Source for Bronica S lenses, alternatives?

[PRS-1]

I was recently given the family's Bronica S, which my father first acquired a little over 50 years ago. It's had consistent, but very light, use. As a result, it's in beautiful condition. I very much like the the 75mm Nikkor P that's on it. However, I'd like to add a longer lens. I believe the 135 fits the S, but I'm not absolutely sure. Lenses seem hard to find, although several can be had from Japan. Does anyone have experience with auction buying from there? I don't mind the wait, if it's generally safe.

Having used it a little as a travel camera now, I'm quite taken with the waist level finder, and I'm also thinking about eventually adding a second waist level camera with more lens options. I've thought about the Mamiya C330. I handled one about a month ago and enjoyed it working with it. The Mamiya RB67 looks great, but it's going to be a little over 50% heavier than the Bronica, which might be a bit much for off tripod travel use. I think the main thing that I like about the Bronica S, aside from its fully manual and mechanical operation, is the distinctive rendering of the lens. I'd be interested to hear what others use. I don't want to pay Hasselblad prices. I've been thinking about later Bronicas, but I've been mildly put off by their electronic shutters (silly, I know).

Any thoughts on sourcing Bronica S lenses and/or on other travel SLR/TLR options would be welcome and greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[doughowk]

Don't know if the SQ lenses are backward compatible to the S series. I have the Bronica SQ-A as well as the Mamiya C330; and I use KEH.com for lenses, etc. for both cameras. And they are superb for travel while yielding excellent quality negatives.

 

[BMbikerider]

They are not backward compatible. At least without an awful amount of fine engineering work and even then the back register may not line up The 'S' series lenses had a totally different fitting, using a locking ring to hold them in place and the shutter, rather than being a leaf shutter within the lens, was focal plane built into the body.

 

[el wacho]

skip the 135mm nikkor and the komura 150mm. the consistently sharpest lens in that range is the zenzanon 150mm 3.5. i've got the normal and the multicoated and they are both as sharp as each other. ( i've owned the komura and the nikkor as well ).

 

[Nick Merritt]

The Komura 50/3.5 for the Bronica S series is very good, though I expect comparable Nikkors and Zenzanons would be a little better.

 

[tony lockerbie]

Komuras are the only ones that I know about. The 135 Nikkor is a bit ordinary, which is a shame because I like that focal length on 6x6. I'm with ElWalcho,the 150 Zenzanon is a cracker, as is the 200mm Nikkor.

 

[Alan Gales]

Just a warning. The winding gears in the S and S2 were weak and much improved on the S2a. When winding the S turn the knob without folding out the lever. When you use that fold out lever it creates more torque and you risk stripping the gears.

There were three lens lines made for the early Bronica's, Nikkor, Bronica and Komura. Generally the Nikkors were considered the sharpest followed by the Bronica and then the Komura. However, the 135mm Nikkor was soft. It may be fine to you for portraits but the as mentioned above Bronica 150mm is a fine lens for both portraits and anything else.

The lenses show up occasionally on Ebay. Most sell real cheap. I sold a real nice Bronica 150mm about a year ago and didn't even get $100.00 for it. The 40mm Nikkors are great performers also but rare. I sold mine in well used condition for $400.00.
I'm telling you this to give you a price spread.

I read where a fellow shot both an early Bronica and a later SQa. He said the later lenses were sharper but he really liked the Bokeh of the earlier lenses so he used both depending upon his subject.

I used to shoot EC's with the electronic shutters and never had any shutter problems. Don't buy the ECTL because if the meter fails so does the whole camera.

 

[Alan Gales]

At one time I owned the Nikkor 40mm, 50mm, 75mm, 135mm, 200mm and the 150mm Bronica lens.

All were fine performers except for the Nikkor 135mm being soft.

I heard quite a few times that the Bronica 80mm was also a quality lens but you really don't need that one since you own the 75mm Nikkor.

 

[Nick Merritt]

I have the Zenzanon 80/2.4 and it's really quite good. Hard to come by, I think -- the 75 Nikkor seems to be a lot more common.

 

[PRS-1]

Thanks, everyone, for the information. Alan, thanks especially. I'll just keep a watch at the auctions and see what turns up.

This wasn't the direction I was planning to go, but I have an opportunity to buy a recently CLA'd Rolleiflex in beautiful condition. It's a with a Tessar 3.5 lens. I'm afraid I wasn't able to chase down the particular model just yet. The buyer wants about $400 for it. Does that seem reasonable? My research suggests it's a good price, irrespective of which model it is. It has an eye-level finder and the whole camera looks pristine. I need to look it over more carefully to be sure.

 

[Alan Gales]

I'm not a Rolleiflex expert but a recently CLA'd pristine example of any model for $400.00 sounds like a heck of a deal. Buy it, try it and if you don't like it then flip it on here. I suspect you will like it.

 

[PRS-1]

I'm not a Rolleiflex expert but a recently CLA'd pristine example of any model for $400.00 sounds like a heck of a deal. Buy it, try it and if you don't like it then flip it on here. I suspect you will like it.

Yes, it seems like a low risk proposition. I'm leaning towards giving the Rolleiflex a go. In the meantime, thanks to your advice, I've already managed to hunt down a Bronica 150mm f/3.5, which is now wending its way to me from overseas. It wasn't expensive, and it's alleged to be in good shape. There seem to be a fair number of 50mm nikkors about, too. I haven't felt the need to go wider than 75mm, so for now I think I'll sit tight with that and the 150mm. I'm looking forward to firing off a test roll to see how the 150mm renders.

 

[Alan Gales]

I really liked my 150. The 150 and 75 were my favorites but of course I was mostly shooting portraiture.

If you see a nice 50mm Nikkor at a good price I would pick it up. Early Bronica cameras and lenses are getting harder to find. There used to be a glut of them out there.

I don't know what you shoot but if you are interested in portraiture I recommend that you pick up a set of Novatron strobes off Ebay. They come with umbrellas and stands and you have the choice of reflecting or shooting through the umbrellas depending upon how soft you want the light. The older strobes will fry a digital camera so they sell dirt cheap. You can use them with a digital camera if you own an inexpensive slave and trigger the slave with your in camera flash or a hot shoe mounted flash. You will need to invest in a flash meter.

I don't know how you feel about Ken Rockwell (I don't always agree with Ken) but he does have a good write-up about Novatrons on his website.

 

[Argenticien]

I have an S2 and so far only the Nikkor 75/2.8 and 50/3.5 lenses (no longs). To get to your original posted questions: I have a C330 as well, which I had before I got the S2. The Bronica (plus a Rolleiflex I luckily got handed down) have made the C330 stay entirely on the shelf, and in fact the Mamiya is probably the camera I'm most likely to sell off. While one can find lenses for the C330 more easily, I prefer the Bronica's ergonomics to those of the C330. Although the Rolleiflex is awesome, of course it's a fixed 80mm, so the S2's ability to go wide with the 50mm makes me pick it up even more than the Rolleiflex. I'm not going to go buy a whole separate camera just to get a wide lens, as Rollei would have us do.

As to sourcing lenses for the Bronica: one other thing you could try (for even more lenses later) is working with Bellamy Hunt (Japan Camera Hunter) who will source things over there by request. I have not worked with him ("yet" ), but by all accounts his service is great. Don't let "Camera" in the business name be a limit; he sources lenses too. If you said "I want a 40mm Nikkor that looks like it just came off the assembly line," he could probably find that for you. I've been tempted to ask him exactly that... And on a hike last weekend I was lamenting my lack of a 200mm as well ...

BTW, pix from my Bronica, if I've encoded the tag properly in this URL --> http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=bronica&w=27004089@N04

--Dave

 

[Steve Smith]

I have an S2 and so far only the Nikkor 75/2.8 and 50/3.5 lenses (no longs).

I bought an S2 a couple of weeks ago. I have the 75mm and 200mm Nikkors. A 50mm is next on my list.


Steve.

 

[PRS-1]

Thanks, Dave, for the info. Dave and Steve (and others), it's nice to see a little community of Bronica S family shooters. Once the 150mm arrive, I'll post some notes on its performance, and if possible, some samples. I'd be interested to hear about people's 50s.

Having found the 150 and owning the 75, the Bronica ought to do for an interchangeable lens camera for a while. If I want to shoot wider, I'll pick up a 50mm or hunt for a 40mm. However, I did buy the Rolleiflex T in the end. Everything works great, it's in beautiful shape, and it went at a very reasonable price.

 

[Argenticien]

@PRS: I assume you've found some of the usual sources of Bronica S family info. Links here --> There's the Bronica Users Group (BUG), which uses the antiquated Yahoo Groups platform. There's Tony Hilton's book, which I don't have but sounds like it would be a wealth of info. Tony is occasionally heard on the BUG, too. And the Nikomat site, where there are some pages in English; then when you get into the lenses, I believe it falls into Japanese only. You can get half an idea of it with Google Translate. Among all those sources, you'll find that there's a 50/2.8 as well as the 3.5. I don't have the 2.8, but it's lighter and takes a smaller filter diameter even while being faster than my lens. Double or triple win there ... I bypassed it because it's more expensive (or they were, a few years ago anyway). I find the 50/3.5 optically a perfectly good lens and nice to work with. Its heft can be tiresome on the trail (I've hiked up two hills with it in the last month, so I know), but if you're very fit, or using it in the studio, this won't bother you.

--Dave

 

[PRS-1]

@PRS: I assume you've found some of the usual sources of Bronica S family info. Links here --> There's the Bronica Users Group (BUG), which uses the antiquated Yahoo Groups platform. There's Tony Hilton's book, which I don't have but sounds like it would be a wealth of info. Tony is occasionally heard on the BUG, too. And the Nikomat site, where there are some pages in English; then when you get into the lenses, I believe it falls into Japanese only. You can get half an idea of it with Google Translate. Among all those sources, you'll find that there's a 50/2.8 as well as the 3.5. I don't have the 2.8, but it's lighter and takes a smaller filter diameter even while being faster than my lens. Double or triple win there ... I bypassed it because it's more expensive (or they were, a few years ago anyway). I find the 50/3.5 optically a perfectly good lens and nice to work with. Its heft can be tiresome on the trail (I've hiked up two hills with it in the last month, so I know), but if you're very fit, or using it in the studio, this won't bother you.

--Dave

Dave, I didn't know about these resources, thanks! I didn't know about the 50/2.8. I'll sign up for BUG and look into the book and the Nikomat website.