Inherent advantages from a 6x7/6x9 vs 6x6?

[nightwolf75]

hi folks! need some opinions here.

apart from the (obvious) advantage of sizes, is there other inherent advantages of a 6x7/6x9 vs 6x6 format? reason i'm asking is cos i am toying with the idea of getting either the fuji 6x7 or 6x9 RF MF cameras. i checked ard, and the prices of these RF MF is very close to a 2nd-hand hassy 500CM. i once used a fuji GA645. but din really like the 645 format, nor the camera itself.

appreciate any inputs from those using the fuji RF MF. from my own readings, it would appear that the RF MFs are more portable compared to the hassy. but of course... hassy is a hassy. no fight in branding.

TIA!

[enivre]

Originally Posted by nightwolf75 hi folks! need some opinions here. apart from the (obvious) advantage of sizes, is there other inherent advantages of a 6x7/6x9 vs 6x6 format? reason i'm asking is cos i am toying with the idea of getting either the fuji 6x7 or 6x9 RF MF cameras. i checked ard, and the prices of these RF MF is very close to a 2nd-hand hassy 500CM. i once used a fuji GA645. but din really like the 645 format, nor the camera itself. appreciate any inputs from those using the fuji RF MF. from my own readings, it would appear that the RF MFs are more portable compared to the hassy. but of course... hassy is a hassy. no fight in branding. TIA!

6X9 is a lovely format, I've only seen the slides, never had the honor to shoot a 6x9 yet. But it's great for landscapes, that extra 3cm adds A LOT assuming you are using the same focal length.

6x7 is nice but sometimes that 7cm is still not long enough.

Other than that I can't think of any other advantages to be honest.

[nightwolf75]

Originally Posted by enivre 6X9 is a lovely format, I've only seen the slides, never had the honor to shoot a 6x9 yet. But it's great for landscapes, that extra 3cm adds A LOT assuming you are using the same focal length. 6x7 is nice but sometimes that 7cm is still not long enough. Other than that I can't think of any other advantages to be honest.

oh yes! i remember seeing a similar slide, pic of national stadium, at CP peninsula too, before renos. think they no longer put that slide up for display at where they sell the studio/film section liao.

hmm.. need to rethink.

[TimeMachine]

6X9cm is similar ratio as 35mm format (24X36mm) you have a lot of allowance to crop it into different format, like panorama, traditional 8X10in or 16X20 in.

[Rangefinder_fan]

I've the GW690 iii. Fairly light despite its size, prob due to the generous use of plastic.
Sturdy, looks like it'll go on shooting for a long time. Controls are so so, I dont like the way the aperture is set as it requires you to pull out a ring that will eventually scratch the aperture scales. It does not feel as precise as some of my older cameras, again, I put that down to the use of plastic in the camera.
Aside from that, been happy with the quality of the shots that I get out of it. The negs are hilariously large.
Portable? Well, its light, but the overall shape is kinda awkward. Its like carrying a largish book with a glass glued to the front of it..
May also note that you only get 8 shots out of this with 120.
May want to consider the GSW690 instead, if you arent already. The wider lens may make its bulk a bit more tolerable.

Originally Posted by nightwolf75 hi folks! need some opinions here. apart from the (obvious) advantage of sizes, is there other inherent advantages of a 6x7/6x9 vs 6x6 format? reason i'm asking is cos i am toying with the idea of getting either the fuji 6x7 or 6x9 RF MF cameras. i checked ard, and the prices of these RF MF is very close to a 2nd-hand hassy 500CM. i once used a fuji GA645. but din really like the 645 format, nor the camera itself. appreciate any inputs from those using the fuji RF MF. from my own readings, it would appear that the RF MFs are more portable compared to the hassy. but of course... hassy is a hassy. no fight in branding. TIA!

[nightwolf75]

Originally Posted by Rangefinder_fan I've the GW690 iii. Fairly light despite its size, prob due to the generous use of plastic. Sturdy, looks like it'll go on shooting for a long time. Controls are so so, I dont like the way the aperture is set as it requires you to pull out a ring that will eventually scratch the aperture scales. It does not feel as precise as some of my older cameras, again, I put that down to the use of plastic in the camera. Aside from that, been happy with the quality of the shots that I get out of it. The negs are hilariously large. Portable? Well, its light, but the overall shape is kinda awkward. Its like carrying a largish book with a glass glued to the front of it.. May also note that you only get 8 shots out of this with 120. May want to consider the GSW690 instead, if you arent already. The wider lens may make its bulk a bit more tolerable.

thanks! i was kinda attracted to the 690III cos of the 90/3.5 lens. i will probably shoot more portaits than landscapes with MF. 90mm on the 690III is pretty close to the view of the hassy planar 80/2.8, i think.

[eosandy]

You will get incredible detail for large+++ enlargements and a lot of scope for cropping.

Will you scan to digital?

[nightwolf75]

Originally Posted by eosandy You will get incredible detail for large+++ enlargements and a lot of scope for cropping. Will you scan to digital?

yep! but i dun do it myself. i ask the shop to do it. not cost-effective for me to keep a scanner at home.

[clubgrit]

Hassy is more than just a brand, I personally love the output from their MF lenses, just the right balance for me. Fuji did make some 35mm Hasselblad lenses (Xpan).

With MF for portraits, most would prefer 150mm / 180mm (higher on a 6x7/6x9) because of the dof, and the size (like elbow to head, or head and shoulders). Of course, 90mm on 6x7 or 6x9 is still ok (just like a 35mm camera's 50mm lens, generally from below the waist to head - exceptions are Olympus lenses that can go very close), but still a bit short compared to an 80mm from a 6x6 camera. But it's all a matter of creativity anyway.

The Mamiya RB67 was a great portrait camera with the right lens, 6x7, found in many studios in the past.

6x9 would be more advantageous in landscapes, IMHO, or for group portraits


.

[nightwolf75]

Originally Posted by clubgrit Hassy is more than just a brand, I personally love the output from their MF lenses, just the right balance for me. Fuji did make some 35mm Hasselblad lenses (Xpan). With MF for portraits, most would prefer 150mm / 180mm (higher on a 6x7/6x9) because of the dof, and the size (like elbow to head, or head and shoulders). Of course, 90mm on 6x7 or 6x9 is still ok (just like a 35mm camera's 50mm lens, generally from below the waist to head - exceptions are Olympus lenses that can go very close), but still a bit short compared to an 80mm from a 6x6 camera. But it's all a matter of creativity anyway. The Mamiya RB67 was a great portrait camera with the right lens, 6x7, found in many studios in the past. 6x9 would be more advantageous in landscapes, IMHO, or for group portraits .

yup. i've seen a 500CM + 80/2.8 in action, courtesy of my fren.

knowing that i shoot people more often than people, i was considering the hassy... but i'm keen on the portability of the RF MF compared to the hassy. mebbe i should borrow my fren's hassy for one more round....

[conherent]

The extended depth of field not found on smaller formats…. I am shooting on Fuji Gx680 (6x8cm)

[pipo999]

6X6 is a matter of getting used to composition but as you get the hang of it so find out that you can exploit your subject to the max. Furthermore I'm a big fan of TLR's since you are shooting from a lower viewpoint ('the hip') giving your shots a truly unique dimension.

[nightwolf75]

Originally Posted by pipo999 6X6 is a matter of getting used to composition but as you get the hang of it so find out that you can exploit your subject to the max. Furthermore I'm a big fan of TLR's since you are shooting from a lower viewpoint ('the hip') giving your shots a truly unique dimension.

i am partial towards 6x6 actually. except for a brief (but horrendous) trials with the GA645 and mamiya M645, most of my MFs dat i've used is 6x6 format. wat i dun like abt my TLRs is the handling lah. nothing wrong with them.

lets see how first...might end up getting back a 6x6 from another CSer who has kindly offered one to me.

thanks for all the info, folks!

[alucard]

Originally Posted by nightwolf75 i am partial towards 6x6 actually. except for a brief (but horrendous) trials with the GA645 and mamiya M645, most of my MFs dat i've used is 6x6 format. wat i dun like abt my TLRs is the handling lah. nothing wrong with them. lets see how first...might end up getting back a 6x6 from another CSer who has kindly offered one to me. thanks for all the info, folks!

The 6x6 is a great format for all round shooting. It is the most convenient shooting format for cropping later. However, I have sold my C33 and kept the GW690III. The 6x9 is more natural if you are a 35mm shooter. The 90/3.5 lens is very sharp and gives very pleasing OOF areas.

I did not get a MF SLR because of the mirror slap. I know it is not a issue for many, but I prefer the RF mechanism.