Photographers who shoot Fuji GW690 i/ii/iii

[RoboRepublic]

This is my 6x9 work done with a Horseman:
View attachment 260252 View attachment 260253 View attachment 260254 View attachment 260251

Very interesting, Who shot the first three?
Some of these are quite stunning, are these from the Horsemen press-style 6x9 cameras?
What focal length are you shooting in your images?
Thank you for sharing!

 

[RoboRepublic]

I have a desert landscape photo by Adam Bartos posted on a wall in my kitchen. I truly love it and I'm convinced it was shot 6x9. So now I want this camera.

I do like his work!

 

[ic-racer]

Very interesting, Who shot the first three?
Some of these are quite stunning, are these from the Horsemen press-style 6x9 cameras?
What focal length are you shooting in your images?
Thank you for sharing!

Look up Tod Papageorge.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Recently I acquired Eyes Wide Open, 100 years of Leica Photography. While I got it for the stupendously large collection in one place of what was shot with a Leica, looking at the images not once was I "bothered" it's all from a Leica. Images speak for themselves, some helped me "discover" a new photographer, some proved to be same "sosoes" as expected, but none rang a bell: shit this was shot with a Leica? Even in the days when I was kneeling before Ansel's photographs every morning and before going to bed, never did I see the camera he used, just the detail, brilliance, composition, visual impact.

BTW, it is a large, but worthy book. It will also help holding your house down when a twister comes through.

 

[Huss]

Look up Tod Papageorge.

My ode to Tod P. Shot with a GW690III

 

[mshchem]

I've have the W and SW versions. I've shot miles of film with them. Biggest issue for me is the noise. It's not the shutter, impossible to take street candid. I've had people hear me from across the street. Still it's a great camera with phenomenal glass. It's a great, modern version, of a banquet camera.

 

[donakello]

It seems like a reasonably specialised camera: I'd like to try one for some colour smalltown landscapes, i.e. street without the people, on a tripod, composed slowly. I hear they don't have a proper bulb setting though but would probably manage with T.

As far as I have read, Dutch photographer Otto Snoek used one, not sure which: the images I've seen are mostly street scenes with daylight and flash, busy frames with lots happening. The setup must have been huge with the flash, and he seemed to get very close.

http://www.ottosnoek.com/

 

[mshchem]

The proof is in the prints. Basically a really really nice W or SW large format lens with a rangefinder and a roll back. Like a 4x5 Press camera with a 135mm lens, you always have the option of shooting wide and cropping. I have a G617, it's a blast too. Old, no batteries, just springs, levers, and gears.

 

[DAVID GEORGE WATSON]

So you need to see what the camera is capable of in the hands of some great photographer, yet it sounds like you are making a purchasing decision? If this is so, then I don't understand. Any camera is capable of results that go from crap to stardom and everywhere in between. I'm not sure if I'm talking down or at since it is not news images are made by photographer not camera.

Yep! It's all in the head!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I've been tracking shots posted from this camera for a bit on the web, and I haven't seen anything that makes me think "wow, such a unique shot!"
Something unexpected for such a large negative and also, is something quite unlike my experience looking at photos out of RZ67/Pentax 67/Hasselblad V/Rolleiflex

I wonder if the aspect ratio is too close to 135, a format I seem fundamentally disinterested in these days (I'm sure I'll be back soon enough). Or it's possible I'm looking at work I don't find appealing?

I wanted to poll this forum for a well known photographer or two who has shot this camera with interesting results.

I had one and was under \whelmed by its built quality but the large negatives where great;stuck with the Hasselblad!

 

[gone]

6x9 is the same ratio as 135, what you get from 6x9 is smoother tonality. Print enlargements are where you'll see the difference, not necessarily w/ online scans. My neg scans usually look grainy, but the enlarged prints are grain free. The Fuji lens has very nice IQ, is plenty sharp enough and doesn't flare. But it's not going to image like a Summicron or Heliar.

The big thing to get used to is the size. You need to hold one in your hands to appreciate how much bigger this camera is compared to 35mm. That's something that didn't work for me, and I found using a folder for 6x9 gave me a much better selection of lenses.

The 3 elements make nice portraits, Tessar types are really sharp, and Heliars are probably the ultimate for portraits and 3D imaging. They usually have an ultimate sort of price tag attached to them. I have landscape shots from an old Bessa 6x6 folder w/ an uncoated Heliar that look like Leica negs.

 

[bags27]

It's a fun camera, especially if you bought it before the massive price rise in all things MF. I love pulling the negatives out of the soup: they look like postcards! And, since it's all mechanical, I use it as a "weatherbeater" for landscapes.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I really like the extended rectangle of 6x9, and have not only optional 6x9 roll film backs for my 4x5 cameras, but also GW690ii and GW690iii cameras. If I want a 6X7-ish image instead, I just crop. I do have a Pentax 6x7 kit too, which is especially nice for telephoto work, along with full 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film systems. I would have gravitated to 5x7 sheet film if it had been more commonly available in color. But I can always crop 8x10 images narrower too if necessary. It's all good. What I particularly like about the Fuji RF's is that I can shoot them either on tripod or handheld, which is really nice if the wind is howling, or in a blizzard, or if I just need to work really fast and spontaneous. And so far, they've held up well in really bad mountain weather. These Fuji RF cameras also have superb lenses.

But squarish Hassies etc deliver just too small an image area for my own enlargement needs. 6X9 has twice the area as a 6x6 equipped with a typical 645 rectangle back. Not, not as nice as enlarging from full 4x5, but a reasonable convenience or compromise format. Roll film is a lot cheaper to shoot too.

Big? That's all relative. A Fuji 6x9 RF is the smallest camera I ordinarily work with. It's no heavier than many 35mm SLR's; lighter than some. Fits in a reasonably small shoulder bag. Handholds better than my NIkon, and I have unusually small hands!

 

[bags27]

I really like the extended rectangle of 6x9, and have not only optional 6x9 roll film backs for my 4x5 cameras, but also GW690ii and GW690iii cameras. If I want a 6X7-ish image instead, I just crop. I do have a Pentax 6x7 kit too, which is especially nice for telephoto work, along with full 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film systems. I would have gravitated to 5x7 sheet film if it had been more commonly available in color. But I can always crop 8x10 images narrower too if necessary. It's all good. What I particularly like about the Fuji RF's is that I can shoot them either on tripod or handheld, which is really nice if the wind is howling, or in a blizzard, or if I just need to work really fast and spontaneous. And so far, they've held up well in really bad mountain weather. These Fuji RF cameras also have superb lenses.

But squarish Hassies etc deliver just too small an image area for my own enlargement needs. 6X9 has twice the area as a 6x6 equipped with a typical 645 rectangle back. Not, not as nice as enlarging from full 4x5, but a reasonable convenience or compromise format. Roll film is a lot cheaper to shoot too.

Big? That's all relative. A Fuji 6x9 RF is the smallest camera I ordinarily work with. It's no heavier than many 35mm SLR's. Fits in a reasonably small shoulder bag.
Handholds better than my NIkon, and I have unusually small hands!

Great point! It is so easy to hold and carry...and to shoot handheld.

 

[MattKing]

I'd love to have the relatively rare, found almost entirely within Japan, 6x8 version.
I like the aspect ratio.
And I like how the nine 6x8 negatives fit in a single Printfile page!

 

[DREW WILEY]

There are plenty of 6x8's for sale, and the Japanese dealers I've dealt with not only ship fast, but also carry the best selection of 6X7's and 6x9's too. Prices are somewhat higher for all of them this year compared to prior years.

 

[reddesert]

The 1:1.5 ratio of the 6x9 format can yield a wide though not-quite-panoramic perspective, I think you see this in some of Tod Papageorge's images. It's not specifically Fuji, but Bill Owens used a Brooks Veriwide 6x9 camera (6x9 with a very wide angle lens) for many of the interiors in the book "Suburbia." For ex, the famous tupperware party picture has a wide aspect ratio and wide angle perspective. Owens mentions his setup (Pentax 6x7 and Brooks Veriwide, and a bare bulb flash) in the notes to "Suburbia." The cameras themselves aren't necessarily interesting - obviously his personality and access to subjects have more to do with the images - but his thoughts on why he used the medium format are. Towards the end of this interview: https://americansuburbx.com/2012/04/theory-interview-bill-owens.html

"RH: What other books influenced your working style?

BO: The Life Library of Photography (1970). In one of the books the editors compared two photographs of a hardhat construction worker. One made with 35mm and a second with 2-1/4. The 35mm image appears menacing while the 2-1/4 looks “documentary.” There are more tones and texture, and it communicates a bigger meaning. It convinced me to jump to the 2-1/4 format. For me it was critical to have the subtlety of the flash fill and bare bulb flash with the Pentax 6 x 7 negative, a combination that brought out detail and depth. This made the pictures open and non-threatening. Had I shot Suburbia with 35mm it would have communicated a very different meaning."

 

[DREW WILEY]

The 65 mm lens version of these "Texas Leicas" is just too wide for me; the 90mm lens version is ideal. But there is a choice.

 

[250swb]

I've owned both the GSW and GW and eventually sold them simply because with medium and large format I prefer the tighter '6x6 or'4x5' look (yes I know you can crop 6x9 but that's not the point) or go with full panorama. Nothing against the cameras themselves and the best lenses you could wish for on any camera. But I didn't leave the fold, I replaced them with a GW617 III (6x7), much rarer and pricier but for me worth the switch.

 

[Alex Benjamin]

Shot this one with the GW690.

View media item 64027

 

[GregY]

I have to agree with those who say the camera is irrelevant to the image. The way you've framed your statment RoboRepublic is comparable to saying "I don't like H Cartier Bresson's photos, so Leica can't be very good. " The well respected 'cowboy' photographer Jay Dusard has made lots of fine images with a Fuji 6x9, including his work as set photographer on the movie "The Horse Whisperer."

The OP statement reminds me of this quote attributed to Chet Atkins:
"Someone told Chet Atkins, "Man, that guitar sure sounds good!"
Chet set the guitar down on a chair and asked him, "Ok, how does it sound now?"

(image below. Fuji GSW690iii, Tri-X)

 

[Tom Kershaw]

(image below. Fuji GSW690iii, Tri-X)

Greg, a very impressive image.

 

[destroya]

I have a gw690 and a gsw680. both are great. when I do long hikes I can take both and still have a good size neg to print. some of my best shots have come from the gsw680 for some reason. at first I thought it might be to wide, but in the back country of yosemite or tahoe, it works great. the 6x8 format feels right to me, not quite as wide as the 6x9 but as Drew said, much wider, and for me, a better feel over 6x6, even though I have a 6x6 camera.

john

 

[GregY]

Yes D, I agree... I used the Fuji 6x8 & i think it fills a sweet spot. If Fuji made a 6x8 folder i'd buy it in a heartbeat. These days the Plaubel Makina 670 is my traveller of choice (we know why). The image below is with the Fuji 680iii

 

[qqphot]

It's sad, but I suppose a lot of people today are shooting for online consumption like Instagram, where subtle gradations of tone and certainly high resolution are lost, which would make shooting a 35mm 2:3 format negative just as good and less hassle compared to a much larger 2:3 format negative with a bigger, heavier camera.