Bro, Nice Camera! AKA Bronica ETRS <3

[KoNickon]

Which lens? I recall reading that the first version of the 75/2.8 was not well regarded. The "II" was fine.

Originally Posted by Peter_wrote:

just bought one a short time ago. i love the handling of this camera. unfortunately i haven't a waist level finder yet. just the prism finder.

but how happy are u guys with the lens quality? i'm not very pleased with it
i also looked through a lot of photos on flickr. don't know how to explain, but they all lack the typical mf-look somehow. a bit soft too...

[PatrickT]

The 75/2.8 is SHARP...I was very impressed when I scanned these...

[Katie]

Originally Posted by PatrickT

The 75/2.8 is SHARP...I was very impressed when I scanned these...

Nice! These look great!

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by timor

I have one in which film travels horizontally (from left to right, like regular 35mm camera) with normal 24x36mm frame. Never seen the panoramic one, but I guess is the same, just different mask and gear ratio for longer stroke. Frame maybe 24x55 ?

The model for the standard frame is 135 N, and the model for the pano is 135 W.

And yes, the frame is 24X56.

[forsakenrider]

I would love to get my hands on the 135W.

Anyone have some shots from the 50 2.8? Im thinking of picking one up as its almost as wide as the 40 and a stop faster!

[Moto-Uno]

Will,that's one great picture!!
Regards,Peter

[Peter_wrote:]

am i crazy, or does anybody else has the feeling that pictures made with zenzanon lenses tend to have blown out hightlights...? don't know, if that makes any sense...

[timor]

Originally Posted by Peter_wrote:

am i crazy, or does anybody else has the feeling that pictures made with zenzanon lenses tend to have blown out hightlights...? don't know, if that makes any sense...

Lenses have nothing to do with that but exposure, development and in this case rather the scan.

[shadowfox]

Originally Posted by Moto-Uno

Will,that's one great picture!!
Regards,Peter

Peter, thank you, as I told you before, I love the Bronica S.

[kanzlr]

Originally Posted by Peter_wrote:

am i crazy, or does anybody else has the feeling that pictures made with zenzanon lenses tend to have blown out hightlights...? don't know, if that makes any sense...

that's pretty much impossible.

highlights are blown if you exceed the films exposure latitude. A lens has not much influence on this.

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by forsakenrider

I would love to get my hands on the 135W.

Anyone have some shots from the 50 2.8? Im thinking of picking one up as its almost as wide as the 40 and a stop faster!

I manage to see two or three of the 135 W backs a year, but I am on eBay almost every day, as I buy and sell film equipment there.

I assure you that if you check eBay very often, as I do, you will eventually see one. I often do a general search on Yahoo for Bronica 135W or Bronica 135 W, and come across one occasionally.

Expect to pay dearly. This gives you the capacity to shoot X-Pan like panos w/ great lenses on your Bronica.

There is also a 135 W for the Bronica square 6X6 model. Same end pano format 24-56. That model is the SQ-A camera body. Then you can shoot square and 135 pano. I'd take either one. If I find a 135 W for the SQ-A, I'd snap it up and then find a nice SQ-A as they are also in great supply and low priced.

Bronica's biggest plus for me is the leaf shutter lenses... all of them. That keeps the body prices low, and opens up flash synch at all speeds.

I'd even step out on a limb here and say I've seen pics as good from the SQ-A Bronica lenses as any Hasselblad I have used.

BTW...I JUST LOOKED AT BRONICA SQ-A BACKS ON KEH AND THEY SHOW A 135-W BACK FOR $300. A LOT LESS TO TURN YOUR SQ-A INTO A PANO 135, THAN BUYING AN X-PAN. HEAVIER YES, ... BUT A LOT LESS MONEY...ALSO YES. PRIMARILY BECAUSE YOU CAN BUY A FULL SQ-A KIT FOR $400 TO $600, PUTTING YOU UNDER $1000 FOR THE KIT W/WIDE 135 BACK.

[MRohlfing]

Originally Posted by kuzano

BTW...I JUST LOOKED AT BRONICA SQ-A BACKS ON KEH AND THEY SHOW A 135-W BACK FOR $300. A LOT LESS TO TURN YOUR SQ-A INTO A PANO 135, THAN BUYING AN X-PAN.

But it only pays if you use it quite often. Otherwise you can just as well cut your pano from a 120 film ....

[rhl-oregon]

I'm very happy with my ETRSi, though I'm using my RF645 more these days. Here are several from the last roll of FP4, shot wide open on 100/4 macro lens.