Bronica Medium Format Owners Thread

I apologise as I have a feeling I've asked this before and maybe didn't follow through with it at the time.

I have an SQAI. I'd really like to play around with a Polaroid back mainly for a bit of fun flash photography with the kids and stick the results on the fridge. That sort of thing. Likely something I'll buy, use a few times and then sell on.

I did naively pick up a polaroid kit some time ago but didn't manage to work out what I actually needed in order to use it and ended up selling it on without trying it.

Anyway, is there a particular back that I can scour ebay for where I can still get hold of film for at an acceptable cost or is this idea dead in the water these days?
 
I apologise as I have a feeling I've asked this before and maybe didn't follow through with it at the time.

I have an SQAI. I'd really like to play around with a Polaroid back mainly for a bit of fun flash photography with the kids and stick the results on the fridge. That sort of thing. Likely something I'll buy, use a few times and then sell on.

I did naively pick up a polaroid kit some time ago but didn't manage to work out what I actually needed in order to use it and ended up selling it on without trying it.

Anyway, is there a particular back that I can scour ebay for where I can still get hold of film for at an acceptable cost or is this idea dead in the water these days?

You are aware that a Polaroid back for the SQ-Ai would only use a portion of the polaroid film, right? This means that there is a lot of unused space on the film, which just shows as black around the 6x6cm exposed part. I never found that particularly appealing and it seemed a waste of film, although others may be less bothered by this.

The other big issue is that I believe the back requires Fuji FP100 B/C film, which isn't made anymore and, when you do find it, it is very expensive. Perhaps there are other alternatives for this film now though, I'm not sure.
 
Last edited:
You are aware that a Polaroid back for the SQ-Ai would only use a portion of the polaroid film, right? This means that there is a lot of unused space on the film, which just shows as black around the 6x6cm exposed part. I never found that particularly appealing and it seemed a waste of film, although others may be less bothered by this.

The other big issue is that I believe the back requires Fuji FP100 B/C film, which isn't made anymore and, when you do find it, it is very expensive. Perhaps there are other alternatives for this film now though, I'm not sure.

Cheers. Starting to sound familiar now. Doesn't necessarily sound like a great idea!
 
I just sold all my polaroid film because they were worth a bit of money, sold some 3000FP for 50£ a pack! and all the colour for 25-30£ a pack.
So playing with polaroidback seems like a very expensive idea nowadays!
 
I just sold all my polaroid film because they were worth a bit of money, sold some 3000FP for 50£ a pack! and all the colour for 25-30£ a pack.
So playing with polaroidback seems like a very expensive idea nowadays!

Looks that way. Have a freezer full of 120 though so not all lost.
 
Looks that way. Have a freezer full of 120 though so not all lost.

Sell them! Not kinding, people just pay silly money for them to the point that it is really silly, you buy yourself a new car or a new house after that!
 
I have both the 40mm an MC and the 50mm is PE. Both great performers and very little difference,maybe the PE handles flare better when shooting into the sun.
 
HI Guys,

I'm looking to buy a Bronica lens for my ETRSI for landscape shooting and trying to decide between the 50 and 40mm. Does anyone have any thoughts views and which is best?

If you are interested in low light shots there's about a stop and a bit difference.
 
I have both to .(in fact I will be selling them soon;)) and liked the results from both.

Tbh imo it's just a matter of wether you want wide or wider:p
 
Distortion ????

its a thing

You've just got to expect it with the 50 so it seems unlikely the 40 will be any better corrected, but it could be a right wonk in comparison


wonk...

its a thing..:)


on the other hand, you might not give a stuff
 
Distortion ????

its a thing

You've just got to expect it with the 50 so it seems unlikely the 40 will be any better corrected, but it could be a right wonk in comparison


wonk...

its a thing..:)


on the other hand, you might not give a stuff

Well there is only one way to compare the 40mm and 50mm and is both to take a shot of the same scene with same settings and compare sharpness to the corners. Same test separates the top 24mms from others in the 35mm film format.
 
Well there is only one way to compare the 40mm and 50mm and is both to take a shot of the same scene with same settings and compare sharpness to the corners. Same test separates the top 24mms from others in the 35mm film format.

Well... I was with you up until the word "compare", Brian. But after that, I'd replace all that stuff about sharpness with just the words "the images". I know there are weirdnesses that can happen with wider lenses that would perhaps fall under the general notion of sharpness, but there are other qualities as well that sometimes over-rule the sharpness issue. IMHO, anyway. That said, I'm pretty terrible at comparing lenses!
 
Well... I was with you up until the word "compare", Brian. But after that, I'd replace all that stuff about sharpness with just the words "the images". I know there are weirdnesses that can happen with wider lenses that would perhaps fall under the general notion of sharpness, but there are other qualities as well that sometimes over-rule the sharpness issue. IMHO, anyway. That said, I'm pretty terrible at comparing lenses!

Well Chris if Bronica made the 40mm and 50mm with the same glass and didn't sub contract the two lenses to different companies then what difference can there be other than test for sharpness out to the corners?
 
Well Chris if Bronica made the 40mm and 50mm with the same glass and didn't sub contract the two lenses to different companies then what difference can there be other than test for sharpness out to the corners?
Different amounts of barrel/pin cushion distortion. Different amounts of chromatic aberration. Just to name the two most obvious. These are down to the design of the lens elements and are bound to vary between 40 mm and 50 mm designs.
 
Different amounts of barrel/pin cushion distortion. Different amounts of chromatic aberration. Just to name the two most obvious. These are down to the design of the lens elements and are bound to vary between 40 mm and 50 mm designs.

Good points but would have thought the 40mm and 50mm would both show distortions anyway and I suppose it comes down what annoys you the most ;) but if you use the lenses for general greenery landscapes you probably wouldn't notice the difference.
I only have the 50mm and yet to try it inside and outside e.g. church and if the distortion is acceptable would still like to see the result sharp to the frame edges otherwise I might as well use a Nikon 24mm (35mm format) and accept the loss in quality.
 
I don't find softness at the edges anything like as annoying as distortion, but each to their own.
My point is that across the 120 market there isn't a manufacturer then or now specializing in heavy correction of WA's like there is/was in 35mm.
Mebbe they corrected on the baseboard or used bellows/movements attachments, or maybe it just wasn't an issue I dunno.
But a 40 ?....well if they didn't go the extra mile with a 50...:/
 
Well for the Rollei TLR guys who are probably bored with this thread about Bronica then drool over this with either 55mm or 50mm lens:-
Interesting to know how good it was.
Rollei WA.jpg
 
I don't find softness at the edges anything like as annoying as distortion, but each to their own.
My point is that across the 120 market there isn't a manufacturer then or now specializing in heavy correction of WA's like there is/was in 35mm.
Mebbe they corrected on the baseboard or used bellows/movements attachments, or maybe it just wasn't an issue I dunno.
But a 40 ?....well if they didn't go the extra mile with a 50...:/

Well the only MF wide angle lens shots I did in the darkroom (for prints) was with the RB67 65mm and I didn't notice any distortion...well it couldn't have been a perfect lens, but then I was into shooting brick walls ;)
 
Last edited:
It's been said time and time again but I'll repeat it parrot fashion. All of these MF system cameras were professional tools and commanded very premium prices so the lenses should be pretty damn good. For us mere mortals I doubt that we will find cause for complaint.
 
It's been said time and time again but I'll repeat it parrot fashion. All of these MF system cameras were professional tools and commanded very premium prices so the lenses should be pretty damn good. For us mere mortals I doubt that we will find cause for complaint.

...but we not acting like a professional forum in that most of us are assuming\and guessing when Matt wants to know about 40mm and 50mm lenses. h'mm when two members have the answers who own the 40mm and 50mm and would have stopped us rambling on, so all it need is shots showing the difference on say buildings (interiors and external) and greenery landscape....... and end of story.
 
...but we not acting like a professional forum in that most of us are assuming\and guessing when Matt wants to know about 40mm and 50mm lenses. h'mm when two members have the answers who own the 40mm and 50mm and would have stopped us rambling on, so all it need is shots showing the difference on say buildings (interiors and external) and greenery landscape....... and end of story.
I didn't mean any offence with that last post, and I'm certainly not putting anyone down for debating the 2 lenses. I only meant that whichever lens was chosen would/ should be a very good lens regardless.
 
I didn't mean any offence with that last post, and I'm certainly not putting anyone down for debating the 2 lenses. I only meant that whichever lens was chosen would/ should be a very good lens regardless.

There was no offence in your post as I include myself in the assuming\guessing game as I only have a small selection on MF lenses and have no idea when comparing different MF lenses between different makes which are better or whatever. But as you said "All of these MF system cameras were professional tools and commanded very premium prices so the lenses should be pretty damn good." and who am I to disagree.
 
I've got both, and they're both excellent based on my subjective impressions of the straight horizontal part of the Forth Bridge near the Hawes Inn, when said section of bridge positioned near the top edge of the frame. I pixel-peeped, and was sufficiently pleasantly surprised to decide that further pixel peeping was a pointless nerdist endeavour that I couldn't be bothered with - they are easily good enough for me.

Anyone that needs something that will make perfect copies of test charts really needs to buy both lenses and evaluate them accordingly - forum opinion short of scientific analysis is unlikely to satisfy. For the rest of us, buy the focal length that gives you the field of view that you want.
 
Thanks guys for your thoughts, I'm not too worried about distortion, i guess we.i was more interested in how the lens compare in sharpness. But as I'm mainly planning to shoot landscapes on a tripod and not people. The shallow depth of field may not be a big issue for me either.

So am I correct in thinking there's not much difference between the two lens apart from fstop and fov?
 
Last edited:
The standard eye piece is -1.5. If your prescription is +2 you need +0.5 diopter.

Well I'll have to look the prescription up because all I'm going by is the glasses you see in the shops and it's got a "+2" sticker on the glass.
 
Ok so after many years of foolishly getting rid of my old sq-b , I'm buying an sq-a, however where can you get sensibly priced backs? I used to buy them for 20-30 quid , you can't find one on the bay for under 100 now!
 
Ok so after many years of foolishly getting rid of my old sq-b , I'm buying an sq-a, however where can you get sensibly priced backs? I used to buy them for 20-30 quid , you can't find one on the bay for under 100 now!
Usually ffordes are very good but they have none in stock at the moment.
 
Ok so after many years of foolishly getting rid of my old sq-b , I'm buying an sq-a, however where can you get sensibly priced backs? I used to buy them for 20-30 quid , you can't find one on the bay for under 100 now!
There's a thread on Photorio about using 120 film in a 220 back, but I've never tried it. Maybe someone here has experience they could give you though, since the 220 backs are way cheaper than the 120 backs. https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/can-i-use-120-film-in-a-220-back-for-bronica-sq-a.63355/
 
New joiner here, just bought an SQ-Ai with 40mm, 65mm, 80mm and 150mm. Test rolls (2 Backs) in the process of being shot so will know in about 10 days the condition of all this kit. It looks fine (first 65mm I got wasn't working but the seller refunded without hesitation, (second one arrives today)). Looking forward to getting back into MF film, I had a similar setup before I sold it to go digital.
 
Welcome back and welcome to the fusty and crusty section, a happy place filled with happy, slightly eccentric film shooters.
 
Fusty and crusty? I thought we were debonair and sophisticated. Oh well.
Maybe we're Fine and Carefree? There must be a better word for classy beginning with C... Oh!
 
New joiner here, just bought an SQ-Ai with 40mm, 65mm, 80mm and 150mm. Test rolls (2 Backs) in the process of being shot so will know in about 10 days the condition of all this kit. It looks fine (first 65mm I got wasn't working but the seller refunded without hesitation, (second one arrives today)). Looking forward to getting back into MF film, I had a similar setup before I sold it to go digital.


Been there done it, SQAi, Pentax 6x45, whilst I may look back and think should I again....... it is always NEVER, as a lover of photography, there were only "the good old days" because we had not yet had anything else, when Digital came out it was the best thing to happen to photography, I have re bought, my first cameras, Nikon F Photomic FTn, Nikkormat and re sold them wondering "Why did I bother"

Enjoy your kit, sincerely, I hope it gives you many many hours of enjoyment but I am looking forward
 
Last edited:
Enjoy your kit, sincerely, I hope it gives you many many hours of enjoyment but I am looking forward
But how much fun do you have? I have three digital cameras and use two of them most weeks. I also have 52 film cameras and use most of them as well (but not every week!). The pictures resulting from all 55 cameras are different - none are 'better' but each is different - and allow me to express myself in different ways. Your Digital camera - regardless of model - cannot reproduce the pictures from my Bronica ETRs. I am not talking about resolution or "sharpness" but the feel and atmosphere of the resulting picture. My Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex does that differently again, thanks to the excellent Tessar lens. Digital is excellent at cold, precise pictures but film is better for art. Vinyl audio recordings surpass digital for much the same set of reasons.
 
Back
Top