nope, now that I know the specs, no, no, no.

Yes. This is pretty much what I wish my GW670III were like.

see the new details at

davidbram.blogspot.com/

be sure to watch the video

No, there's no way I can afford it, unless someone in the company has stopped taking their pills...

If i were to buy a new film camera the Fuji Klasse W would be very tempting for the 35mm film availability and local minilab processing.

No. I am not going to buy one. My house is full of MF gear. That I don't use, or use very little. Unfortuately. I have several folding MF'ers. They are all old and neither of them are presision instruments due to the folding mechanism.

Interested in MF? Understandable. Good color negs of ISO160 scanned looks as good as files from a 1Ds II. 501 M/C Hasselblads with removable film magazine and the excellent Carl Zeiss 80 mm 2,8 are being sold for less than 1,000 $ here in Norway. They are far more presise and durable than any folding camera and are in excellent condition and will last for a generation or two.

The Fuji looks great... too bad I don't think I could justify the costs of it...
But it's a good thing trying to make MF more portable and bringing more attention to analog films.

Its not a folding camera either!:p

Right, a Hasselblad may be more durable and more precise than a folder. But! - it is much more prone to keep its solid and durable state in its case, while I take my folder out on my motorcycle or hiking tours. That's true for me: my Kiev 60 hardly sees the light of the day, while I carry my Iskra with me wherever I travel.
I can imagine replacing the Iskra by one of those new Fujis.

I'm now going to think of the new Fuji 6x7 as an Iskra on steroids! :)

Gene

Would I buy one? Definitely interested, but would have to see what it cost first.

Jim B.

The point of a folder is that you can throw it into the front pocket of your F-2 and use it when you need. It doesn't replace a regular RF camera for street shooting, but it is certainly complementary to it.

I'm very, very interested in buying this. I would definitely buy it if (a) it was light in weight (let's not confuse weight with durability) and (b) the lens focusing ring worked in the reverse direction to that shown in the prototype. Most rangefinder lenses work the way Leica lenses work so to have the aperture and focusing rings rotate in the same direction as Leica, Zeiss, CV et al would be a big plus for me.

I wouldn't buy one, for quite few reasons:
- I find MF folders a big hassle
- pricing
- there's still the Mamiya 7
- it's VERY questionable whether Fujfilm will actuall make this camera.

If the price were right I would buy one. Having MF that you can carry conveniently is important to me. That's one thing holding me back from getting a Mamiya 7 or GW670/690. Traveling with my Super Isolette was so easy because it fit in a jacket pocket.

A compact, folding GW670ll/lll. With light meter and AE. What's not to like? Some people you just can't please!

I love the idea of a new medium format folder, but I seriously doubt that it could match the Mamiya 7. The Mamiya is 7 is fairly small too, and you don't have to hassle with setting the bellows properly, you have a number of different lens options, and it even has a standard film advance!

what 'specs' are people talking about, it's a film camera, what you see is pretty much what you get. i would buy one if it is around $1500 or so. I could sell my GS670iii to cover about half of that...

It's very tempting, it looks nice in black and the portability of a folding camera definitely appeals. I would put myself in the very interested category, but since I already own a Rolleiflex, it would be hard to justify another medium format camera. Also, cameras with long closest focussing distances really annoy me (I'm guessing this will be about 1 metre and a close up kit won't be available).

Bellows aren't always delicate - none of the Polaroid cameras with bellows seem to be prone to bellows problems even after a good few decades, so it is at least in principle possible to make good ones.

Ruben makes some interesting points. On the plaubel makina the wires were in the bellows and had a tendency after use, opening & closing, to break. It made for an expensive repair. With the Hasselblad, though it is large, there is no problem obtaining a shade and it stays on.

The strength of this Fuji is that it is a compact camera when folded. The weakness of this Fuji is that it is a folding camera, with bellows and the other limitations of a folding camera. (fixed lens, not close focusing, etc.)

The strength of a Hasselblad is that it is non-folding and has interchangeable lenses. The weakness of a Hasselblad is that it is large and non-folding.

Get the idea? Every camera type has strengths and weaknesses. Depending on the application or intent, a strength could be a weakness.

Hasselblad large? Nah, Mamiya RZ and RBs are large. Hasselblads are tiny.

Please don't mention the Hassy SWC or you will be giving me gas.

Frank is right about strengths and weaknesses. I ride a bicycle to work and run errands with everyday. Which medium format camera should I take with me?

Bingo. :)


- Barrett

I wonder if they are going to follow CV's Bessa example and go for a lower price point and create some medium format mania? If you think of the Holga as a gateway drug into medium format, it would be smart to put out a camera that's a step up but not a bank-breaker. If it sells well (as CV's Bessa R did) then they have a ready market to make another step up in a few years.

I've been looking for a MF folder for a while but now I'm going to stop looking and wait and see about the Fuji.

Hard to say about pent up demand. It is a unique camera though. If you want a modern folding 6x7 camera, this would be the only game in town. Many of the vintage folders (delicate to begin with due to the folding design) have mechanical issues. None of them offer a built in meter with AE. Digital is competing more directly with 35mm film. A MF negative will still give you much more quality than a digital file from existing dSLRs and RF digi cams, and the camera is more compact than a dSLR to boot. There is definitely a niche for it, IMO.

Like I said before: a folding Fuji GW670ll/lll with metering and AE; what more could you want? (Okay, maybe a wide angle version too.)

I guess Bronica has never been very smart with marketing its products and it never managed to get the "pro" image that Mamiya got. The superb GS1, a rather compact 6x7 SLR, met exactly the same fate as the 645 RF: launched at a steep price, never met real success, then discounted, therefore causing the second hand market to collapse and badly damaging the image of the product in the eyes of the pros that did buy it at full price.

A folder with a decent lens is far more capable than a 10MP digital SLR. The DSLR might be more convenient to use, but a good folder in capable hands will still produce better pictures.

You admit that a 14MP digital rangefinder can come close in quality to an MF film scanned, therefore acknowledging the superior quality of MF film.

I do shoot digital and I agree regarding the need of a good affordable digital rangefinder with an APS sensor -- or even a good compact camera with live view :eek: -- but I will also be very happy to buy the new Fuji GF670, because I get great results shooting film and I like it.

Cheers!

Abbazz

I echo your comments exactly.

Every Bronica I owned and shot was a superior product that never received the marketing and support they should have from Bronica and/or Tamron. Superb glass, leaf shutters, dependable cameras, but unfound and largely ignored by professionals.

Any well built and properly used medium format camera will outshoot any and all 35mm frame and smaller digital sensors currently in the marketplace. The same photographer qualified in film and digital would have to cheat film to come to any other conclusion.

There are still many variations of digital sensors, focusing methods, etc, to be developed in digital before the final verdict is in, IF a verdict is what one is looking for.

If this new Fuji 670 comes in at a price between $1500 to $2000, it will still take a digital sensor capable of considerably more than 14 Mp, and a camera selling for in excess of $5000 to come close in image quality. Remember that a 6X7 and 6X9 color image delivers the equivalent of 25 to 35 megapixels of information.

I trust that Fuji will come through on this image quality, just as they did on my 25 yr old Fujica G690bl.

I don't know about others, but I am very interested in medium format cameras, perhaps including folders, but find speculative financial and marketing analysis tiresome.

I think it's all quite interesting and I think SM usually has some very thoughtful and good ideas, which is to say I usually agree with him. ;)

As we have seen with Nikon's dalliance with a re-introduced limited edition rangefinder, these little forays don't necessarily mean that the camera maker believes there is a huge market for the camera or that there is a new market in the making. They can do it as a one-off for any number of reasons that don't include world dominance. I do think this is what we are seeing with this MF folder. Nothing to get one's undies in a knot over, though. :)

/T

An Iskra 2 is a good example of the perfect folder format, IMHO. :) 6x6 is big enough (remember the funny postures of people trying to take a vertical format pix). A simple film wind scheme is important. Unit focusing lens. Yashica Electro shutter and exposure control. :D

........... and, while I'm dreaming, add a 120 E6 developing option to the Fuji processors in WalMart. :D

Here's some Astia 100 in my Iskra 2.

Very nice shot....
 

And FAR better than any 10 to 14 Megapixel image I've seen lately.

Thanks, the light was "right".

120 Astia (any E6) is a pain to work with, but worth it.:)

I really need to get another Iskra. Selling mine was the single biggest photographic mistake I have ever made... :bang:

William

Don't get one! Wait for the new Fuji!

I applaud Fuji. Instead of whining and watching their film business collapse (like a certain yellow competitor) they are at least going out swinging, trying to develop their assets rather than watch them wither. Someone here pointed out that Fuji can't sell film if people don't have cameras. At least they are trying to get cameras out there, which is why I think (I hope) the price might be closer to $500 than $1000. The goal is to get cameras into people's hands and burn some film. It's possible that they've seen an uptick in 120 sales since the Holga came out and thought hmmmmm...

Is there a market? CV has surprised everyone with the Bessa series. In retrospect the Bessas make perfect sense, but no one else had the guts to do it. Fuji has already seen one retro camera business succeed (two if you count Holga) so they are pretty smart to jump on that small bandwagon.

Let me be clear: I don't believe that film will ever come back as a mass consumer or professional product. But I do believe that there is an artist/hobbyist market out there that is big enough for some smart companies to put out interesting products and make some money.

Voted Yes, though price may be an issue.

I've owned an MF SLR in the past. Got rid of it because it was so heavy and large that I never took it along. Big shame because the image quality was so darn good. If the price isn't outrageous, I'm definately interested.

The verdict on better IQ from digital cameras or MF film isn't there yet and the progress in quality: S/N, dynamic range, resolution is not happening at the film side as we both know. At the time we get the virtual MF folder presented there's a much more concrete 25 Sony FF announced and three 14 MP APS size DSLRs with HDR qualities will be available within 6 months. In all digital cases with optics that are more optimised than what is made available for analogue film these days. The Fuji folder has at best a Heliar type lens as any good Planar or Sonnar would be too heavy. There's a nice analogy in the Schneider lens catalogue, compare the Digitars with the Symmars for film, the first are just better. A good friend with a Sinar back has the right equipment to compare the Nikon 35 mm lenses, the Hasselblad Zeiss lenses, the Digitars, the Symmars on that MF back. The Digitars are the best hands down. If MF film has to beat the DSLRs announced these days it should be in an Alpa type camera with the customised Linhof film holder + 220 film for extreme flatness and a Biogon or Digitar lens to get the resolution you need. On Dynamic range you have to be careful with B&W and in color you better forget slide film. In a hybrid analogue/digital workflow the scanner should at least be a Nikon LS9000 with wet mounting or a well kept and operated drum scanner. A complete analogue workflow faces the same problems with film flatness and another optical path that is in the scanning and picture taking steps. If I write about equal outcome from MF film compared to today's digital it is with that in mind and not a Tessar, Heliar, 80 mm f3.5 on folder struts transmitting light on 6x7 frames of plain 120 roll stock.

The "I like it" is the same term I use to explain my Iskra, Bessa, Monitor, converted Polaroid 160 use. I also considered it as a nice stop gap solution between 35 mm analogue dying and digital photography coming to age. Yesterday bicycling I had my Iskra with me and a small Fuji digital compact. The Iskra loaded with Tmax that will be developed in a Jobo Autolab 1000 and scanned on a Nikon LS8000 in wet mounting then printed on a HP Z3100. There's fun in some aspects but I do not think my image quality is optimal now or will be optimised by a new MF folder. For that I trust the digital developments more and I hope that the "I like it" feeling is one day represented in a digital rangefinder that has the better image quality but at the same time offers it in a compact and uncomplicated way. I might go for a DSLR if it takes too long but I'm afraid it will not bring that feeling back.

I know I wouldn't buy the Fuji. Even if it had a 65mm lens and a 48 x 83 mm frame size to keep the film more flat and fit my LS8000 on length to get the extra square inches. Not for a lower price like 500 $ either. I might spend a total of 1500 $ hours on tinkering a camera like that but that's the other part of the fun factor. Suits old cameras better than new ones :-)

Not going to spoil the fun of potential buyers anymore so this is the last of my opinions on this camera proposal.


Ernst Dinkla

I voted "yes" even though cost and size/weight factors will be an issue.

I like folding MF cameras for their relative simplicity and the fact that they can be folded to fit a small space. Right now I use a Certo Six and couple of Super Ikontas. All my vintage folding cameras have problems with poor viewfinders, and close focusing. The Certo Six has parallax compensation (sort of) but the Ikontas do not.

If this Fuji comes in at a cost of around $1500.00 to $2000.00. Has parallax compensation, can close focus, better viewfinder, can take some modest punishment, and is reasonably lightweight etc. I'll take it.

The retro styling really puts me off; on the other hand, there's no realistic alternative for a new pocketable MF (at least one that's not made out of recycled Lada dashboards).

I vote maybe, if it's cheap.

A fixed lens 6x7 with an 80mm, no thanks, I really find it a useless focal length.... If it were 65mm or shorter it would be a nice compact.

"The retro styling really puts me off."

Can you elaborate? This is what folders look like. (And I think frankly something more modern-looking wouldn't have the appeal this one seems to have.