I will almost certainly buy one - I have a range of 6x9 and 6x6 folders, but don't currently have a 6x7, so. The only variable is when depending upon how long it takes to save up! :)

But it's not - it's how they looked sixty years ago, and I for one don't see the appeal in an ersatz antique. It's not as if Fuji can't do modern design - they've shown us repeatedly that they can, and do it well.

Don't get me wrong. I like old cameras - I went out this lunchtime with a Perkeo II in my back pocket, and there's a Rolleicord Vb in my desk drawer for whenever I get bored. But I want them to look old because they are old. It hurts my soul to see a company rely on misplaced nostalgia to sell its wares, as if it has no faith that the camera can succeed on merit alone. :(

Contrast this with the Zeiss Ikon. That's a camera with clean, elegant lines, that feels no need to ape its predecessors. Imagine if CZ had put out a cod Contax IIIa instead.




I wonder what Porsche Design Studio could do with it? ;)

I think this has been asked before...but I'll ask again.

What would a modern folding camera look like? It seems that form follows function and this is a simple device. The lack of wind lever is certainly a retro thing, but what else should be changed so you don't think of this as just a sentimental design?

the lack of wind lever on this new fuji camera doesn't bother me as much as the presence of the wind lever on the rd1. : )

Compact camera design has progressed from early folders with bellows to telescoping lenses on P&S digitals. I'll opt for the bellows design. :) ... and I like old Porshes .:D Regards.

I suppose a "modern" folder might resemble Fuji's GA series, organic curves and plastic. But I rather like the appearance of the prototype, no pretense, plain and simple, it looks like what it is. The 80mm lens is just right for versatility, about like a 40mm in 35-format terms, and AE is a nice addition.

Great idea I hope it flies.

not literally

Why does everyone assume that this has knob wind? A 6x7 camera is a lot bigger than a 6x4.5 (I'd bet that this camera - despite its folding nature - is a lot bigger than a GA645), and there is plenty of room to secrete away a coreless motor for the drive.

I like the product; I would temper my enthusiasm with the following:

1. This will not be a small camera. If you've seen a Mamiya 7 II or a Plaubel Makina in real life, you will understand. The original Fuji GS645 was pretty chunky for a folding 6x4.5 (it felt like about 1.5 times the size of a Super Ikonta A - in all dimensions).

2. Folders have unavoidable mechanical stresses related to opening and closing. The original GS645 folder was a fantastic image maker but was easy to knock out of line in terms of lens alignment. This was an even bigger problem with the Super Ikonta C 6x9 folders (and the Moscow-5s).

3. Bellows assemblies are prone to wearing out, particularly the synthetic ones. The GS645 had a big problem with this.

4. Fuji has never made a quiet MF camera (except perhaps the Auto Electro lens-equipped GL690 or GM670).

If you like the idea of this camera, consider the GA645 series (or GA645zi), which is (going to be) smaller, tougher, more vibration proof and capable of point and shoot operation when you need it (i.e., when anyone other than you is taking the picture). And they fold just as flat as any Fuji RF has (or will). No bellows; solid metal retracting lens barrels. The lenses, by the way, are sharp as tacks. You also get AE (if you want), built-in data imprinting (incl. exposure info), and automatic loading. If you're a scanning fiend, you'll note that the frame spacing is accurate to within about 1/4mm from frame to frame.

I know people love manual focus RFs, but in the end, slavish devotion to a rangefinder spot is functionally no different from the judicious use of single-point AF. And the AF systems on the GA series are hybrid active/passive and are not fooled easily by low light. You can also zone focus, which I do most of the time with mine.

Ah, but the 6x7 neg, Dante! And the motors in the GA cameras are noisy! No, they won't do at all.

The idea for the new Fuji is portability. As well as size, weigthh also plays a part in portability. I had a heavy Super Ikonta B that folded but was as heavy as a brick. I certainly hope that the new Fuji does not have the added weight and complexity of a motor drive. A MF folder is not a fast handling camera for action so a motor drive would be silly, and I am not so lazy that I won't wind on my own film, even with a knob.

I sure hope you're wrong about the motor!

I agree with Tripod. Motor = weight, noise, complexity, batteries ... fine if you want the convenience, but not my cuppa.

As for retracting lens vs. bellows, point taken. But the bellows is purty! :D

And as for the AF ... This is Rangefinder Forum! :angel:

I voted NO simply because I already own a Fuji GL690. Why give up a superb camera and spend money on another Fuji RF camera?

So, let me get this straight???
 

You are implying that you CAN have too many Fuji's?

Hmmmm...

What is the frame of reference for portability?

This is mine. I've taken my GA to 17 countries on five continents in every season and every temperature (from 120F in Namibia down to 0F in Park City). It's easily concealed (folds flatter than an M camera and fits in a coat pocket, an outside pocket of a Domke satchel, a Crumpler digits - barely - or a plastic shopping bag). It's never been stolen (except, I believe recently by Fuji service, which has had it for a VF cleaning for 2 months now...). At 815g, it is the same (if not less) than an M8 with a 35mm/1.4 ASPH. The weight is not probably not going to be a challenge to any normal user.

[For comparison, the Super Ikontas went up to 1,100g - real porkers - especially when you consider that everything was hand-wound and meterless]

6x7 as a format is not what it used to be - in the old days it was billed as a way to squeeze two more frames out from a roll of 120 - with the idea that anything beyond a 4:5 ratio was wasted. Since 6x7 became popular with the Koni-Omegas and Mamiyas, both lenses and film have gotten an order of magnitude better. Even 24x36 digital cameras in the 12-14mp range are starting to make a play against 6x7 color.

And when you start considering the other incremental costs, 6x7 looks like less fun. The cameras are bigger, and the film has 40% less capacity than a 6x4.5 (300 shots of 6x7 - 30 rolls - is 50% larger in volume than 320 shots of 6x4.5 - and it's not an insignificant in a TSA carry on). Frequent film changes are really not fun for travel in Salvador, Bahia. And when you consider the other incremental costs (a standard negative page or 8x10 contact sheet only does 8 of ten frames; you can only gang two negs in a MF film scanner; and the enlargers are an order of magnitude bigger and more expensive than 6x6), 6x9 becomes the more attractive option (especially if you like 2:3 ratios). Against this, you have to consider that the imaging difference only hits you in the head above 8x10.

A new, expensive 6x7 might be for an amateur a rough road with very little return. For some people, especially people who like to make wet prints, it's very satisfying.

Motors are not all bad. The modern ones add very little weight to the camera (many motors weigh far less than the steel and brass geartrains used in manual wind units). And the ethos is less toward fast action than a transparent user interface (no shifting your eye to wind if you are left-eyed; no forgetting to cock the camera). On the GA, it adds some features you wouldn't really get otherwise: barcoded film, data imprinting, auto wind-on and wind-off. On something like a Hexar AF, servo motors get you a camera quieter than anything mechanical.

Noise, too, is in the ear of the beholder. I have always been suprised at how "loud" cameras don't attract any attention anymore. I think that with many digicams, the simulated "shutter" sound is very loud and flash is a universal phenomenon. This leads to desensitization of people who might notice. That said, even before "loud" motor driven cameras, it was always surprising how little attention they attracted as long as they looked like p/s units. Of course, I can report almost getting knocked off one of the spires of the Sagrada Familia by an enthusiastic Japanese gentleman who was marveling that I had a Fuji... but that was visual and not auditory.

And sometimes invisibility is more about how you dress and carry yourself than shaving a few grams, a couple of cm, or a couple of dB off a camera. I can spot most Leica users from a distance even before I can see their cameras (oddly, as I have observed, it seems they are often the only people who carry cameras around their necks).

Why do you need quick action? What if you don't like the photo-pervs who are always checking out your equipment (cue double entendre) and drawing attention?

The Fuji 6x7 folder has potential (I'll send a letter to them asking that it be made... since I already paid for the hellish enlarging/scanning infrastructure to use negatives that big), but I think people are getting unrealistic ideas about the "fun" level in general. Write in to Fuji. Wait for it to come out. See what it's like. See how it's built. See how heavy it is (prediction: 1kg+). Then go crazy!

Cheers
Dante

Dante: You make a lot of good points; well said. I still say the bellows is pretty. :)

No matter, I will buy it.

There will be NO motor.. Do not fear.
 

If they took the time to engrave a little arrow on the wind-on knob, wouldn't that be a little redundant (and costly) if there were a motor. Think about it! No motor... trust me. And BTW... the checks in the mail.

kuzano,

After a while, too much is really too much when it comes to photography.

Thanks for the reply, Dante. As a B+W printer, if I'm using a 120 film camera, I'd rather have the extra cm2 of a 6x7 format than a 645 format.

I'll take mine in chrome thanks :)

175 people here on RFF have said they would buy this camera.
160 people on APUG have said they would buy this camera.

I guess this is a good sign.

Maybe someone should forward this information to the appropriate person at Fuji...

I wonder how people voted on both polls?

Let's have someone setup a poll on what they think the price will be.

Or what they will cost on the used market 5 years from now....

I agree - I find 6x7 to be the best format for me. I end up cropping much less than any other format I've used.

As for a 12 - 14 MP 35mm challenging 6x7, that would not be my experience. I have tested against Canon in that range and ther really is no contest when comparing image quality. Of course size and convenience are different discussions.

And, BTW, I don't think I'll buy the new Fuji, the Mamiya 7 is enough for me now. :)

Could not agree more. No contest.

If size matters, why not 6x9, as stated by Dante: when you consider the other incremental costs (a standard negative page or 8x10 contact sheet only does 8 of ten frames; you can only gang two negs in a MF film scanner; and the enlargers are an order of magnitude bigger and more expensive than 6x6), 6x9 becomes the more attractive option

The 6x9 format had fallen out of fashion because enlargers and slide projectors were not easily available. Now, hybrid processing has brought back 6x9 to the front page as the larger non panoramic format on 120 film. For those who hate cropping and wasting paper, it's interesting to note that most actual printer paper formats are nearly homothetic to the 6x9 negative: 10x15cm (4x6 in.), A4, A3, etc.

Cheers!

Abbazz

Do the additional two centimeters really matter? I doubt it.

/T

Abazz: All enlargers are cheap these days. You can get a Beseler or Omega 4x5 for next to nothing, free for hauling away if you're fortunate. :angel:

Has there ever been a 6x7 folder?

I think Fuji is doing a balancing act here. 6x9 does quite a bit to increase the size of the thing.

They could have gone 6x6 for me. In any case, if I can afford it, I'll buy it.

Based on the video, where there's a person for scale next to the prototype, I'd say this camera is closer in size to the 6x9 Bessa II than to the 6x6 Perkeo II, so it wouldn't take much more to make it a 6x9.

There has never been a 6x7 folder to my knowledge. 6x7 only became popular as folders were on the wane. 6x7 cameras can't use red window frame counters, because there isn't a number series on the paper backing for 6x7, and many folders use the red window.

I'd be happy with this camera in 6x7 or 6x9. The main thing for me is to have a lightweight folder that fits in a coat pocket or briefcase pocket, with better optics, film flatness, alignment, and ergonomics than the classic folders, and I suspect this camera would do that. The option of shooting 220 is a plus. Meanwhile, I use my Perkeo II (I sold my Bessa II, because the ergonomics didn't work for me, though it was a lovely camera otherwise).

Fuji MF cameras tend to be bigger than other brands'. I bet the new GF670 is bigger than a 6x9 Super-Ikonta.

Except the Plaubel Makina 67, which was not a folder stricto sensu.

That's why it has a film advance knob and not a lever. A lever would catch on your pocket.

Cheers!

Abbazz

My prediction for the little work of art is 2795.00

I bet that if Fujifilm announces production of the 6x7 folder the queues at stores will be miles long. ;)

Frankly keen 120 and 35mm shooters alike have a lot to be grateful to Fujifilm for.

Some years back when all 120 folders could be found feet deep in garbage dumps, I managed to pick up a bunch of wonderful Voigtlanders and Zeiss Ikon Super-Ikontas and Inkotas nearly for hamburger money!

Since then I have used every one on shoots and fid them a delight to use and a fantastic surprise when the film is processed. So, now when I travel I take a Super-Ikonta IV as a backup to my XPan and Hassey 6x6. :o

I predict that if you're right, they'll sell about 3 of them.

I don't see the comparison between the fuji and any of the other makes you mention...except that they all use film.

Again...I'm not seeing how that makes a high price mandatory for a Fuji folder. It's not going to be an Arca Swiss or Sinar in capability and almost certainly not in build either.
I think a Mamiya 7 is a better guide to how much the market might bear for a Fuji 6x7 folder. Give the fuji points for portability and take away points for versitility.
My official no one asked estimate is.....

$899 to $1250.

oh, no, I feel GAS coming on..

I'd get one in that price range, but not much higher. I don't *need* one, and I'm sure very few people -- pros or amateurs -- really do either. But it sure looks nice and within its limitations (fixed lens, mainly) would doubtless make good photos.

I wood buy free, wun fer each off me peepers and wun fer me dinner.

Thank you fer torkin too me.

Love SBMXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX