where you slide the box top in. The plastic bit broke off. Fortunately it doesn't affect the other functionality.

 

[craigclu]

I have both systems. I'd put the optics on an equal field. The Pentax glass can vary from one example to the next. I had many P67 lenses go through my hands (new and used) over the years and could discern slight variations, especially in the wider focal lengths. 2 of 3 55's were not as sharp as the third, for instance. I had a new 45mm that was not sharp, too. In my small samples, I've had most every GS-1 lens and they've all been very good, but this could be just good fortune as I've had very few multiples to compare any variations. I like the changeable backs of the GS-1 over the P67, if that matters to you. I had a P67II body that went bad and never replaced it. As I've gotten older, I actually am using MF rangefinders for most of my duties as they are so portable and require less serious support pods, too.

 

[Tony-S]

After one year, I am really satisfied with the Bronica GS-1, except for one thing: Film backs. So far I had four 120 film backs. Two of them malfunctioning from day 1 and returned, the third died yesterday after 5 months (frame counter doesn"t work). Only one is sill working. Besides the disturbance and waste of film, each one cost $200-250. It is no peanuts.

Is this just bad luck or it is a known current issue of this system? I am in love with the image quality, to the extent of considering the sell of my whole Pentax 67II gear... if film backs are reliable.

Mine are all still functioning fine (120/220, 6x7, 6x6, 6x4.5). Perhaps I've been lucky.

 

[reddesert]

I don't think Bronica backs are a known weak point, but they have extra interlocks between body and back, which means another mechanism that can cause issues. For me, I have some that work (albeit not heavily used); one where a pin that communicates between the back and body occasionally hangs up - it can be cleared by taking the back off and poking the pin with a paper clip, and probably just needs to be cleaned; and a jammed one that came with some other stuff. I intend to take apart the jammed one sometime and see if I can clear it. This is a good video that shows the internals of the wind mechanism:


220 backs are typically much less expensive than 120 backs, if you are willing to experiment with using 120 in them.

 

[halfaman]

Ok. I will assume bad luck.. for the last time! New film back ordered and I will check with a local guy that repairs only mechanical issues in photo gear if he is willing to take a look to my faulty back (he has a GS-1 too). @reddesert your video will be usefull for him, thanks.

 

[Randy Stewart]

I read in threads in this forum that Frank Marshman (aka Camera Wiz) might be a resource, but recent postings by members who used, or tried to use, Mr Marshman were discouraging. ...

Over a decade in the 1980s-90s, I used Camerawiz (Marshman) to service several Fuji GS645 folders I purchased: bellows replacement, general CLA. He did beautiful work, fairly quickly, and at a fair price. Then one of my GS645 cameras was stolen in a home burglary. When I recovered it nearly a year later, the classic problem presented was a damaged strut mechanism from being forced to close by some idiot. I sent it to Camerawiz for repair. Marshman confirmed that he would have to delay to find a part. Never heard from him or saw the camera again. So unhappily, Marshman is a "do not recommend".

 

[manfrominternet]

Just a quick question to any Bronica GS-1 users out there. I’ve had 2 Bronica GS-1 camera bodies, each with their own GS AE Finder. I sold one of them, however, BOTH consistently underexpose my negs by one full stop.

It’s making me wonder if I should really be using a 6V Silver Oxide battery instead of the 6V Energizer Alkaline (the 4LR44/A544 battery as seen in the attached photo).

Do you guys think I’ll be getting the proper exposure via the GS AE Finder if I went with a 6V Sliver Oxide battery, or will it not make any difference whatsoever?

As always, many thanks!

 

[MattKing]

The silver oxide batteries are much more likely to supply the correct voltage for a long time.
An alkaline battery will only supply the correct voltage for a portion of its life.

 

[halfaman]

So far exposure seems ok to me. I have not done a proper check, but negatives look fine and print/scan beautifully.

 

[GS1owner]

Usually it is screen fold