Bessa IV - 6x9 or 6x12

[kzphoto]

Originally Posted by ruby.monkey

Personally I'd like the equivalent of a GSW690 with a built-in spot/matrix meter and added aperture-priority autoexposure.

Yes, Please. or a GW/GSW690III with the same. And a switch to shoot 6x6. I need squares, sometimes.

[f16sunshine]

Nice topic Matus.
I would love a Modern 69 folder with a 105mm lens. An "Update" if you will of folders from the past. For me a spot meter would be grand. I have been shooting a Gaeorsi 612 with a 75mm. It is fun and provides very nice negatives. My problem is then what? I don't have a 4x5 enlarger and my Bessler 23Cii does only up to 6x9 and not particularly well. Scanning is OK with V700 but I still need to improve my technique. Shooting such a big negative for me is aimed at printing though.

Scanning is just OK some flare in this sample as well

[Pherdinand]

anything wider than a 6x9 would cost crazy money, and would be extremely low volume sell, today...

[KenR]

Having just purchased a Fuji GSW690 with the 65m lens, I can attest to the sharpness of the lens and the huge size of the camera. It is heavy - to the point that I thought that I would return it as soon as it arrived from KEH. However, once I put a strap on it and started walking around with it, it really is nicely balanced and really has been fine on my shoulder for an entire day. The downsides for me are the lack of metering and the need to change film really, really frequently. But, the results seem worth it (sorry for the lack of images).

[rbelyell]

yeah the thing is this kinda already exists in the cheapest-maintaining-quality way in the gaoersi and dayi, both of which can be gotten at 6x12 for under $1000 including vf and cost of lens. they are very compact and seem to produce great images. how can, and why would fuji compete with that?

i myself am thinking of rigging up a nice schneider or kodak 90mm lens to the holga pano i received for xmas...

[Matus]

You are probably right. But all these current 6x12 options have only scale focus (or ground glass) and are large and bulky.

Just thinking loud here - what about buying 2 of the Bessa III, sending them off to SK-Grimmes together with an Wide Field Ektar 80/6.3 or Angulon 90/6.8 .... and couple of grands $ It MUST be possible with enough dough

[rbelyell]

interseting idea matus! kinda like mine of puuting a real 90 on the holga, but a lot more expensive. and those gaeorsi and dayi 6x12's really are not big at all, but they are zone focus...still at 6x12 youre not gonna be doing portraits, right? probably landcsapes, buildings, some street secenes, things easily measured, especially at F8.

[kuzano]

He can do them in 6x12 or 6x17.

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~razzle/index.html

Me, I use my Fuji G690 with the 100mm lens, on a tripod and take two closely comparable 6X9 negs/transparencies, on a tripod. Have had great luck having them scanned and stitched at any length up to 17cm.

[roboflick]

Originally Posted by FT2

Zero image? Pinholes are lame, unless you do it on 8x10 sheet film and contact print that ****. Even then it's questionable.

6x12 is for old sweating men with old sweating hands who want to drag around big cameras to show off. Lots of options already available, AKA: GRAFLEX.

6x7 is OK if you're into that sort of stubby look. 6x9 shoots just like 35, easy peasy. Nobody has made anything portable in this size since 1960 (fuji 6x9 cameras are huge).

Most old 120 folders except the Makinas are worthless for enlargement: they were meant for contact printing. Hence the destruction of resolution by front cell focusing and lack of film flatness. Finding a 6x9 plate camera with a roll adapter is a solution out, but most lack rangefinders.

my bessa ii is tack sharp between f8-f22, and just fine for taking pictures of people between f3.5 to f 8 before becoming so sharp that you can see every pore on the subjects face.
ive made huge cibachrome enlargements from velvia and ektachrome

lots of factors, though,mine is a well used example, and the sharpest slides were made mid roll from film that had just been pulled through before having a chance to buckle or bow.

I've also found that well used examples are sharper than pristine ones, the ones with sharp lenses tended to get used alot over the past 60 years!

plus it fits in my pocket, i plan on taking it and a 3d camera as my only cameras on a trip to paris in may, both will fit in vest pockets. I plan on shooting ektachrome e 100g in both.

awesome travel camera.

Nik

[Carlos Cruz]

It seems a 6x9 with 65mm lens might satisfy most of us.

[KoNickon]

Agree -- there isn't any used folder competition in that combination, I believe.

Originally Posted by Carlos Cruz

It seems a 6x9 with 65mm lens might satisfy most of us.

[bugmenot]

I just measured the size of a single exposure on the recently developed Velvia 100F roll from my Fujica GL690. It measures 56mm x 84mm.

Compared to 35mm format (24mm x 36mm), this 6x9 slide would be 2.3333 or 2.4 times the size.

If a new 6x9 rangefinder camera were to come out, it would either need interchangeable lenses, or has to come with at least two lens combinations: One to satisfy the 35mm equivalent focal length, and the other to satisfy the 50mm equivalent focal length.

In case of 6x9, 50mm equivalent = 120mm, and 35mm equivalent = 85mm (due to 1/2.4x crop factor).

Personally, I'd buy a 6x9 modern rangefinder by Voigtlander or Fuji that comes with any lens 70mm to 90mm in focal length.

6x12 and 6x17 are just too ... bizarre to my eyes.

[sanmich]

I would love a 6x7 folder with a 105mm or so.

[kuzano]

Originally Posted by bugmenot

I just measured the size of a single exposure on the recently developed Velvia 100F roll from my Fujica GL690. It measures 56mm x 84mm.

Compared to 35mm format (24mm x 36mm), this 6x9 slide would be 2.3333 or 2.4 times the size.

If a new 6x9 rangefinder camera were to come out, it would either need interchangeable lenses, or has to come with at least two lens combinations: One to satisfy the 35mm equivalent focal length, and the other to satisfy the 50mm equivalent focal length.

In case of 6x9, 50mm equivalent = 120mm, and 35mm equivalent = 85mm (due to 1/2.4x crop factor).

Personally, I'd buy a 6x9 modern rangefinder by Voigtlander or Fuji that comes with any lens 70mm to 90mm in focal length.

6x12 and 6x17 are just too ... bizarre to my eyes.

Using an area formula:

24X35 = 864 sq mm
56X88 = 4928 sq mm

Divide the 35mm number into the 6X9 area number gives you 5.7.

The 6X9 has 5.7X the film area that 35mm does. A testament to why a 6X9 image "blows" 35mm out of the park on IQ.

I've done this math over and over on all the 645, 66, 67, 68 and 69 compared to 35mm

I've also done this on 4X5 inch LF compared to 35, and all the MF formats.

Why??... Retired!!

[Matus]

It's been a long time since I have started this wishful thinking thread. And I still think that 6x12 folding camera would be great to have.

All better 6x12 that are out there (Linhof, Horseman) are big, heavy, bulky and cost €2500+ with one lens and have no rangefinder.

[thegman]

Originally Posted by Matus

It's been a long time since I have started this wishful thinking thread. And I still think that 6x12 folding camera would be great to have.

All better 6x12 that are out there (Linhof, Horseman) are big, heavy, bulky and cost €2500+ with one lens and have no rangefinder.

There are the DAYI cameras for 6x12 for around £600 minus a lens, no range finder, but does have ground glass if scale focusing is not good enough. I expect they could put one together for you with lens for about £1000. They also have a shift ability which may come in handy depending on what you're shooting.

[louisb]

Did I already vote on this?

Oh my, a Bessa IV 6x9 with a 50mm lens? I would basically sell my kidney for one of those. You never know with Voigtlander, eh?

LouisB

[citizen99]

Originally Posted by louisb

... Oh my, a Bessa IV 6x9 with a 50mm lens? I would basically sell my kidney for one of those. You never know with Voigtlander, eh?

LouisB

That would be awesome!

[citizen99]

Originally Posted by Carlos Cruz

It seems a 6x9 with 65mm lens might satisfy most of us.

At the other end of the cost scale, I have experimented with this, which with a 65mm (non-Super-)Angulon was on the limit before the length-wise mounted fold-down 'door' of the 6x9 would have caused vignetting (and by the way you wouldn't be able to close the door on a Super Angulon class lens anyway) .

[citizen99]

Originally Posted by FT2

... Most old 120 folders except the Makinas are worthless for enlargement: they were meant for contact printing. Hence the destruction of resolution by front cell focusing and lack of film flatness. Finding a 6x9 plate camera with a roll adapter is a solution out, but most lack rangefinders.

If by 'most' you mean what were family snapshot market cameras. Some other old ones can still be pretty good, I've had nice 6"x9" prints from the old Bessa Rangefinder, and the scanned files still look good blown up even more on the PC monitor screen .

[Matus]

So, I am starting to wonder ... where is the Bessa IV?

But seriously - It would be so great to have an RF coupled 6x12 with SOME decent lens and AE ...

[thegman]

Originally Posted by citizen99

If by 'most' you mean what were family snapshot market cameras. Some other old ones can still be pretty good, I've had nice 6"x9" prints from the old Bessa Rangefinder, and the scanned files still look good blown up even more on the PC monitor screen .

Completely agree, I came across this thread here:

http://forum.mflenses.com/bessa-ii-c...00-t41488.html

Using a "cheap" scanner, I think the Bessa II shows buckets of resolution.

[citizen99]

Originally Posted by citizen99

If by 'most' you mean what were family snapshot market cameras. Some other old ones can still be pretty good, I've had nice 6"x9" prints from the old Bessa Rangefinder, and the scanned files still look good blown up even more on the PC monitor screen .

Attila's pictures of Budapest are awesome. For a different sort of scene, this page starts in the middle of a set from my Bessa Rangefinder, which is the 'ancestor' of the Bessa II. This one has the Heliar, it also came with the Skopar and Helomar which are also excellent lenses .

[Texsport]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

As Frank noted, in 6x12 there's the Linhof; and also the Horseman, Dayi, Gaoersi and Fotoman offerings, at various quality, capability and price levels. And as nice as it is, the GSW690 will not give me the perspective that a 65mm lens on a 6x12 will give.

So in the meantime it's back to making do with a wide lens on the dSLR, and cropping to 2:1. And dreaming of doing this with film.

But a 50mm of a Fuji 6X9 or a 47mm on a Horseman 6X12 are available, and both give wider and taller views.

Texsport

[alienmeatsack]

This thread is interesting since it pretty much is filled with people wishing for something that is similar to what Lomography created with their Belair X 6-12 recently. I just suspect that the quality folks here are looking for is aimed a bit higher then the Belair can produce.

But, it pretty much does what this thread discuses... a folding 6x9 and 6x12 camera with 58mm and 90mm lenses with optional (overpriced) glass lenses for better image quality, built in metering and aperture priority shooting.

Since I have one of the Belairs already, this "Bessa IV" would have to be really spectacular for me to take interest at an affordable price point.

But I'd certainly be interested... especially if it would be capable of rendering quality via the lens out to 12" wide without the blur/focus falloff the Belair's plastic lenses has.

I'd say for my vote, I'd say I'd like to see it do both, but 6x12 would be my preference. And I'd like to see a lens that "works" well for realistic wide shots. It feels to me like the 90mm on the Belair is the closest to that for that camera but I do like the idea of a wider one that doesn't look stretched or distorted, so maybe the 65mm for this thread's camera would be nice.

I'd also like it to have more control over aperture and shutter speeds then the Belair has. f/8 and f/11 just are not enough, and 1/500th is not fast enough in bright sunlight even with 50 or 100 film here in oklahoma during bright days.

Mmmmm wide shots... ::drool::