[Swift1]

I recently sold all my 4x5 camera gear, so bought this to "replace" it

[stevebrot]

I recently sold all my 4x5 camera gear, so bought this to "replace" it

Texas Leica! I am envious, seriously envious!


Steve

[Swift1]

Texas Leica! I am envious, seriously envious!


Steve

I'm pretty excited with it. It's a seriously huge camera! You don't really get a sense of the size until you actually see it. It works pretty well on my wheelchair mount.I went out and shot the first 3 frames with it today, but it's quite cold out today. I will have to wait a few days for it to warm up outside before I can finish the roll.

[tuco]

I recently sold all my 4x5 camera gear, so bought this to "replace" it

Congrats!

My 65mm, GSW690III is one of my most used cameras. I also have the 90mm version too.

[johnha]

I'm pretty excited with it. It's a seriously huge camera! You don't really get a sense of the size until you actually see it.

I looked at one of those, in the end decided it was similar in size & weight to my P6x7 and I'd be better buying more lenses for the latter.

[WPRESTO]

It's a seriously huge camera! You don't really get a sense of the size until you actually see it.

I had a Bronica S2 for a few years and could not handle it. The camera that was bigger when I first encountered one in the metal than in ads was a Mamiya RB 67. Definitely better atop a tripod, but the tripod alone for a Mamiya would have been heavier than all the photogear I'm currently willing to carry in a backpack. However, I knew someone who used a Mamiya RB 67 exclusively, He was a botanist who predictably did a lot flower photography, concentrating on his specialty = orchids. Suitable subject for a tripod-mounted RB 67.

[tuco]

What generation is your GW690, @Swift1 ?

What's funny about these cameras is that it says 'Professional' on them. No light meter, no shutter/aperture priority and no help in anyway except focus. But in small format, no way would you call a camera like that Professional. It would need every bell and whistle in order to be a Pro camera.

My GSW690III, 65mm version

---

Last edited by tuco; 02-03-2020 at 08:54 AM.

[g026r]

The camera that was bigger when I first encountered one in the metal than in ads was a Mamiya RB 67. Definitely better atop a tripod, but the tripod alone for a Mamiya would have been heavier than all the photogear I'm currently willing to carry in a backpack. However, I knew someone who used a Mamiya RB 67 exclusively, He was a botanist who predictably did a lot flower photography, concentrating on his specialty = orchids. Suitable subject for a tripod-mounted RB 67.

I know someone who uses an RB67 as her main day-to-day camera. I'm sure she sometimes uses a tripod, but if so I've never seen it.

[WPRESTO]

I know someone who uses an RB67 as her main day-to-day camera. I'm sure she sometimes uses a tripod, but if so I've never seen it.

I'm impressed as well as skeptical. I cannot imagine hand-holding a Mamiya RB 67, in fact, I can barely image toting one on a photo-outing.

[Swift1]

I looked at one of those, in the end decided it was similar in size & weight to my P6x7 and I'd be better buying more lenses for the latter.

Ya, I've had a Pentax 67 and 5 lenses for 10 years now, as well as my Kodak Medalist II, so the Fuji seemed a bit redundant, but in the past few years I have really taken to rangefinder cameras, plus the P67 is just a bit big and heavy for my wheelchair camera mount. I have taken photos with the 67 on the wheelchair mount, but it's far from ideal. The Medalist is great on the wheelchair mount, but it's a complicated camera for helpers to deal with, and 620 is an issue since I am unable to reroll myself.
The Fuji GW690 works well on my wheelchair mount, is a really simple camera to operate, takes easy to get 120 film, plus it has my favorite 2:3 format.

---------- Post added 02-03-20 at 12:00 PM ----------

What generation is your GW690, @Swift1 ?

What's funny about these cameras is that it says 'Professional' on them. No light meter, no shutter/aperture priority and no help in anyway except focus. But in small format, no way would you call a camera like that Professional. It would need every bell and whistle in order to be a Pro camera.

My GSW690III, 65mm version

Mine is the first gen. GW690. I would have liked a GW690II, but the price on this GW690 was hard to beat.
I was surprised when I first learned (years ago) that these cameras didn't have meters, but now that is actually a plus in my book. I almost never use a meter, and I have learned to appreciate the simplicity of a camera with no electronics.
Maybe they put "Professional" on them because you actually need to know some things to operate them

[Lord Lucan]

What's funny about these cameras is that it says 'Professional' on them. No light meter .... [etc] ,.... no way would you call a camera like that Professional. It would need every bell and whistle in order to be a Pro camera.

I would not agree. Bells and whistles appeal more to amateurs, and pro cameras tend to be conservative, even old-fashioned, compared with ones aimed at the amateur market. Look how long the LX and the Nikon F3 kept selling even when mid-range and entry level cameras had more modern features.


I remember an advert for Hasselblad years ago. It had a long list of what features the camera did not have : no red-eye reduction, no metering, no auto-focus, no power winder, no DX coding, no little voice telling you what to do (remember that on some P&S's ?), etc, etc. Just the most reliable camera body and sharpest lenses money could buy (or so it claimed) - obviously a professional camera then! In my father's day (he was semi-pro), pros and experienced amateurs were cynical about auto exposure, which is why pro cameras at that time tended to be manual only (eg 6x7, MX, Olympus OM-1)..


Of course things have changed, In the professional market the MX was upstaged by the LX with its auto option, ditto the OM-1 by the OM-2, and even this market has now got into a feature arms-race, although I'm not sure that a pro would be all that swayed by it. I am an amateur myself, but experienced enough not to be over-awed by the plethora of functions on my K-1, most of which I will never use. As far as I am concerned it is just a rugged "full-sized" camera which can take my legacy glass in addition to its native mid-range zoom, and I use it in manual mode as often as not.

[tuco]

Mine is the first gen. GW690. I would have liked a GW690II, but the price on this GW690 was hard to beat.
I was surprised when I first learned (years ago) that these cameras didn't have meters, but now that is actually a plus in my book. I almost never use a meter, and I have learned to appreciate the simplicity of a camera with no electronics.
Maybe they put "Professional" on them because you actually need to know some things to operate them

I read in camerapidia or some place this stripped down camera's market was for a tour group industry photographer. They wanted to make a reliable camera with a 10K shutter exposure life. The wider 65mm was for capturing a group of people with some scenery included.

My first GSW690III was a bargain condition purchase at a good price. It had a lot of exposures on its shot counter. And after a couple of years of use the shutter broke. I missed it so much I had to replace it. This time I paid much more then the going price before. I like the simplicity too and having a fixed lens has taught me a lot. I'm surpised.

[stevebrot]

What's funny about these cameras is that it says 'Professional' on them.

I dunno...looks pro to me.

The obvious clues are that it appears to be unfriendly to anyone not capable of making a living with the camera. It also looks like it might take a blow with less damage than the person holding it. I can imagine that if I were holding one, I might look pro too.


Steve

[tuco]

... experienced enough not to be over-awed by the plethora of functions on my K-1, most of which I will never use.

I hear that. When I haven't used my DSLR for a while, I often fumble through the interface trying to remember where/what something is. I need to stay 'tuned up' with it to use it effectively. But my attention is split with these film cameras.

[WPRESTO]

Remember when they calculated that considering the optional colors, transmissions, engines, body styles, trim levels, and miscellaneous options for the Impala that GM could not have made one of each possible combination of features one year (1957 I think)? I suspect that with all the possible settings that are available to enter on my K1, there's no chance I will live long enough to try each of them once even if I changed a setting before every shutter press.