Fuji GX680, good idea?

sirch

sirch

Lu-Tze
Admin
Messages
104,475
Name
The other Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
This could be the worst attack of GAS ever but I have had an itch to scratch for a medium format camera for a while now and the Fuji GX680 is looking very appealing. However I have never even used a medium format SLR and it’s over 30 years since I processed a roll of 120 so is the Fuji the place to start? Several times now I have nearly bought a Mamiya and I have been keeping an eye on Bronicas too but the Fuji just seems like the ultimate in flexibility at this format with the movable front standard. I am really enjoying doing some set-up, indoors, “product” type shots at the moment and add to that the fun of a moveable lens and I can see that I would get some use out of it.

So what is stopping me? Well, mainly it’s not having a clue what I am getting into. It’s OK seeing something for sale but then to buy it only to find it is missing some rare and exotic part or needs £££ on repairs to get it going puts me off. Also if I am going to invest some time and effort in learning to use the thing batteries are a concern, NiCds have a short-ish life and there doesn’t seem to be much of a market for third-party batteries and it would be annoying to find that once I had learned to use it I no longer could because the batteries wouldn’t hold charge.

I know I could probably sell it for something close to what I buy it for if I don’t like or use it, so not much to lose but given my complete lack of experience with these things I’m interested in understanding the pros and cons. So do you have one or have you used one? Is it the best thing since single malts? Will I need a second mortgage? What are the pit-falls? What essential extra bits should I be looking for (remote release, prism finder, etc)? Should I see a psychologist?
 
Are you ever likely to want to take it outdoors with you? The size of the Fuji makes it a studio camera only in my eyes.

As for lens movements the Rolleiflex SL66 has some and the Mamiya RZ67 (maybe the RB67 also) has an accessory that fits between the lens and body to allow some movements. Both have bellows focusing which is great for close up work. The benefits of the Rolleiflex and the Mamiya are portability (I'll happily carry my RZ around on photo walks) and they use easily available batteries. The focus screen on my RZ is a thing of beauty and the results compared to 35mm are so much more impressive.

I don't have any experience with the Fuji but I can definitely say that medium format is well worth shooting with whichever camera you choose.

As a final thought if you really wanted the extra movements you're probably better off using a large format camera. You could always have a medium format camera and then put your name down for a Chroma 4x5 ;-)
 
Another vote for the RZ67 as the Fuji is very weighty and huge. I don't consider the RZ67 a small camera by any means, especially when compared to a Hasselblad, but look at the difference between the Fuji and the RB67! If you need movements and medium format then a field camera with a roll film back will most likely be smaller and lighter than the Fuji.

CAMERA WARS - GX680 is the boss, RB67 looks small next to it by Fredrik Lundén, on Flickr

You are probably right to be concerned about batteries, and electronics, and replacement circuit boards are going to become harder to get as time goes buy. I picked up a complete RZ67 outfit with 3 lenses, 2 backs, prism finder and other bits and pieces for under £700.
 
Last edited:
Hi Chris,

Well the first thing is that it is a big beast of a camera system,(how fit are you). the second is there are so much better(IMO) MF camera,s.

My opinion is that you should based your genre indoor work,product shots etc, Have a look at the Bronica ETRSi body with lenses from 40mm through to 250mm if you want,but, The 40mm and 50mm are great performers and the 105mm macro is a very good Performing lens.

The ETRSi body allows for good flash coupling which should accommodate your needs.

Good luck anyway and welcome to the dark side of MF film.
 
Last edited:
Jesus, I didn't realise the Fuji was that much bigger than the Mamiyas! :eek: The Mamiya is a monster of a camera (the real Beast from the East) so for it to look so teeny weeny in that photo, the Fuji must be crazy big. I definitely wouldn't want to take one outside, unless you can get Eddie Hall to carry it for you.

As has been said, you can get bellows attachments for the RZ which lets you do movements (I'm sure @Kevin Allan has one?) so apart from very slightly bigger negatives I'm not sure what the advantage of the Fuji is?
 
sirch said:
I am really enjoying doing some set-up, indoors, “product” type shots at the moment and add to that the fun of a moveable lens and I can see that I would get some use out of it.
Click to expand...

If this is how you intend to use the camera, then the Fuji and the Rollei SL66 be may best suited to your needs in medium format. The Rollei is much smaller, but is limited only to tilt and tilts only at distances closer than infinity (although you can adapt lenses that will allow movements at infinity, which I've done).

A large format camera with a roll film back is also a very real, and potentially lighter option than the GX680, although the SLR viewing of the GX680 (and the SL66) is lost with this option.

If you intend to use the camera in other way, outside of portraiture, still-life, or close-up photography, the GX680 might not suit you though.

medwaygreen said:
the second is there are so much better(IMO) MF camera,s.
Click to expand...

Better in what way?

If the OP intends to use it primarily for product-type shots, as intimated in the initial post, the GX680 is a better camera than any you have suggested and is very well suited to the task. If he intends to go hiking with it too, then you would be right that there might be better options available.

The GX680 is actually quite a nice camera. It doesn't suit my usual style of photography, but I can certainly see how it could be really useful depending on one's needs.
 
If you are seriously loking for one there are a couple of models that all differ very slightly.

Most use NiCad batteries, which can be replaced either by yourself, if your good with a soldering iron, or I have seen places on either EBay or the web offering this service. I think the MkIII had the ability to use ordinary batteries, but would check on that.

Also you might see the 'S' models around, these were built without the front movement you got in the other models as a way of making them cheaper.
 
[QUOTE The GX680 is actually quite a nice camera. It doesn't suit my usual style of photography, but I can certainly see how it could be really useful depending on one's needs.[/QUOTE]

Nice camera In what way?

*Mod edit*
That last bit is not required!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Have you seen this guy's overview of the system on YouTube? He goes into loads of detail. Worth watching all the videos if you're in any way serious about the purchase. But like others have said, there are probably 'better' systems out there, on balance. Having said that, it looks absolutely superb if you're passionate about still life/interior/studio photography.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MB4hLCAU6cQ


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yq-1zRBomt4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVsg9RV6WnQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yViibd-Xijw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ceTw4qJqaE

He's done a lot of informative videos for film shooters generally, covering alt processing and large format photography etc. https://www.youtube.com/user/macgabhan/videos
 
Last edited:
Thanks all, plenty of food for though there. Seeing it next to the RZ67, it is a beast isn't, it, perhaps its a physiotherapist not a physcologist I'll be needing. Also, with the waist level finder on a tripod it's either going to be pretty low or I'll need steps to look into the viewfinder.

As for taking it outside, perhaps sometimes but not often and I am fairly used to lugging quite a lot of ironmongery around the countryside on my back so I'm not too bothered about that and it would be a real bit of one-upmanship on the kids with their iPhones :)


FujiLove said:
View attachment 121580
Click to expand...
FujiLove said:
Sorry, I'm not helping the GAS, am I?
Click to expand...
Now we're talking, how much is one of those on ebay? :D

I have seen those vidoes, thanks.

Thing is I am now thinking I probably need a nice neat Bronica and the Fuji
yikes.gif
 
Got to say, the Hasselblad 500 is a nice little camera to carry around. Easy to hold in one hand, funnily enough around the same price as a RZ67 and all mechanical. Here's an idea of the size - my 500c/m compared to my RZ67 Pro II

DSC07075 by Lee Turner, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
medwaygreen said:
Nice camera In what way?
Click to expand...

Well, for certain types of photography, it's a nice camera. As intimated in my original post and as @FujiLove has noted in his:

FujiLove said:
But like others have said, there are probably 'better' systems out there, on balance. Having said that, it looks absolutely superb if you're passionate about still life/interior/studio photography.
Click to expand...

Like many cameras, the Fuji GX680 has some serious strengths and some serious drawbacks.

For certain types of photography (e.g., studio-based portraiture, still life, etc.), the movements, 6x8 aspect ratio, lenses, leaf shutters, and other elements of this system make it a very powerful tool and a nice camera to own. I think these cameras can even be outfitted with digital backs, so they are still very relevant in the digital world too. If you want to do interior, still-life, or studio portraiture photography and often work from a tripod, then the GX680 is a superb, professional tool capable of very good results.

At the same time, the Fuji also has some notable drawbacks (e.g., its size, in particular) that will seriously limit other types of photography. Quite obviously, It would be a very questionable choice for those who want to work quickly or handhold, for instance.

It's just about matching up the camera capabilities with the needs of the photographer. If the OP wants to specialise in product photography, then this could be a great choice; if he wants to do other things, then the GX680 might not be the best option.

medwaygreen said:
*Mod edit*
That last bit is not required!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why the name calling was necessary, as I don't think I said anything particularly controversial. Regrettably, this isn't the first instance that moderators have had to step in with comments you've directed toward me, so I think it's best that I block you at this point. Sorry, Richard.
 
The GX680 is the most stupidly ridiculous camera ever made. It's almost certain that you don't need one. In fact, I seriously doubt anybody needs one.

Buy one immediately. You will love it.
 
Tell you what, at the price it's going for at ffordes I'm more than a bit tempted. Do I need it, certainly not. I do want it though...
 
Carl Hall said:
As has been said, you can get bellows attachments for the RZ which lets you do movements (I'm sure @Kevin Allan has one?)
Click to expand...

I am indeed a former owner of the Mamiya NI701 Shift-Tilt Adaptor which provides for some movements in conjunction with some Mamiya RZ lenses. I have a blog article about it here - https://kevinthephotographer.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/using-the-mamiya-ni701shift-tilt-adapter/

However I sold the adaptor and put the cost towards an Intrepid 4*5 camera and two lenses (I sold it for more than the cost of the Intrepid body). Since then I have added a roll film holder to the kit. The large format kit is actually lighter than the RZ (and hence lighter than the Fuji) and allows movements with any lens. The Intrepid doesn't have enough bellows draw to do really close up work of very small objects, but in other respects it is a much more flexible, cheaper, and lighter way of getting movements than the RZ.

I still have two RZ bodies, four lenses, two extension tubes, etc - can't bear to part with them and for uses that don't need movements they are easier to set up than the Intrepid.
 
If it were me I'd just get a nice large format camera and a couple of lenses, all the movement you need at about a 1/4 of the weight.
Have a look at Steve's Chroma thread that weighs less than the film back on the GX (possibly :))
 
mdjchat said:
the Mamiya RZ67 (maybe the RB67 also) has an accessory that fits between the lens and body to allow some movements
Click to expand...
Just looked at the price of those, :eek: I can buy the whole Fuji system for less than just the Mamiya RZ67Tilt & Shift Adaptor so I think that's only really an option if you already have a RZ
 
sirch said:
Just looked at the price of those, :eek: I can buy the whole Fuji system for less than just the Mamiya RZ67Tilt & Shift Adaptor so I think that's only really an option if you already have a RZ
Click to expand...
Yep, the RZ67 is going for silly money now and the RB67 is starting to creep up.
 
sirch said:
Just looked at the price of those, :eek: I can buy the whole Fuji system for less than just the Mamiya RZ67Tilt & Shift Adaptor so I think that's only really an option if you already have a RZ
Click to expand...
I wasn't aware that they were quite so expensive. I had only recently seen one used in a YouTube vlog which is why I mentioned it. As others have said already you'd be better off buying an intrepid or Chroma instead of the adaptor and would probably get a lot more use out of it.

At the end of the day if you need to scratch that Fuji itch then there's a chance that nothing else will suffice until you do.
 
I was originally talked into getting a 5x4 camera on the day after going round Wells with a Mamiya RZ67 with shift lens - it let me travel lighter :D. I may start looking out for an RB67 if prices are rising. Mine's been out on loan for years and is the original model anyway.
 
Last edited:
Just to add - the image on a view camera is upside down, so possibly an adjustment step too far.
 
FujiLove said:
You're right in this regard, so you could definitely give one a try without too much of a financial penalty. Ffordes has a whole kit listed for £349!

http://www.ffordes.com/product/18022616420281

Sorry, I'm not helping the GAS, am I?
Click to expand...

Yes, a solid price, indeed. Although slightly more expensive, West Yorkshire Cameras also have a nice kit for a pretty affordable price. Their kit includes a slightly longer focal length and a different style viewfinder:

 
Andysnap said:
If it were me I'd just get a nice large format camera and a couple of lenses, all the movement you need at about a 1/4 of the weight.
Have a look at Steve's Chroma thread that weighs less than the film back on the GX (possibly :))
Click to expand...

The lure of the dark-slide is strong but where on earth do I start with a LF camera, I've been googling and those aren't cameras, they are Mecanno kits, camera, lens, film back. Really out of my depth there, off for a lie down ...
 
They are actually the simplest of all cameras - they only become complex because they are incredibly flexible in what you do with them (pun intended). Like all cameras, a light tight box with a lens at one end and film at the other. The only differences between a view camera and one like the Fuji is the lack of a mirror meaning that after focusing on the ground glass, you put the film in. Plus the image is upside down.

Large format cameras come in all types, just like 35mm - rangefinder, SLR and TLR as well as the view camera type like the Chroma.
 
sirch said:
The lure of the dark-slide is strong but where on earth do I start with a LF camera, I've been googling and those aren't cameras, they are Mecanno kits, camera, lens, film back. Really out of my depth there, off for a lie down ...
Click to expand...

Honestly, if I can use one then anyone can.
It took a little while and I nearly gave it all up on a couple of occasions but when you get into a routine it's actually, as Stephen says, very simple. And the rewards are stunning when it all goes well. :)
 
StephenM said:
They are actually the simplest of all cameras - they only become complex because they are incredibly flexible in what you do with them (pun intended). Like all cameras, a light tight box with a lens at one end and film at the other. The only differences between a view camera and one like the Fuji is the lack of a mirror meaning that after focusing on the ground glass, you put the film in. Plus the image is upside down.

Large format cameras come in all types, just like 35mm - rangefinder, SLR and TLR as well as the view camera type like the Chroma.
Click to expand...
Thanks, my previous comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek but I agree that like a lot of things in life the flexibility and range of options means a steeper learning curve.
 
Andysnap said:
Honestly, if I can use one then anyone can.
It took a little while and I nearly gave it all up on a couple of occasions but when you get into a routine it's actually, as Stephen says, very simple. And the rewards are stunning when it all goes well. :)
Click to expand...
Maybe one day, there is no way I am even close to processing 4x5, initially it would just be where to start with kit
 
You don't have to use large format film in a large format camera - you can use a roll film back. Get a 10x8 camera and shoot 6x17 :)
 
Yep, a large format can be used very easily with a roll film back without utilising any movements. Once you do start using the movements though you'll wonder how you photographed certain things without them. Say good-bye to the majority of converging verticals.

The big advantage for me to both a MF, like the Fuji, or a view camera is that it slows you down and makes you visualise the shot.
 
StephenM said:
They are actually the simplest of all cameras - they only become complex because they are incredibly flexible in what you do with them (pun intended). Like all cameras, a light tight box with a lens at one end and film at the other. The only differences between a view camera and one like the Fuji is the lack of a mirror meaning that after focusing on the ground glass, you put the film in. Plus the image is upside down.

Large format cameras come in all types, just like 35mm - rangefinder, SLR and TLR as well as the view camera type like the Chroma.
Click to expand...

Excuse the messy grab shots but I’m currently using @StephenM’s Wista 6x7 rollfilm back to finalise the new Graflok standard back for the Chroma.

IMG_1520376443.543266.jpg

IMG_1520376451.756834.jpg

IMG_1520376461.277511.jpg

On the face of it, large format is definitely a steeper learning curve but there’s nothing stopping you picking up one all round lens (eg a 150mm) and a rollfilm back then getting the same sized negatives using 120 film but a much lighter and more compact camera (1600g plus lens).
 
Jeez, will you guys stop it already! There I was happily bumbling along, toying with silly options for a MF camera, minding my own business, doing no one any harm, and BOOM, like Darth Vader dropping in unannounced I find myself lured towards the dark-slide and looking at 5x4 cameras. It's all starting to feel like I am being lead down a very dubious looking garden path:)

Firstly, “just get a 5x4 LF camera” they said; but in reality what do I actually need?
  • Body – i.e. bellows and ground glass
  • Lens – does any LF lens fit any LF camera?
  • Roll film back – does any back fit any camera
  • Film back - ditto
  • Anything else?

An then what do I need to know about roll film backs? My feeble brain is seeing these as like a crop sensor (yes, I know, I’ll wash my mouth out for saying that), i.e. I could use the same lens but I would get a cropped image on 120 film. Is this the case or do I need different lenses?

How does framing work on a roll film back? I assume the back controls how much film gets wound on etc. is there much waste since the back is wider?

Does the "crop factor" affect anything else, such as focusing ability, exposure, etc.?
 
sirch said:
Jeez, will you guys stop it already! There I was happily bumbling along, toying with silly options for a MF camera, minding my own business, doing no one any harm, and BOOM, like Darth Vader dropping in unannounced I find myself lured towards the dark-slide and looking at 5x4 cameras. It's all starting to feel like I am being lead down a very dubious looking garden path:)
Click to expand...

Hahah I can relate to this. I was innocently checking Instagram this morning and one of the accounts that I follow had linked to a vintage camera blog written by a camera store in the USA. They had got a Graflex Century Graphic 2x3 press camera in stock and decided to test it out. 2x3 you say? Not a current film format you say? Turns out that it used roll film backs (including those for the Mamiya RB67) and the standard lens for it is 100/ 105 mm focal length. So suddenly it starts to look like a viable shooter and a good alternative to lugging a 6x7 SLR around. The worst part is that they're actually really affordable so now I have that nagging little itch in the back of my mind. The one tested had a Zeiss tessar lens that gave some pretty nice results.
 
sirch said:
Jeez, will you guys stop it already! There I was happily bumbling along, toying with silly options for a MF camera, minding my own business, doing no one any harm, and BOOM, like Darth Vader dropping in unannounced I find myself lured towards the dark-slide and looking at 5x4 cameras. It's all starting to feel like I am being lead down a very dubious looking garden path:)

Firstly, “just get a 5x4 LF camera” they said; but in reality what do I actually need?
  • Body – i.e. bellows and ground glass
  • Lens – does any LF lens fit any LF camera?
  • Roll film back – does any back fit any camera
  • Film back - ditto
  • Anything else?

An then what do I need to know about roll film backs? My feeble brain is seeing these as like a crop sensor (yes, I know, I’ll wash my mouth out for saying that), i.e. I could use the same lens but I would get a cropped image on 120 film. Is this the case or do I need different lenses?

How does framing work on a roll film back? I assume the back controls how much film gets wound on etc. is there much waste since the back is wider?

Does the "crop factor" affect anything else, such as focusing ability, exposure, etc.?
Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of Film & Conventional where we will all happily help you spend your money. I only opened this section once by accident and now have a house full of film cameras and am about to start building 126 Chromas! :D

To answer your questions;

  • Body – i.e. bellows and ground glass - Most new systems will come with both of these already as they're generally made to fit that particular camera
  • Lens – does any LF lens fit any LF camera? - Within reason, yes. The main limitations are generally the length of the bellows (draw) and the size of the lens board. To focus any camera, regardless of the medium, the lens has to be a set distance from the film/sensor (flange depth). For example, if you buy a 90mm lens for large format, the flange depth is generally around 90mm, if you buy a 150mm lens, it's around 150mm. This will vary with some lenses (telephoto design are generally mounted closer to the film than their focal length) but is a good rule of thumb. Therefore, you need a camera with enough bellows draw to allow you to focus to infinity and everywhere up to that point. My Chroma has a maximum bellows draw of just over 300mm. Coupled with that, you need to factor in the physical size of the lens and the shutter size it needs as a result. A Copal 0 sized shutter is pretty common and uses a 36mm hole in the lens board to mount. A Copal 1 shutter is larger, and a Copal 2 is larger again. The lens board has to fit into the front standard of the camera (the part that holds the lens and allows it to move forwards/backwards).
  • Roll film back – does any back fit any camera - You can purchase any 4x5 (or 5x4!) rollfilm back and it will fit any large format camera with a Graflok/International standard back. The rollfilm holder is basically mounted to a plate that's the same size as a basic 4x5 sheet film holder so fits into the same cutout on the back of the camera.
  • Film back - ditto - As above, a basic 4x5 'DDS' "Double Dark Slide" sheet film holder is a standard size across all manufactures, although there may be some variation in the way the dark slides are locked in place).
  • Roll film back spacing - There are two broad types of roll film backs, those with simple manual rollers that you turn to wind on the film and use a red window on the back to stop when the next frame number is visible, and those with geared winding levers like a 35mm camera that will wind the film on the correct amount automatically. Whichever type you use, the offer the same end result.
  • Crop Factor - I'm not 100% sure about the comparison? A 90mm lens gives a wider field of view on 4x5 than a 90mm lens on a 6x9 system but if you use a rollfilm back, you're actually cropping the centre of the image so you will probably end up with a similar field of view. I haven't compared both options though so someone else might be better clarifying that?
 
-
stevelmx5 said:
  • Crop Factor - I'm not 100% sure about the comparison? A 90mm lens gives a wider field of view on 4x5 than a 90mm lens on a 6x9 system but if you use a rollfilm back, you're actually cropping the centre of the image so you will probably end up with a similar field of view. I haven't compared both options though so someone else might be better clarifying that?
Click to expand...

If you used 4x5 as your standard format then yes 6x9 would be cropped/you'd have a narrower field of view if you were standing in the same spot. Roughly, 6x9 is to 4x5" as APS-C is to 35mm.


The numbers below aren't exact but they're in the ballpark:

Code: 
FORMAT                                WIDE           NORMAL       TELE
35mm                                    28mm            50mm        85mm

6x9cm                                   55mm            90mm       165mm

4x5in/9x12cm                            90mm           150mm       240mm
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top