Guest AgXlove Posted November 30, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just wondering if anyone owns one of these cameras or has had a chance to photograph with one. I have owned 120/220 cameras in the past and am thinking of getting back into medium format. The Bessa 667 seems like it would be a great way to go. What are your experiences/impressions of this camera? I'm wondering about the lens in particular - does it produce contrasty, sharp, quality negs/chromes? Are there any annoyances or eccentricities as far as design or performance? Any information that anyone can share will be greatly appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 30, 2009 Posted November 30, 2009 Hi Guest AgXlove, Take a look here Voigtlander Bessa 667 questions. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
antistatic Posted November 30, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 30, 2009 Over on Rangefinder Forum there is a subforum devoted to the Bessa. It looks a beautiful camera but quite expensive. With so many good 2nd hand MF options for much less money, I personally would find it hard to justify. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted November 30, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 30, 2009 Agreed, I love the fact that they have made this camera but its simply too expensive (but very desirable!). You could buy a nice Zeiss folder instead, if you want the compact size, otherwise look at the usual suspects, Rolleiflexes, Bronica, Mamiya, 'Blad... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AgXlove Posted November 30, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 30, 2009 Agreed, I love the fact that they have made this camera but its simply too expensive (but very desirable!). You could buy a nice Zeiss folder instead, if you want the compact size, otherwise look at the usual suspects, Rolleiflexes, Bronica, Mamiya, 'Blad... True, the $2250US price seems steep, compared to the fire sale prices on most used 120/220 cameras these days. However, compared to this Mamiya | 7 II Pro Value Pack Medium Format Rangefinder | 215-220 the Bessa seems like a steal. Of course, you don't get interchangable lenses witht the Bessa like you do with the Mamiya 7 II. One question in my mind is this: At a given print size (say, 20" wide by whatever the height dimension would be, dictated by printing with no cropping) would you get a better quality print from a negative created using Leica M ASPH glass and the 35mm film size - or would a better print come from a 6x7cm negative using non-Leica glass like Voigtlander, Mamiya, Hasselblad or Rollei? I have often wondered about that issue, but have never found anything approaching a definitive answer... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted November 30, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 30, 2009 Ultimately the MF will be better quality, due mostly to the lower enlargement factor. I remember some time ago they tested a Seagull TLR image against the same image taken with - I think - a Nikkor 50mm lens. The Seagull has a basic 3 element lens but it won hands down. If you took two identical photos one with the Leica and one with the MF camera, printed both to the same size, which one would you prefer? That's less easy to answer! You need to also consider the way each individual lens draws, the effect of the grain on the image etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted November 30, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 30, 2009 I'm not sure it belongs in this forum but I'll comment briefly. I tried one for two weeks courtesy of the national distibutor. One camera is on tour to various photographers for a year. It is very well made, the lens is sharp and contrasty and has no visible vignetting, softness nor any other defect. It is possible to provoke flare which is insurprising since the front element is exposed. There is a hood available I would buy. The finder and the tab focusing are like an M7 on steroids. Transport is positive and accurate (frame spacing) 67 gives a huge area to frame within. Excellent Meter works fine. I shot transparency, CN & BW Mechanically excellent as is fit and finish. Here's the blog with some samples too. As to image quality, you will have to debate for yourself there. depends on compared to what, purpose, film/digital/scanning/ etc etc. I only printed at this point to A4. My M8 produces sharper more detailed prints. Size isn't everything. big transparencies look yummy on a lightbox though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted December 1, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ultimately the MF will be better quality, due mostly to the lower enlargement factor. I remember some time ago they tested a Seagull TLR image against the same image taken with - I think - a Nikkor 50mm lens. The Seagull has a basic 3 element lens but it won hands down. If you took two identical photos one with the Leica and one with the MF camera, printed both to the same size, which one would you prefer? That's less easy to answer! You need to also consider the way each individual lens draws, the effect of the grain on the image etc. I agree - the comparison between a Leica camera and glass and a cheap medium format is less clear. I got hold of a Yashicamat 124G (whose Yashinon lens is nothing special) specifically because I was interested in whether small format + excellent glass would outperform medium format + average glass. I have to say that IMHO Leica won hands down - I actrually expected it to be the other way round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted December 1, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 1, 2009 Years ago I took many pics with Rolleiflex - Planar 3,5 and also Mess-Ikonta 6x9 RF - coated Tessar 105 3,5, and I liked to make comparision with good Leica glass (not the very last ones, indeed - typically Summicron-Summilux 50 given that my MF lenses were "normal"). Usually, same Fuji Film or Kodak color neg : my idea was that color neg needed a SIGNIFICANT enlargement to show an advantage for MF... 20x30 cm wasn't sufficient, and 30x40 cm had to be looked from a not usual near distance to appreciate MF's plus. But the plus was real, under that circumstances. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AgXlove Posted December 1, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 1, 2009 I have printed Tri-X negs created with my MP and 28/2 ASPH to aproximately 10"x13" with a filed out neg carrier border on 11"x14" paper and have been very pleased with the print quality. These negs were created hand held with the film rated at ISO 400; even pushed to ISO 1600, I found Tri-X would produce nice results, although the prints seemed to be a bit lower in contrast (but not objectionably low) than the ISO 400 negs. From what others have reported, it sounds as if 11"x14" may be the limit for Leica M glass and 35mm negs - beyond that size, the 120/220 neg size seems to come into play regarding print quality. Now the question is - who makes the best 120/220 format lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted December 1, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 1, 2009 I've got lovely crisp and detailed 12"x18" prints from 35mm negatives, using a fine grain colour print film (Reala). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted December 1, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 1, 2009 Now the question is - who makes the best 120/220 format lenses? So many choices to consider: Zeiss for Hasselblad V mount; Mamiya for the Mamiya 7; Schneider/Rodenstock glass for large format cameras with 120 film back; ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haris Posted December 2, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 2, 2009 Now the question is - who makes the best 120/220 format lenses? I would LOVE one of Fuji MF cameras... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted December 2, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 2, 2009 I played with the Bessa at Aperture in London, they are stocking them new. It's pretty nice to handle, better than my Plaubel Makina 67 for ergonomics and there is TTL metering as well of course. New, it's not nice enough for the price to warrant trading the very sexy Plaubel - but when they reappear second hand I could be tempted to buy one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted December 2, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 2, 2009 I played with the Bessa at Aperture in London, they are stocking them new. It's pretty nice to handle, better than my Plaubel Makina 67 for ergonomics and there is TTL metering as well of course. TTL metering? How do they do that with a leaf shutter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted December 2, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 2, 2009 TTL metering? How do they do that with a leaf shutter? Hmmm, I think you are right - it must be external to the lens. It's the aperture priority auto exposure that is different to the Plaubel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stealthman_1 Posted December 3, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 3, 2009 Here's a link to some samples from my first couple rolls through the Bessa III. I quite like the camera, though I wish it were 6x9. The meter is excellent and MF folders are wonderful for packing inconspicuously. I recommend it for a backpacking camera (though a Bessa II is hard to beat). The only real tick the camera has is the requirement to be at infinity focus to close. I have a Fuji GW690 II and GSW690 III, can't argue with the quality of the optics on these. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AgXlove Posted December 5, 2009 Share #17 Posted December 5, 2009 I have always heard very positive things about the Fuji rangefinder lenses. The lenses for the Hasselblad XPAN are made by Fuji, and they produce outstanding chromes - very sharp and contrasty with very accurate color rendition. From what I have seen, Fuji lenses give up nothing to the Zeiss lenses made for the Hasselblad 6x6 cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted December 5, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 5, 2009 Here's a link to some samples from my first couple rolls through the Bessa III I think you forgot to post the link? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stealthman_1 Posted December 7, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 7, 2009 Ooops! Glad I've never done that with an attachment... Bessa III First Rolls Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 7, 2009 Share #20 Posted December 7, 2009 Nice, some excellent images there. Did you rely on the auto exposure mode? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.