Talk me into /out of a Texas Leica

[guangong]

Yes to group photos, that's also why some of these cameras have settings for 4-exposure rolls of 120 film, perfect for group shots plus a backup exposure.

The cameras can certainly be used for candid and street photography too, but personally I think some of the big-film advantages are lost unless the camera is held really steady. Although not inconspicuous, IME, the sheer size of the camera seemed to amuse people!

And since no one else has mentioned it, I will: 6x9 was once a common format, even for box cameras. I suppose one big reason is that 6x9 is big enough that contact prints may suffice as final output.

Contact prints were most likely the method employed to distribute souvenir pictures to tour members.

 

[4season]

Contact prints were most likely the method employed to distribute souvenir pictures to tour members.

My memory of Japanese group photos in the 1990s is a bit hazy, but they typically delivered enlarged prints while the group was still in the area, and I don't recall it being a long wait.

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Well, 6x9 is exactly the same proportion as.... 24x36?

Yes, and that is why you also have to decide whether to crop 35 mm shots to fit the paper, or crop the paper to print them full-frame.

 

[Chuck1]

No - those represent the number of exposures you could get with 220 film, 120 film, or the special half-length 120 film that was apparently available in Japan at one time.

Thanks never heard of 1/2 length 120.
now it makes sense.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I found out the hard way. I somehow accidentally changed the setting to 4 frames when driving down the highway, and then couldn't figure out why the shutter wouldn't work after the fourth shot.
I was in a hurry, so put in a new roll, and only after the trip noticed that feature.

But the naysayers of this series of cameras plainly haven't used one. They're highly useful, well built, and perhaps the best MF bargain out there. For many LF shooters, they're the preferred choice when smaller size and quicker operation are needed. I only regret that it took me so long to discover that.

 

[GregY]

Yes that is something I never got - MF RF, bigger than 35mm RF, so less practical in street, smaller than LF so less whatever for large enlargements, not modular so not as flexible as MF systems.

I still dont get the special use case, it seems all other options are better suited to their specific case.
I guess the point of a Texas Leica is just to play with a f-ing huge camera from 1970s. Which has an attraction in its own right. Like a pre-oil-crisis 8.2. Caddy.

Have any notable photographers used the TL?

Jay Dusard, noted for his "The North American Cowboy: A Portrait" (8x10 work), used the Fuji GW690 on the set of the Robert Redford movie "Horse Whisperer." The simplicity of the Fuji is one of it's strong points.... not battery dependent like the Mamiya 6 & 7. If you print in a darkroom, the larger negative is a big step up from 35mm (even with Leica or Zeiss lens quality). Sometimes you don't need modular or flexible systems. Doisneau & Avedon did fine with the Rolleiflex... Bruce Weber with the Plaubel Makina. Fixed lens cameras can be very versatile.
Personally I've used them for years, carrying them in the mountains in N America & Europe. They're superb instruments.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Proportions : A common snapshot and postcard size, 5X7 inches, is much better suited to the 35mm and 6X9 ratio than 6x7 cm. But for those of us who do our own enlargements, we can use any proportion we please. And full 6X9 does offer twice the real estate as a 645 film back.

Like Greg, I've taken the GW690ii into the mountains. Just before I turned 70, I did a hundred mile trek involving storms which were either too windy for a tripod, or where I needed to quickly pop out of the tent during a multi-day blizzard, get the shot, and then get back inside. I didn't carry the 4x5 at all on that particular trip, yet still ended up with a number of wonderful prints. A tripod was used in most instances, but not all.

And often, in such circumstances, the more basic the equipment, the better; no electronics or battery to worry about. I work off a handheld meter, or even memory of analogous lighting situations.

 

[macfred]

GW670iii - EBC Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 here for several years - no issues so far ...
Love it for color film.

FUJI GW670iii - FUJINON 90mm f/3.5 - Kodak Ektar 100

FUJI GW670iii - FUJINON 90mm f/3.5 - Kodak Ektar 100

Fuji GW670iii - EBC Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 - Ektar 100


but for b/w too ..

FUJI GW670iii - FUJINON 90mm f/3.5 - Kodak T-Max 400

FUJI GW670iii - FUJINON 90mm f/3.5 - Ilford XP2 Super

 

[abruzzi]

GW670iii - EBC Fujinon 90mm f/3.5 here for several years - no issues so far ...
Love it for color film.


View attachment 371212
FUJI GW670iii - FUJINON 90mm f/3.5 - Kodak Ektar 100

that needs some explanation. a piece or road moves out of the way like an over designed drawbridge?

 

[macfred]

that needs some explanation. a piece or road moves out of the way like an over designed drawbridge?

Hope this will help ...

Slauerhoffbrug, Leeuwarden, Province Friesland / NL
Bridge raised for river traffic.

<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slauerhoffbrug" rel="noreferrer nofollow">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slauerhoffbrug</a>

 

[RezaLoghme]

Proportions : A common snapshot and postcard size, 5X7 inches, is much better suited to the 35mm and 6X9 ratio than 6x7 cm.

Wait a minute - 6x7 is often the excuse why people do say they dont want a Hasselblad, and go for a Mamiya. Now suddenly 6x9 is supposed to be "better", just until someone comes round the corner and says 6x8 is the ultimate answer to all questions.

The more I am learning about the camera from its owners, the more apologetic it sounds. In another forum I read about the limited DoF and that you need to stop the lens one more down to actually achieve the promised DoF. I get the "tourist group photograph" use case and the half-film and all that. But its does not sound as if that kind of camera has ever played a substantial role, exceptions notwithstanding. Most interesting to read would be owners of Hasselblad etc to say that they are looking to upgrade to one of the TLs, but that I have never seen. I simply see owners defending their decisions with a huge sunk-cost bias.

And before current owners - or mods - attack me : this is just my very personal opinion and if you are happy with the Bill Bryson use case of cameras ("neither here nor there") I applaud you.

 

[Don_ih]

this is just my very personal opinion

So what was the point of this thread? Understandably, no one cares what camera you buy and people like to talk about whatever anyone proposes, but you phrased the question at the beginning suggesting you were seriously considering buying one of these. Yet all you accomplished was bashing?

 

[MattKing]

There is an entire world of photographers out there who are much happier with a 3:2 aspect ratio.
And there is an entire world of photographers out there who are much happier with a 4:5 (~6:7) aspect ratio.
Just as there is an entire world of photographers out there who are much happier with a 1:1 (~Hasselblad) aspect ratio.
And as there is an entire world of photographers out there who are much happier with a big camera that yields a really large negative.
Along with there being an entire world of photographers out there who are much happier with a little camera that yields a really small negative.
And don't get me started about the arguments between fans of SLRs vs. rangefinders.
And finally, there is a really big world of photographers out there who are happy using different cameras in different circumstances, to fill differing needs.
There is no single type of camera that is "the best" or will do everything.
I don't have a "Texas Leica". I would like one, to be used for some of my photography. It might replace my Kodak Tourist (or might not) but I would still continue to use my Retina IIIc, or my Olympus OM cameras, or my Canon EF film cameras, or my Mamiya C330 or my Mamiya 645 camera or ....

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've never taken a "group tourist" photo in my life. Probably neither have 99% of those who now happily shoot "Texas Leicas". And many of us have strong large format backgrounds. I shot only 4x5 for two decades, and mainly 8x10 for another decade, so I think I know what a fine print looks like! In the meantime, my brother - who sold Linhof and Rollei gear - borrowed my Pentax 6x7 system, because he personally obtained better shots that way. I got it back after he passed away, but now shoot the Fuji RF's even more than the Pentax 6X7 SLR.

There is absolutely nothing "apologetic" about this. The point is informed explaining of the relative pros and cons compared to other MF options. If I wanted a Hassie or even a Mamiya 7, I would have bought that instead - I certainly had the opportunity to at reasonable pricing. This isn't about going around bragging about owning a Leica or Hassie lapel pin. "The proof is in the pudding" - the results!

What is my "best" camera? Whatever one I choose to carry on a particular day. Last week I went out with the 6X9 RF and an Ebony 4X5. I don't even know what I'll use later this week - 8X10? The P67? The Fuji RF again? Just like with outdoor house painting this time of year, a lot depends on the wind forecast. It's howling at the moment.

I'm sorry that nobody talked you out of purchasing one of these, like you requested, but instead spoke up for the Fuji RF. So I guess that's why you had to talk yourself out of it.

 

[warden]

Most interesting to read would be owners of Hasselblad etc to say that they are looking to upgrade to one of the TLs, but that I have never seen.

A Texas Leica is not an upgrade from a Hasselblad any more than a Hasselblad is an upgrade from a Texas Leica. They are quite different cameras, each with their strengths, and it's a great idea to own and enjoy both if you think it would be fun or useful.

Dont ask me why, but I have to been bitten by the Texas Leica Bug recently.

It seems you have been cured. I think you were cured at post #1 actually but whatever.

 

[mshchem]

the III has a cheap panoramic adapter that is amazing. way better than XPAN

What's this? I tried a China made device, doesn't work, not sufficient friction to cock shutter, move frame counter. I just crop when required

 

[chuckroast]

Wait a minute - 6x7 is often the excuse why people do say they dont want a Hasselblad, and go for a Mamiya. Now suddenly 6x9 is supposed to be "better", just until someone comes round the corner and says 6x8 is the ultimate answer to all questions.

The more I am learning about the camera from its owners, the more apologetic it sounds. In another forum I read about the limited DoF and that you need to stop the lens one more down to actually achieve the promised DoF. I get the "tourist group photograph" use case and the half-film and all that. But its does not sound as if that kind of camera has ever played a substantial role, exceptions notwithstanding. Most interesting to read would be owners of Hasselblad etc to say that they are looking to upgrade to one of the TLs, but that I have never seen. I simply see owners defending their decisions with a huge sunk-cost bias.

And before current owners - or mods - attack me : this is just my very personal opinion and if you are happy with the Bill Bryson use case of cameras ("neither here nor there") I applaud you.

1. You asked for opinions and they were freely given.
   
   
2. It's bad form to carp about said opinions, and even worse form to suggest a motive like "apologetic".
   
   
3. Cameras are to photographers as paint brushes are to painters - each serves a different purpose in the constellation of producing the final work product.
   
   
4. A 000 brush is not an "upgrade" from a 00 brush. In the same way, a Hasselblad or Leica or Fuji or Nikon or Canon or ... isn't an "upgrade" from some other system. They are each different ways of approaching visual problem solving.
   
   
5. Ditto different formats.
   
   
6. It is almost never the case that switching formats or equipment will make your work better. Maybe in some very narrow areas like sports or scientific image capture, equipment may matter a lot. But generally, it matters less than you might think. I've taken wonderful stuff in nearly every format from 35mm to 4x5, and I've comparably created utter dreck across that range of formats. Same thing for different camera brands.
   
   
7. What I think most here are trying to do (if I may be so bold as to speak for the class) is to provide you with insight into the tradeoffs as you move across formats and equipment.
   
   
8. While these questions of equipment are fun, it's useful to spend more time developing one's vision of the world and getting a sense of how you want to "paint" with your camera.

I say this with utter hypocrisy insofar as I own way too many brands of cameras, lenses, and different formats. Oh well, it keeps me out of the bars and off the streets...

 

[mshchem]

New Adapter Kit for Fujifilm 690 6x9 Camera 120 to 135 Medium Format Film Photo | eBay

Product Feature We will do our best to resolve problems for you.

www.ebay.com

These do not work.

 

[Radost]

These do not work.

Yes they do. Fit perfect.

 

[brancaleone]

Hi,
in my opinion it does not make much sense to compare a TL to a 6x6, and even less to a 135 format camera.
6x9 negatives are different league, and the question should be 'what camera would be best if I want to go 6x9?'. The old Gl690 Professional or G690BLP with interchangeable lenses are very convenient in this regard. Those are spartan cameras, and therefore usually reliable (the only problem frequently been referred is with the curtain that enables changing of the lens mid roll), the lenses are good (I can speak about th 100mm, 50mm and 180mm) and the size of the negative helps also in this regard. The weight is considerable, but I find Pentax 6x7 and Koni Omega 6x7 heavier and less confortable to use hand held.
The donwnsizes. The first is personal: I don't like 3:2 ratio, I love 6x7 format, and in fact I am looking for a GM670. Secondly, using the RF is not always easy, especially with tele lenses.

 

[mshchem]

Yes they do. Fit perfect.

I tried, the adapters fit perfectly, but wouldn't turn the roller that cocks the shutter and advances the frame counter.

 

[Radost]

I tried, the adapters fit perfectly, but wouldn't turn the roller that cocks the shutter and advances the frame counter.

Did you change to 220 plate? I have not noticed that since I just shoot the 135 till it stops. But will test this weekend.
The results by the way “can not share because it is all my and my friends kids” are spectacular.

 

[Don_ih]

can not share because it is all my and my friends kids

You could share it like this:

 

[mshchem]

Did you change to 220 plate? I have not noticed that since I just shoot the 135 till it stops. But will test this weekend.
The results by the way “can not share because it is all my and my friends kids” are spectacular.

I tried everything. If you are successful let me know what brand you have, thanks

 

[reddesert]

Yes that is something I never got - MF RF, bigger than 35mm RF, so less practical in street, smaller than LF so less whatever for large enlargements, not modular so not as flexible as MF systems.

I still dont get the special use case, it seems all other options are better suited to their specific case.
I guess the point of a Texas Leica is just to play with a f-ing huge camera from 1970s. Which has an attraction in its own right. Like a pre-oil-crisis 8.2. Caddy.

Have any notable photographers used the TL?

This begins to feel a little like the Monty Python "But I came in here for an argument" sketch. You already have a medium format system camera, right? Maybe you don't need or want a TL Fuji 6x9 rf. It's ok to simply not want something. One doesn't have to make an argument that it's bad, just that one doesn't want it. It doesn't mean that other people who do want or use it are misguided.

I don't think "rangefinder" needs to be associated with street photography just because many prominent street photographers used the 35mm rf. There are places where a big RF seems not the ideal tool, for ex if I were going to do a lot of studio portraits. On the other hand, there are many stories on Photrio of people who shot weddings in the 70s using a 6x7 Koni-Omega RF. I suspect the Fujica 6x9 RFs were less common in the US back then, compared to the Koni-Omega and Mamiya medium format cameras. All of these were quite expensive professional tools at the time, and people probably did not flit between systems.

Although not any of those RFs, Bill Owens took many of the shots in "Suburbia" with a Brooks Veriwide, which is a 6x9 viewfinder camera with a (slow) 47mm lens. He used a bare bulb flash for the interiors. I think he also used some other camera, perhaps a Pentax 6x7.