Well did it again - love the GW699 III

sixby45 · Jun 3, 2019

Witold said:
I was only saying that the II is fine all around and I see no reason to make it look like inferior to III in ANY part of its design and function. Once I had a chance to handle each it was a no decision for me, just straight one sided pick for the II.

To be fair both the II and III which I have used extensively are awesome cameras. The lenses are identical and the bodies though ergonomically different do the exact same things. This is not true if the version I with a different flash trigger system - however you cannot go wrong with a version II or III - there are simply minor preferences and of course a price difference.

If you are on a lower budget go for a II and you lose nothing on the actual negative. If you're able grab a III or a really good condition II and enjoy - both are amazing

sixby45 · Jun 3, 2019

Witold said:
1. maybe
2. pick yours, I can't see how focusing could be better than the II
3. as per 2, I can't see a much brighter rangefinder than on the II, possibly age difference (longer abusive storage) might play part in some differences between the two
4. may be lighter, may be weaker, or ... may be stronger?
5. II is a LOT sexier (after all we're taking this down the personal preferences path, right?)

Ha! Sexy that made me smile on my way to the office - if that's the case I find the GF670 sexy as well! Just can't afford it at the moment

Deleted member 88956 · Jun 3, 2019

sixby45 said:
Ha! Sexy that made me smile on my way to the office - if that's the case I find the GF670 sexy as well! Just can't afford it at the moment

Of course that would somewhat depend on bottoms preference. I like what I see on II.

Huss · Jun 3, 2019

Theo Sulphate said:
Well, Fuji did release a new medium format camera. It even says "Fujifilm" on it, but that's the only film associated with it:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/11793...hase-detect-af-and-4k-video-for-10000-dollars

Yep: $10,000.

But the sensor size in that lump is much smaller than the 690. Or even a 645.

Huss · Jun 3, 2019

My GW690iii is the only kamera I have ever owned that is prone to producing loose/fat rolls no matter how careful i am loading it. Do not have this issue w any of my other mf kameras. And yes I do maintain tension etc.

narsuitus · Jun 3, 2019

Huss said:
My GW690iii is the only kamera I have ever owned that is prone to producing loose/fat rolls no matter how careful i am loading it.

I have used GW670iii, GSW690iii, Mamiya TLR, Mamiya RB67, Yashica Mat, Ansco folders, and Holga medium format cameras. Thank goodness, I have not yet had problems with loose/fat rolls.

sixby45 · Jun 3, 2019

Hmm very Interesting - I have had no more loose rolls on the Fuji than other MF systems though occasionally would misload the old rolleiexes - and have to feed the paper back through the double rollers when caught

Huss · Jun 4, 2019

sixby45 said:
Hmm very Interesting - I have had no more loose rolls on the Fuji than other MF systems though occasionally would misload the old rolleiexes - and have to feed the paper back through the double rollers when caught

Yeah my 2.8E and 3.5 mxv is thru the rollers, while the 2.8 gx is above the rollers. None of those, nor my Hass H1, Mam 645, Veriwide, Moskva, Ikon etc have ever fat rolled. Butt the Fuji? Several times.

Fyi I also have never fat rolled any of my 35mm kameras, nor my Rollei A110s, not even my Sx70.

Deleted member 88956 · Jun 5, 2019

Huss said:
Yeah my 2.8E and 3.5 mxv is thru the rollers, while the 2.8 gx is above the rollers. None of those, nor my Hass H1, Mam 645, Veriwide, Moskva, Ikon etc have ever fat rolled. Butt the Fuji? Several times.

Fyi I also have never fat rolled any of my 35mm kameras, nor my Rollei A110s, not even my Sx70.

While I've only shot relatively few rolls through my Fuji, what's interesting here is that suddenly these cameras are accused of being fat roll producers, like none other. Might help to either defuse this characterization through general Fuji owners' feedback, or perhaps prove it beyond reasonable doubt by same means. I won't be one of them either way as my sampling isn't large enough to argue, however I have never heard of this until now, hence I think it is either isolated, user error, or similar problem.

papagene · Jun 5, 2019

No problems with either of my Fuji cameras.

StepheKoontz · Jun 5, 2019

I've shot literally hundreds of rolls of film through various Fuji rangefinders and never had any issues with the way the film rolled up.

Theo Sulphate · Jun 5, 2019

Never had a problem with my GW690III.

Prest_400 · Jun 5, 2019

Huss said:
My GW690iii is the only kamera I have ever owned that is prone to producing loose/fat rolls no matter how careful i am loading it. Do not have this issue w any of my other mf kameras. And yes I do maintain tension etc.

Could it just be that the springs holding the film tense went a bit weak? The most extreme I had was only edge leak on last frames.

Soent yesterday carrying it around the city. Nice machine, huge according to my friend. Sadly conditions changed and I didn't get to shoot some Provia that I wanted.

macfred · Jun 5, 2019

I had the fat roll issue a few times - I guess it might be user error one can prevent with a little attention while loading the camera.
From the manual (GW670III - should be the same with the 680 and 690 series) :

''To prevent the film from slackening, press down the leader paper near the supply side lightly with your finger so that it won't buckle,and wind the film advance lever firmly.
To prevent the film from becoming loose again when the cameraback is being closed, use the film advance lever to keep the leader paper taut until you snap the camera back into place.''

destroya · Jun 5, 2019

I only had a fat roll twice, both times with a 220 roll. but those were rolls a friend loaded and he had no experience with loading these types of cameras. I always keep tension on the roll while I wind to the start point. I shot 14 rolls on monday and had issues with any. hope you can figure it out

john

Theo Sulphate · Jun 5, 2019

The issue may be the particular flat metal spring (or "brake" as they say in the industry). Some cameras have these where there isnt much force applied to hold the film secure on the roll. Easy to fix by gently bending it.

Theo Sulphate · Jun 5, 2019

Huss said:
Yeah my 2.8E is ... thru the rollers, while the 2.8 gx is above the rollers.

Fyi I also have never fat rolled any of my 35mm kameras ... not even my Sx70.

Wait... on the 2.8E doesnt the film go through the sensing rollers (near the feed spool) but then over the two sets of rollers at each end of the film gate?

Yes, SX-70 - no fat rolls due to excellent design.

Roger Thoms · Jun 5, 2019

Congratulations on your new camera. I’m shoot the GW680III which is almost identical to your camera. Same chassis as your but a smaller film gate and of course the winder and counter to accommodate 9 frames instead of 8. Wonderful camera! Wouldn’t mine getting the wide version one of these days.

Roger

Huss · Jun 6, 2019

Theo Sulphate said:
The issue may be the particular flat metal spring (or "brake" as they say in the industry). Some cameras have these where there isnt much force applied to hold the film secure on the roll. Easy to fix by gently bending it.

Good call, I had not thought of that. I will check it, thank you.
(I follow the loading procedure outlined in the manual, and again, this is the only mf camera I have had this issue with)

Theo Sulphate · Jun 6, 2019

Huss said:
... I will check it, thank you.
...

Here are some photos of my springs. If you have to adjust yours, be very careful!

The only thing that really annoys me about these Fuji rangefinders is the narrow slot one has to reach through to change shutter speed and aperture.

moto-uno · Jun 6, 2019

"Roger Thoms", it may be your lucky day , someone over on RFF is selling that exact camera you're looking for ! Peter

StrangestStranger · Jun 6, 2019

Witold said:
While I've only shot relatively few rolls through my Fuji, what's interesting here is that suddenly these cameras are accused of being fat roll producers, like none other. Might help to either defuse this characterization through general Fuji owners' feedback, or perhaps prove it beyond reasonable doubt by same means. I won't be one of them either way as my sampling isn't large enough to argue, however I have never heard of this until now, hence I think it is either isolated, user error, or similar problem.

i just got a GSW690III in mint condition and have put a few rolls through it. I did have one fat roll, but i attributed that to user error, since i'm still getting used to this wonderful, beautiful camera.

Theo Sulphate · Jun 6, 2019

Such rolls are not "fat"; they are "diametrically gifted".

Huss · Jun 7, 2019

Theo Sulphate said:
Here are some photos of my springs. If you have to adjust yours, be very careful!

View attachment 224778 View attachment 224777
The only thing that really annoys me about these Fuji rangefinders is the narrow slot one has to reach through to change shutter speed and aperture.

View attachment 224776

Already gave it a tweak, thanks! Of course now I just noticed that the foam light seal on the door hinge/camera back area has fallen apart. I'll have to put a fresh strip there.

thuggins · Jun 9, 2019

I have occasionally thought of getting one of those, but I really can't see the point.

Well did it again - love the GW699 III

Deleted member 88956

Deleted member 88956

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency