BRONICA RF645 FOR SALE PRO
The build quality is excellent, which puts up the weight, but it is compact (for an MF camera) and is about the same size and maybe lighter than a pro level 35mm like a Nikon F5. I have the Bronica RF so I will tell you about that. If you dont need to shoot square and would crop to 6x4.5, the M7s will give you 42 square cms of image area, while 6x4.5 will give you 27 square cms of image area. Setting cost aside, I like to shoot full-frame, black border, square images from time to time. This is an interesting feature, but is not a deal-breaker for me with the M7s. Given that you have about a 5X larger image to use than 35mm, you can crop anywhere in a frame and still have big enough acreage to make significant enlargements.Īs to build quality, I think Ken is peeved that the M7s dont fold in somewhat like the M6s. One thing that is nice if kids are running around an area is that you can back up take a wide shot, leave waste so that the kids arent running out of the photo and crop later. The 150mms are also fine for kid shooting, but perfect focus at close distances is critical. The 75/80mm lenses for the M6 and M7 are fine for kid shooting though these largeish rangefinders are not as quick to use as an AF SLR. The M7 150mm would not be good for head-and-shoulders portraits, but is superb for half- and full-body portraits. Ken Rockwell is 100% correct that this lens is an improvement on the Hasselblad SWCs 38mm Biogon and the Mamiya 43mm is easily the best ultrawide Ive ever used. I would also recommend the 43mm Biogon-design lens for the M7s equal to a 21mm lens on a 35mm camera. It is also the shortest lens for the M7 that doesnt require a shoe-mounted viewfinder and its image fills the rangefinder. The 65mm lens is equal to a 32mm lens on a 35mm camera.
If you went with the M7, I would recommend the 65mm lens over the 50mm or the 80mm. Finally, the M6 lenses are a little smaller than the M7 lenses because they are able to project smaller image circles. And while the 150mms must be focused with some care, they are no more difficult to focus than a short telephoto on a Leica M body. I agree with much of Kens reviews, but the 6s and 7IIs have the same rangefinder base. The 75mm and 150mm lenses are also exqusite. The 50mm on the Mamiya 6圆 is brutally sharp and is somewhat equal to 28mm in 35mm format- though it is difficult to make a comparison as between square and rectangular formats. Any additional info that I may have missed would also To know about the using the normal and tele lenses on the 6 and 7 to So, here I am, hoping someone can help me out. That system is a bit more affordable, as well. He claims the 150 is easier to focus accurately on the 6 than the 7. I had essentially eliminated the M6 until I read Ken Rockwell's site. Would the 150 be too tight for general use? Would the 80 be too Only affordable used, and even then, the lenses are very expensive. The M7 body is slightly bigger and the lenses are much bigger. Three lenses pushes up the price, and it's really onlyĪvailable new. Have to get it with the 65, as well, because it's rarely available The RF645 has the two lenses I'm most comfortable with. I can also see the advantage of square format. Horizontally outdoors, so the vertical/horizontal viewfinder issue I frequently shoot vertically when photographing the kids and I use the 100mm to photograph the kids (generallyįull body shots, rarely a portrait) and the 40mm for most landscapes. I'm happy with the 40mm and 100mm perspective on 645 film, they fit Thinking of trading in the system for a rangefinder kit. Take on trips, but too often, it stays in the bag at home. I would like to use MF to photograph my kids and to Not using it much because it's too heavy and bulky (I use my EOS Lure of multiple backs for B&W and color attracted me. Indoors, I add on a grip/winder and a Vivitar 283. I've used a Bronica ETRS, AEII prism, with 40mm and 100mm lenses for aįew years now.
0 kommentar(er)
