Related Links:
Bronica ETR SLR Cameras (6x4.5cm)
Bronica GS-1 SLR Cameras (6x7cm)
Bronica RF645 Rangefinder (6x4.5cm)

The main Bronica/Tamron site has current manufacturer's information on this fine 6x6cm leaf shutter lens SLR (with interchangeable backs and viewfinders). You can also find many owners on the Bronica mailing lists at Yahoo/Egroups. Thanks to Danny Gonzalez, you also have a comprehensive review of the pros and cons of different MF SLRs, including Bronica SQ, as well as those of Peter Williams and others.

You will also find a number of comprehensive chapters in books such as Michael Freeman's Medium Format Handbook and Theo Disante's Medium Format guide (HP books, 1980s), along with Mr. Michael Beard's book on the Bronicas and so on. We also have a number of links and related articles on medium format buying tips which might be helpful.

One reason the Bronica SQ series is of major interest to many buyers is that Tamron/Bronica makes both the camera bodies and the lenses, unlike its other major 6x6cm leaf shutter competitors (i.e., Rollei, Hasselblad) who buy their lenses from Zeiss. This marketing structure adds a layer of markups and costs to those Zeiss lenses when resold by Hasselblad or Rollei, translating into major costs for buyers. Buying direct from the maker (here, Tamron/Bronica) can make a kit of Bronica SQ lenses and body circa $6,000 less than a similar set of 6x6cm leaf shutter lenses and a body from the Zeiss lensed competitors. Checking prices at our listing of medium format SLR lenses will illustrate some of these major savings (often, 40%).

Check the above reference for their full review and information on lens testing standards and their interpretation. Lens resolution is only one parameter among many in determining the quality of your images. Lenses also vary between samples, so you simply have to test your lens to ensure it hasn't been abused or mis-repaired and is working properly.

From the above chart, it appears that the wide angle (50mm) turned in one of the better performances in this focal length. The earlier Bronica S2/EC series cameras also had outstanding 50mm (and 40mm) wide angle Nikkor lenses, also turning in higher resolution ratings than the normal and telephoto lenses. Generally, the wide angle lenses are the hardest to make well, so this performance is very impressive.

Both the 50mm and 150mm yielded all "HI" ratings for central contrast, while the 105mm rated all "HI" for edge contrast. The 50mm rated 9 "excellents" and 5 "very goods", versus 5 and 6 respectively for the 105mm and 3 and 9 respectively for the 150mm. None of the lenses yielded any resolution rating below "good". So all of these lenses are capable of turning in professional results, as thousands of users will readily attest.

So you should feel free to consider the entire system cost and other features you need, since the lens performance of the pro 6x6cm leaf shutter SLRs is more than good enough for professional or serious amateur users alike. For example, I might not pick the Bronica SQ series if I were a dedicated macrophotography fan(atic). There is only one 18mm extension tube available (at $538!) rather than a range of tubes (cf. Hasselblad). So study carefully the overall system you are getting into, to avoid discovering system weaknesses the hard way - by running into them and having to start over!

Related Postings

you wrote:

>Does anybody out there has any experience with both the Bronica SQ-A or SQ-Ai
>and with any Hasselblad 500 model?

I shot a wedding last Sat night with a friend of mine. I used Bronica & he used 'blad. Both with a 45CL4 on camera and both the a 50mm lens. At one point he handed me his rig and it must have been twice the weight of mine. We've been shooting together for more than 5 years. It's his studio -- his name on the door and he has no trouble with the quality of the images my lenses produce.

--
regards,
Henry Posner
Director of Sales and Training
B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio Inc.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com

From Bronica Topica Mailing List;
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000
From: Kelvin Lee [email protected]
Subject: Re: [BRONICA] Bronica SQ-Ai vs. Kowa 66

Hi Uwe

Consistently good deals are the Bronica S2a. If overhauled, they produce great results and make wonderful machines for "hacking" barrel lenses for use on. The used Nikkor/Komura etc. lenses are plentiful and inexpensive (US$100-300@).

As for the SQAi, it too is a good machine... pretty reliable and the P-series lenses produce wonderful results. I have friends who have used it professionally for work and have not had major problems. Though one seemed to have a piece which has gone for repairs every year after the third. The leaf shutters in the lenses are wonderful... in that respect, easier to use for fillflash relative to the focal plane shutters of the S2a ...which only x-sync at 1/30. "not a problem", I thought.... but in the end, to me they were.

I have/had an ETRSi. Preferring something bigger, it was either Hassleblad, SQAi or GS1 (I want something reasonably portable too, so Mamiya RB/RZ is out). I noticed the rate of depreciation on the GS system is fantastic... about 50-60% ... but the system is limited. I assessed my needs, and figured that for what must be about 10-15% cheaper than an equivalent SQAi, I leap-frogged over the 6x6 SQAi and went straight to 6x7 GS1. If you are an amateur shooter with limited needs , this may be an option.

[Ed. note: re: 120 in 220 backs..)
From Bronica Mailing List:
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001
From: budd gottesman [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: Why are used 120 backs cheaper then 220

Lawrence,

I've done this many times over the years. Load the 120 film as if it were a 220 roll EXCEPT that you stop the film's arrow at approx. 90 degrees BEFORE the position for the 220 film's arrow to stop. This works for me perfectly every time. I've not had any noticeable 'pressure plate' problem. You may want to test this for spacing (for any doubts) with an outdated film roll with your lens off so you can mark the film thru the camera's front opening (minus lens).

REMEMBER...90 degrees BEFORE the '220' arrow mark...AND stop at frame 12 even tho the camera will usually count to "16" or so before winding thru. If not; and it's important shots...YOU'RE GONNA FEEL STUPID!

Budd

...

Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001
From: John Costello [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format,rec.photo.marketplace.medium-format
Subject: Re: The Best Medium-Format Camera Ever, period?

Daniel A Robertson wrote:

> I am trying to decide on what medium format system to go in for.
........
> Daniel

I have used a Bronica SQA for the last 11 years with absolutely no problems or regrets. The PS lenses (50, 80, 200) have all produced all the sharpness I can use (never larger than 16x20) The mirror lockup and multiple exposure features have been useful, especially the lockup. I think that careful and conscientious use of a tripod contributes more to ultimate sharpness than any small differences in major mfr. lenses. On that topic I selected the 6x6 partly because I don't have to flip the tripod head for verticals( without any scientific support, I just feel that everything is more stable when the tripod head is in the horizontal position and the camera is not pulling it to one side). Once in a while I have found that a subject I visualized as a horizontal crop would print better as a vertical. If I hadn't used the square format I wouldn't have had the negative that let me do that. Of course many would say that they always plan better than that, but for me it happens occasionally. Of course when I crop I have reduced the format to 4.5x6, but that is part of the compromise. One final note about the Bronica system: the electronically controlled shutter guarantees consistency among all lens sizes, no small matter.

Most of the cameras you listed, along with some others, are so well made and produce such fine negatives and slides that you will probably be happy with whatever choice you make. That's why just about all the respondents to your question are so enthusiastic about their own.

One last suggestion. Since price contributes in only a "small way", why not buy a used Rollei TLR (I used the same one happily for 40 yrs.) or Yashica and find out how you like MF before spending any big bucks? This can be done for $200.00 or less. Then you will have spent only $200 more than otherwise, and have a usable backup for emergencies.

John

Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001
From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Any suggestions, C330 kit or Rollei 6001?

John Halliwell [email protected] writes

>Hi folks,
>
>I've just been out today with my C330f and 80mm lens and thoroughly
>enjoyed myself, shot 3 rolls of 120 until the light disappeared
>(unusually high number with this camera). I'm looking to start building
>a decent 6x6 system, but wonder if I'm better moving to the Rollei 6001
>instead, before I spend lots of cash on some more lenses (I have only
>the 80mm at the moment).

Having spent some time thinking about it, I've decided to buy a Bronica SQ-B outfit, thanks for all the comments that have helped me out.

For those interested, my reasons are:

1) Originally I liked the 'TLR type' handling/design of the Rollei, having since spent some time with my Mamiya 645, WLF and manual wind crank, I've realised SLRs of this type handle quite well anyway.

2) I don't think I was ever really fully happy with an old TLR system, it would have been more attractive had the lens prices been lower, I will still keep the C330 though.

3) I was never happy with the Rollei's rechargeable battery, older Rolleis are harder to find in the UK.

4) The SQ-Ai would have been better, but the extra cost needed to make use of the AE ability ($1,000 for the AE prism) and TTL flash ($250 for the SCA module) is very high, especially since the extra cost for the basic camera is 40% more ($600 extra). Losing 'B' is the biggest problem, but I can't remember the last time I used it either. I could have bought used but I got a very good deal on the SQ-B, if I need the extra features in the future, I can buy a used SQ-Ai body knowing I always have a backup just in case.

5) If I really need AE, prism finders and power winders, the Mamiya 645 stuff will be useful (although I may sell it to concentrate on just the Bronica system).

Thanks once again, I'll let you know how I get on with it.

--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk

From: John Halliwell [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Recommendatons on new MF camera (GS-1 vs RB vs Pentax 67 vs SQ-Ai?)
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 

patrick [email protected]> writes
>Is that the *only* difference?  I thought i heard something about
>construction as well.

I think the SQ-B body is based on the older SQ-A (many of the
accessories for the SQ-B appear to be the same for the SQ-A and
different for the SQ-Ai).

I haven't had my hands on an SQ-Ai for comparison purposes, so can't
comment further on the construction, apart from to say it feels more
than adequate for my uses (I don't plan on throwing it around and
generally try to be careful with it).

The SQ-B is stripped of various features and only available as a
complete camera (body, 120 back, WLF and 80mm PS/B lens). The body won't
meter at all with any AE finder, and there's no TTL flash. The slowest
shutter speed is 8s (over 16s for the SQ-Ai) and there's no 'Bulb'
setting. The camera can shoot 'T' exposures, but not with the cut down
80mm 'PS/B' lens it comes with (the 'T' switch isn't present on that
lens), so you need other lenses to get it. The winder won't fit, but the
speedgrip will. The 120 back it comes with doesn't have an ISO dial and
won't connect to the body or AE finder (if used on an SQ-Ai etc). As
mentioned above the PS/B lens doesn't have the 'T' switch the others
have.

I went for the SQ-B because I couldn't see that I would ever want a
meter prism (the SQ-Ai basic kit and AE prism, costs twice what I paid
for the SQ-B). On reflection, the limited lens, 120 back and lack of TTL
metering probably make the SQ-Ai a better choice if you can afford it. I
saved about $500 US on the SQ-B ($1,500 opposed to $2,000), so the
saving was considerable (for the extra $500 I can probably get a used
SQ-Ai body anyway). I received a free back with it, this was the usual
SQ-Ai type back with the ISO dial and connections to the body etc.

I wanted a new camera and warranty, rather than buy used, largely for
piece of mind.

>>The Bronica only offers two extension tubes and a bellows set, all of
>>which are quite expensive (compared to say those for a Mamiya 645). 
>
>Point taken.

I forgot to mention Bronica also have a 1:1 110mm macro lens.

>>Had you not put landscape in there, for me it would have been an easy
>>RB/RZ choice, whether you'd persuade yourself to lug one around is
>>another question.
>
>Yeah, landscape is something I'm just kind of getting into, and as such will
>really be in the studio for the most part at the moment, so I'm not too
>concerned about that.  Yet.  
>
>>I found the bellows focussing of the C330 a pain when in the field, not
>>only does it look fairly fragile (possible over caution on my part), I
>>found framing awkward with the image magnification jumping around as I
>>adjusted the subject distance for composition.
>
>Thanks for the comments.  Can you elaborate on your experience w/ the SQ-B?
>Reliability?  Ruggability?

I carry it around quite a bit, but I'm not a heavy user. So far I've not
had any problems. It's the first leaf shutter SLR I've used and I
expected problems with the lens, body and back getting out of sync, but
it all seems to operate reasonably smoothly. The lack of somewhere to
put the darkslide is a bit annoying (the instructions tell you take it
out when a back's attached to stop it falling off accidentally!). I keep
the slide in when not shooting and haven't had any problems yet.

I find it far better as a field camera than the C330 and apart from the
nagging doubt I should have gone for the SQ-Ai, think I made the correct
choice. I've not used my Mamiya 645 since I bought it and I'm wondering
what to do with it.

Hope this helps.

-- 
John

Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk


From: "Wayne Sircoulomb" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Getting a  BRONICA  SQ-Ai
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 

A few years ago I bought two complete SQ's from a friend along with a 150mm
lens.  Both had rapid wind handles.  They were great to use and I fell in
love with them at once.  However, I only kept them for a year and then
traded them for Hasselblad stuff.  The first problem was that the dark slice
only needed to be about a 16th of an inch out and the shutter would release.
In a wedding this could be a serious problem.  The other problem was the
backs.  The wore out really fast and could not be repaired and returned to
like new condition.  New backs must be purchased.  By the way,  a repairman
that worked for Bronica told me not to let by backs get older than 3 years.
The main problem with the backs was the counter would stop, and if you
didn't catch it you could crank and shoot a lot of pictures.

On the plus side was their ease of handling with the rapid wind crank
installed.  The lenses are very well built and a dream to use,  You cannot
tell the difference between the Bronica negatives and Hasselblad negatives.

Wayne Sircoulomb


"Ken N Phann" knp@purvis/com> wrote 
>
> Hello Group.
>
> I have been shooting with a Mamiya 645 Super for the past couple of years,
> and I really enjoy the quality of prints that I get from medium format.
>
> There have been times that I think I would've like to shoot 6x6.
> So, now, a fellow at work (part time wedding photog, like me) needs to
part
> with his Bronica SQ-Ai.
>
> I've seen and held these cameras and almost fell in "love" with them with
at
> the local camera store.
>
> So, what can some of you people tell me about the strengths and weaknesses
> of this particular model.
> From what I understand, he is including the thumb-winder, an 80mm and a
> 150mm lens, polaroid back, 35mm back.
> I'll get a chance to check out the goods up close tomorrow, but wanted to
> get some feedback for now.
>
>
> Thanks, and best regards,
>
> --=== Ken N Phann ===--



From: [email protected] (Wilt W)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 15 Aug 2001 
Subject: Re: Battery for a Bronica SQA ?

A Bronica SQA does NOT take a MS76, which is a 'button cell'.  An SQA takes a
PX-28 battery (somewhat similar in appearance to a 6 volt shortened version of
a AA battery).  Equivalent to the PX-28 is the 544.  Unfortunately every
battery manufacturer has a different battery coding scheme like 544 or PX-28,
rather than a universal coding scheme like AA, C, D

--Wilt



From: "Anthony Wallis Wallis" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Which MF camera for portraits and weddings?
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2001 

You really ought to follow the auction sales on Ebay.

I am just re equipping for weddings and am on a tight budget to start. So
far have bought 2 Bronica SQA outfits with standard and wide angle lenses,
light meters (2) and a Metz flash outfit with 2 nicad packs. Good to very
good condition - so far have spent �700 UK

Tony



From: John Halliwell [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: bronica ETRSi vs. SQ-Ai
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 

Huib Smeets [email protected]> writes
>Yip, one wonders why you have to buy almost the double price for just 1,5 
>cm...

The SQ-Ai is expensive, if you can do without the luxuries of metering,
TTL flash and B, the SQ-B offers a considerable saving. The SQ-B will do
'T' exposures with standard SQ-Ai PS lenses (but not the PS/B lens that
comes with it)!

I bought the SQ-B primarily because I had a decent handheld meter and an
SQ-Ai + meter prism cost twice as much as the SQ-B.

-- 
John

Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk


From: [email protected] (Huib Smeets)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: bronica ETRSi vs. SQ-Ai
Date: 20 Sep 2001 

You must have misread the previous post.

SQ-B is a stripdown version of the SQAi, it lacks some of the
electronics that a SQAi is fitted with. You can install a metering
prism on it, but it is defunct because the contactpins on the body are
absent. Furthermore there is no TTL flash connector (Metz SCA or
Quantum). There are a few other minor differences as slowest
shutterspeed is 8 seconds (sqai : 16s) and other type of battery is
used.

The SQ-B uses the PS lenses and all other addons (filmbacks,
compendium, extension tubes, etc) as it does not have it own range of
lenses and addon's

The only exception (refering to the previous statement) are the 80mm
lens and 120 filmback when you buy the SQ-B kit. The 80mm PS-B doesnot
have a T shutterspeed (a pin on the lens) and AFAIK the 120 filmback
has no contacts and iso dial, contacts and dial are used in conjuction
with the metering prism.

If you know for shure that you'll never need a metering prism and not
want to do TTL/OTF flash, than the SQ-B could be a valid option.

I myself was shure about the metering prism (no need for my kind of
shooting) but about the flash I wasn't shure. So I let my eye-balls
roll a few times and payed the extra $$ for the SQAi.

But before anxiously buying a Bronica, look also at all those others,
maybe a Mamiya-7 RF suits you much better. What do you want to do with
the camera? studio Portrait, Landscapes, Street, etc etc.

Greetings,

Huib


"Neurula [Sydney]" [email protected]> wrote 
> but SQ-B is not compatible with newer lenses like PS lenses correct?
> 
> Im thinking ahead and I don't want to get a special edition that will be
> useless in 5-10yrs time.
> 
> 
> 
> "John Halliwell" [email protected]
> > Huib
> > Smeets [email protected]> writes
> > >Yip, one wonders why you have to buy almost the double price for just 1,5
> > >cm...
> >
> > The SQ-Ai is expensive, if you can do without the luxuries of metering,
> > TTL flash and B, the SQ-B offers a considerable saving. The SQ-B will do
> > 'T' exposures with standard SQ-Ai PS lenses (but not the PS/B lens that
> > comes with it)!
> >
> > I bought the SQ-B primarily because I had a decent handheld meter and an
> > SQ-Ai + meter prism cost twice as much as the SQ-B.
> >
> > --
> > John
> >
> > Preston, Lancs, UK.
> > Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk


From: "Tom Bloomer" bloomer@/"NoSpam>"/snip.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: S, S2 lenses for Bronica SQ-Ai
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 

No.  The mount is different and most of the old lenses don't have built-in
shutters - which are required by the SQ series.  However, the older "S"
series of lenses for the SQ and SQA, which pre date the current "PS" lenses,
will work with the SQAi.

I have a Bronica SQA with the 105mm f3.5 S lens.  This is about the sharpest
of all the S (for the SQ) series lenses and is sharper than many of the PS
lenses as well.  I bought mine for about $350 on eBay.  I think that Bronica
originally developed this lens to compete with the Zeiss 100mm F3.5 for the
Hasselblad.  It is a similar (6 element, 4 group, symmetrical - Planar)
design short telephoto.  I think the 105mm F3.5 S it is the best kept secret
in medium format.

All the S series lenses are multicoated.  Most of the lenses were redesigned
for the PS series.  The 40mm and 50mm PS lenses have the same design as the
older S lenses.  The 80mm PS is different and much sharper than the old 80mm S
lens.

The new PS 110mm F4.5 1:1 macro lens is not as sharp as the old 110mm F4 PS
macro, but the older lens didn't focus very close.  However the used price
of the old 110mm PS macro is very high because many Bronica users know this
is the sharpest of the sharp from Bronica.  The old 150mm F3.5 S lens is a
softy - but that's good for portraits - not good for landscapes.

Hope this helps.

--
Tom Bloomer
Hartly, DE

"meme" [email protected]> wrote 
Hi can old S, S2 lenses be used on Bronica SQ-Ai? what about old Nikkor
lenses, can they be used too?

Thanks



From: "Wayne Sircoulomb" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: what lightmeter to get?
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 

I purchased two used Bronica SQ-A's a while back and loved the way they
worked.  I had always used Hasselblad but I had several friends that used
Bronica and loved them.  Both worked great for a while, but within months
the backs began to give me trouble.  The backs would stop counting correctly
and you could find yourself taking 16 or 17 pictures over before you
realized that the thing was stuck on 5.  I had them repaired several times
but the still kept breaking down.  The repairman told me that I should keep
the Bronica backs only a few years then replace them because they would not
stand up to heavy use.  I also found out that the dark slide only had to be
moved a fraction of an inch for the shutter to fire.  Bad news for a wedding
photographer to discover his assistant has shot a roll of film with the
slide in.  After about a year I sold the things and went back to using my
Hasselblads.  The Bronicas were slick cameras, and the pictures were great,
but they just didn't hold up as well as the Hasselblads and the Hasselblad
slide has to be way out of the camera before the shutter can be fired.  I
also learned that Bronica's were more expensive to repair than my old
Hasselblads.  For my money I will take a used Hasselblad any day over any
kind of Bronica.


Wayne

"Neurula [Sydney]" [email protected]> 
> Its not that I am stubborn about not getting SQ-B, its just that from my
> view SQ-B is a model that was made for people with a limited budget, as a
> result I dont think it will have high resell value (people will think that
> its inferior)
>
> Besides since SQ-Bs are introduced very recently (1996) they are almost
> brand new even on the 2ndhand market, and with that price I can buy a
> slightly used SQ-Ai (last time I checked on Ebay, the diff between the 2
> models is less than $500, both models brand new, the diff will be less if
> the SQ-Ai is used).
>
> At the moment im on a transition period, trying to sell my 35mm setup and
> also to save some money, so im in no hurry, and eventually if I really
> couldnt be stuffed saving for the extra $500 and want a camera striaght
> away, i would then consider SQ-B.
>
> Thanks, appreciate your responses.
>
>
>
> "David Grabowski" [email protected]...
> > "Luigi de Guzman"
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >If I were you I'd look into that SQ-B.  If it really is cheaper, and you
> can
> > >live with carrying your own lightmeter, then you'd be that much better
> off
> > >to buy a lens or a load of film to play with.  Surely that's what you
> want
> > >to do, right--use your equipment?
> > >
> > >-Luigi
> > >dirt cheap amateur
> >
> > Luigi,
> >
> > You can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink ! This is why I
> > didn't respond to his last message, plus I don't want to seriously
> > influence his thinking, if his mind is made up, so be it.
> >
> > My case would be different, but then I've been exposing film for over
> > 40 years and have yet to use ttl flash ! I own 7 cameras, two 35mm.s
> > with in camera meters but use one in aperture priority for probably
> > 20% of it's useage. Any serious work gets hand held metering usually
> > in incident mode, some work gets none at all.
> >
> > David



From: "Tom Bloomer" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: should i get 500CM or SQ-Ai?
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 

"meme" [email protected]> wrote 
do i detect a slight tone of cynicism and/or sarcasm?

Just a little of both.  Bronica's biggest weakness is their marketing
prowess.  If Microsoft decided to go into the medium format business, they
would make the worst cameras and lenses in the world, but everyone would
"believe" that they were the best despite evidence to the contrary.

Most folks seem to believe what they are told - especially if they hear it
often from many different sources.  After numerous requests, bronica sent me
the MTF curves for their PS lenses.  Back in the late '80s when Bronica
first developed the PG series of lenses, they used to provide the MTF curves
in their brochures.  Although MTF is not the end-all of lens evaluation, it
does provide a scientific and objective quantification of image depiction
capability.

The curves for the Bronica lenses are as good or better than the ones
published by Hasselblad.  Why Bronica/Tamron fails to publish the proof
where everyone can see it remains a mystery to me.  In every photo magazine
review that I have seen or heard about where scientific a comparison has
been done between Zenzanon and Zeiss, the Bronica has always come out on
top.  In my own personal tests, I have been able to see a difference in the
final image, but the difference is not so much quality in terms of sharpness
and contrast as preference for a certain kind of optical and color behavior
that manifests itself almost like a flavor in the final image.

If you are shooting Negative film, your choice of film, processing, and
enlarger will have more of an impact on the final image than whether you
used Zeiss or Zenzanon lenses.  For transparency film with a 10X Loup or a
drum scan, you will find that certain aspects of the image are better with
certain lenses from one brand vs. the other.  Over all, my considered,
carefully researched opinion is that the Bronica lens lineup is sharper than
the Zeiss offerings.  . . . here come the flames from those who "know" that
the world is flat.

If I could have it my way:
1. Fuji would make the lenses
2. Contax would make the film backs
2. Nikon would make the bodies and metering electronics
3. Minolta would make the focusing screens
4. Microsoft would sell it so everyone could afford it

--
Tom Bloomer
Hartly, DE


From: [email protected] (Hartmut Krafft)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: bronica sq-b
Date: 12 Mar 2002

"Willie wjb" [email protected] wrote:
> is there someone who can tell something about the quality difference in
> sharpness between this one and the Bronica SQ-B?
>
> i am investigating to go to the sq-b...

Hi Willie,

I recently went from Kiev88 to a SQ-B.

So I can't tell about the older lenses for the Bronicas. But the
PS-B 80mm lens is as sharp as the Volna 80mm of my Kiev (! - at
least the 'good' of my 2 Volnas; the other one is _very_ bad).
So, I wouldn't expect the difference in sharpness to the older
lenses to be very great, perhaps it will not even be visible.

The film flatness is much better than with the Kiev (but there's
an overall day/night difference regarding the manufacturing
quality between the 88 and the SQ-B, which shouldn't be that
great with the S2a).

3 things to keep in mind:
- the SQ-B _doesn't_ have a 'B' shutter speed, so if you need
this, it's ruled out;
- the market for used SQ accessories is not that well-equipped
here in Europe;
- the leaf shutter SQ lenses are more expensive (even used).

So, if your current equipment works as designed (which my Kiev
did only sometimes 8-), I'd stay with it...

Greetings
Hartmut


From Bronica Mailing List:
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 
From: "Huib Smeets" [email protected]
Subject: RE: Extension tube madness -- table from the brochure

Bill,

here's the S18 table

There are two lines in the table (as is for every other PS lens)

Lenses   Magnifi-   Area          Focussing    Exposure
         cation     covered       Distance     factor
------------------------------------------------------------
150mm    0.12       46.4x46.4     156.7        1.4
         0.25       22.2x22.2     93.5         1.8
------------------------------------------------------------
80mm     0.22       25.6x25.6     56.0         1.4
         0.35       15.8x15.8     42.4         1.7
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
50mm     0.36       15.6x15.6     30.0         1.4
         0.51       10.9x10.9     26.5         1.6
------------------------------------------------------------

Area and Distance in Centimeters (2.54 cm = 1 Inch).

I think that I slowly start to understand how the table must be read, also
because of Edwin Leong off-list reply, thanks Edwin.

The first line of numbers represent the lens when focussed at infinity on
the barrel/focussing ring but with the ext. tube attached, the second line
the same but focussed at the minimal distance. So with the ext.tube I can
only focus between 156.7 and 93.5 cm (150mm). The exposure factor and area
covered are (now) self explanatory.

Next question: Extension tube versus screw-in close-up lens (those from B+W)
are the following observations correct?
xt.tubes: minimal/maximal focus distance changes, loss of speed 1.4 to 1.8.
Close-up lens: minimal/maximal focus distance does not change, (virtually)
no loss of speed.

Why would one choose the one in favor of the other??

Thanks,

Huib.



From: [email protected] (Hartmut Krafft)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: which MF to choose
Date: 18 Jun 2002

"AW" [email protected] wrote:

> PS I have to admit that the BRONICAs seem very interesting to me.

Recently, I upgraded from Kiev88 to Bronica SQ (6x6). I decided
for 6x6 because I really like the waistlevel finder; and except
for the Mamiya 6x7 SLRs (rotating backs), waistlevel finders just
don't harmonize with oblong formats, so it had to be the square.
I also like the versatility of changeable backs.

With the kiev, I never carried the prism finder around much, so I
decided to keep it simple and chose the SQ-B without contacts for
auto metering and prism finders. So far, I didn't regret
anything. I've got two 6x6 backs now, and the standard three lens
set; 80mm PS, 50 and 150 S type lenses. All are very nice glass,
sharp and contrasty. It's also nice that all have the same (67mm)
filter thread. And the 150mm is incredibly compact.      

Bronica boasts the PS lenses as being much superior, but
analyzing my chromes doesn't really prove this. Under the
microscope, pictures taken with reasonable f-stop are razorsharp
and contrasty even in the corners. I have to say that I use the
dept-of-field scales in a 'conservative' manner, i.e. I assume
for f/11 the DoF for f/8 (using less tolerance for the Circle of
diffusion as the manufacturer did). I've *nothing* to complain
about - the only source for unsharpness being myself, sometimes
not holding the camera steady enough. Have to get a good tripod,
I guess...

The Kiev suffers a lot from internal flares. The Bronica simply
doesn't. (From the looks, both are covered with non-reflective
varnish and black suede-like plastic stickers, but the results
are very different).

I *thought* that I wouldn't have to change my habits much
regarding the handling of the new system. But here, I was in
error ;-). Strangely, the Bronica lens mount turns 'left',
exactly the 'wrong' way as compared to Kiev and my 35mm system.
So, I still keep wondering why the lens won't come off...
Also, the Bronica backs open where the Kiev and Hasselblad ones
just come off. So I already once spoiled a roll by non-thinkingly
opening the back instead of tyking it off the body. But if you
have no previous experiences, this shouldn't be a problem.

The coupling of the lens mechanism to the body (shutter and
diaphragm release/ cocking/ opening) is very well constructed -
it seems virtually impossible to jam it.

The magazines also have quite an ingenious mechanism that allows
to advance the film only if you really pressed the release, no
matching between different 'states' of mag/body (released/cocked)
is necessary.  

To sum it up: the Bronica SQ system appears to me very nicely
built, easy-to-handle (if you aren't spoilt ;-) and has very good
lenses.

Hartmut
*not affiliated to Bronica ;-)*
--                             


From: John Halliwell [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Vacilating - Used Hassy or New Bronica ?
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 

 Stan Randle [email protected] writes
>The differences lie in Bronica' electronically-timed shutter (with more
>accurate shutter speeds than an all-machanical *used* Hassie), the
>Bronica's ability to easily add a metered prism, the existence  of a
>warranty on the Bronica (as opposed to none on a used Hassie), slightly
>lighter weight to the Bronica, and very good, relatively inexpensive
>lenses (from the corporate parent, Tamron) including newly released
>lenses like the 50-100mm zoom. Both bodies can have fiddly backs,
>although the Bronica back is easier to use. Bronicas require batteries,
>but that shouldn't be too much of a concern to someone who prepares for
>this in advance.

As far as the battery goes, the SQ-B will shoot at 1/500th without a
battery. Carrying spares should not be a problem.

I had a similar choice and chose a new Bronica SQ-B for several reasons
(in order of importance):


1) I didn't think I could justify paying Blad prices for accessories in
the future (not necessarily lenses which are extremely good but stuff
like prisms and backs that don't differentiate themselves from the
Bronica equivalents).

2) Ease of use. I've heard too many scary ways to screw up a Blad,
having to keep the back, body and lens synchronised sounds like a
nightmare. I've heard many stories of jammed lenses requiring
'screwdriver' treatment to remove. These things may not worry a seasoned
Blad user, but I wouldn't feel comfortable. With a new camera you get
all the manuals which also helps.

3) More up to date spec. Not talking about features, but having a modern
focus screen helps a lot, I've heard many complaints older Blad screens
aren't as bright the newer ones.


4) Used gear minefield. Not knowing exactly what to look for makes
buying used more prone to ending up with dodgy gear or big repair bills.
How long is the lens shutter going to hold out? With the Bronica I had
the backup of a warranty.

5) The Bronica was on promotion and I got an extra back completely free.
It gave me an extra leg up into the system.

As I said I went for the SQ-B, the only regret I have is that I should
perhaps have gone for an SQ-Ai (although for the price difference I can
buy a used SQ-Ai body). The SQ-B is a cut down version and lacks several
features:

a) Meter prisms will fit but won't meter
b) There's no B shutter speed, you can use 'T' (activated on the lenses)
but not with the 'cut down' 80mm lens that comes with it (it comes only
as a complete camera).
c) The speedgrip will fit but the winder won't.
d) The back it comes with doesn't have the electronic contacts for
passing data to the camera (i.e. using it on an SQ-Ai body wouldn't tell
the camera what you ISO was).

Now for the disadvantages (presumably all Bronica models?):

i) The mirror lockup fires the mirror (doesn't raise it slowly by a
lever like my Mamiya 645 Pro). If you lock the mirror up and then decide
not to take the shot, you need to go through something like 20 steps to
release it without exposing the film.

ii) I really miss a darkslide holder on the back, the one on my Mamiya
is really useful.

iii) The lens range is limited to 'average' maximum apertures, there are
no 'fast' telephotos for example (then again a Zeiss 200mm f/2 costs an
awful lot).

--
John

Preston, Lancs, UK.
Photos at http://www.photopia.demon.co.uk


From: [email protected] (Hartmut Krafft)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Help with Bronica SQ-A 50mm lens
Date: 25 Aug 2002

"Piezen" [email protected] wrote:

> Hello,
>
> For some reason, the shutter on my 50mm lens doesn't close on the first
> exposure after putting the lens on (Bronica SQ-A, S-series lens).  The
> mirror flips up, but the leaf shutter stays open.  It doesn't fire the flash
> sync either.  This problem usually goes away after one or two exposures.
> Once the problem has gone it doesn't come back until I put the 50mm on
> again.

You could at least check if the shutter fires mechanically, to
rule out the contact problem:

1. Take off the lens.
2. Open the diaphragm (->set to 3.5).
3. Hold the lens against a light source so that you can see
through it.
4. With a small screwdriver or jacknife, gently press the little
silvery notch located behind one of the four lens mount lobes
inwards.
5. Now, by hand gently move one of the pins on the 'behind' of
the lens from the green dot into the red-marked area (this works
only if the notch is pressed inwards) and all the way until it
cannot go further.
6. While doing so, the shutter should first close, then fire at
1/500 s (which you should be able to see as a flash of light
through your lens and hear as 'clack') and finally, stay closed.
7. Before remounting the lens, move the pins all the way back to
the green dot (thus cocking the shutter); otherwise the lens
cannot be mounted (and might even damage the body)!

If the shutter fires that way, it might indeed be an electronics
problem. Maybe double-check the contacts...
I'm afraid that this won't help you much though, sounds rather
like the lens needs servicing.

Hartmut


From: Patrick Rudin [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Question for Bronica SQ-AI users
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002


Roger wrote:

> If it's like the ETRSi then there is a "standard" cable
> release socket BUT it's fussy about what type of
> cable release it accepts.

Do-it-yourself-solutions exist for everything of course...but: From
Bronica, there ist only one cable release for the sq-ai and this one
works _only_ together with the sq-i-winder.

regards

Patrick
--
Patrick Rudin - Aeschengraben 17 - CH-4051 Basel
http://www.hoppla.ch/mittelformat/ - Kameras und Technik



Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 
From: lawrencereiss [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: [medium-format] Bronica 110 PS macro - 2 versions

Why did Bronica replace the 110 PS F4 macro lense with a 110 PS
4.5?  The older version went to 1:4, and had a 67mm thread, the
newer one goes to 1:1, but has a very short focus throw in the
normal range.  Can the newer one be used with 67mm filters and a
step down ring w/o vignetting?  Is the new one hard to focus
accurately in the normal range? Any comparative thoughts on these
two lenses would be appreciated. Thanks!

Lawrence


From: "David J. Littleboy" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Bronica SQ-Ai system
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002



"Daniel ROCHA" [email protected] wrote:
>
> I have seen some catalogues, and found the 6x6 Bronica SQ-Ai, I found
> the the system is sold at a reasonnable price.
>
> I would like to know the opinion of users.

I'm not a user, but check out the amazing performance of the 40mm/4.0 lens
for the SQ at

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

And it's only about half the size of the Hassy Zeiss 40mm/4.0, that photodo
claims is an unmitigated dog.

David J. Littleboy
[email protected]
Tokyo, Japan


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 
From: lawrence reiss [email protected]
Subject: Re: 110 Macro for SQ


I was delighted to read your note that the 110 F4 got good reviews when it came
out - I had been wondering if perhaps Bronica replaced it with the newer
version because there was some problem with it.  If the 110 F4 was a good
performer then it looks like they just wanted something that would go to 1:1.
I never was able turn up any reviews or comparisons on those lenses though.   I
only turned up a lot of notes on the net asking about it.  You are the first
one to allude to a review / comparison of sorts!
-----------------------------
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 
From: "Mark Rosen"
Subject: Re: Re: 110 Macro for SQ

fyi,
When the older lens came out, it was considered a viable contender with the
H*blad macro lens
I remember seeing test reports and comparison photos.
The concensus was that the Bronica was equal or near
equal to the Blad lens

That helped make my decision to go with Bronica and just being
out of Art School, who can afford Blad (I still can't)
Also at the time 1984-1985, it was the first PS lens available
Thats when I bought mine.


Of course if you want to really do macro., use a bellows and the 50mm
PS lens where you can get up to 3x life size, which fits more into the
definition of macro

By definition the older 110 lens is really a close up lens. (1:4 - 1/4 life size)
Macro is 1:2 (1/2 life size or greater)

Mark


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 
From: retinars [email protected]
Subject: Re: Opinions on 40mm and 50mm PE lens

Hi,

I use the bigger brother version of the 40mm PE lens (square
format). The front filter thread of the PS version is around 95mm
which is a little scary if you've not had anything bigger than 82mm!

I must say I'm absolutely in love withthe 40mm; I wouldn't have said
that for the first few weeks I owned it; I can remember feeling
totally deskilled and hopeless with it. My background is mostly
35mm, so I kept on whinging to myself: "but 35mm does this...it's
better at this, faster at this, easier at that... whinge whinge
whinge". I got sick of hearing myself and resolved to lay waste to
rolls of film in order to learn how to use the extreme wide-angle
view with a square format. 

Firstly, the drop in light by a whole stop (Yess! f1.0!!) (40mm f4
c/w 50mm f2.8) may or may not bother you; with a waistlevel finder,
it might be a struggle to see the screen without the mirror with the
wider lens. As a result, it forces me to work slower with focusing,
however the depth of focus and field should take care of that.

Secondly, I tend to hand-meter, and with the extreme wide-angle, I'd
gone through a spate of getting more exposures wrong.

I shoot mostly architecture and landscape; I think the distortion
compares very well with the 50mm. It's nowhere near fishy, nor is it
perfectly rectilinear. It's perfect for interiors; I can't comment
too much with landscape, since that is where I'm still plodding along
trying to learn; with the 40mm, I get heaps of sky, heaps or
foreground grass, and a tiny strip of landscape. That limitation is
me, rather than the lens, however I've found the challenge quite
rewarding.

No - I've not been flummoxed by any curvature at all. The front
element might bow/convex outwards, however it doesn't limit filter
use. I use a wide-angle polariser on the front element and X-Pro
squares, so I've not experienced any vignetting problems. If you
stack circular filters, there may be. 95mm filters are awkward; I
only use ND grads, polariser, 81C, and it set me back around half the
price of the lens!

I used to own a 50mm PE, and it worked well, however like you, the
zoom option seems attractive. One more reason I guess to go for the
40mm is, perhaps one day you'll go for the zoom, and decide that the
extra stop of the 50mm PE is worth passing by.

The 40mm suits me for my purposes and I find it an excellent lens. 
I've not found it soft in the corners either, but I'm not a
particularly sophisticated and cultured nit-picker in that respect.
The main downer is the loss of aperture speed and filter cost,
however *gulp*, I've learned to swallow that.


Keep us informed about what you decide!

Regards,

Jason

> > From: "Dallas dc_deifi@y..
> > Date: Fri 07/Feb/2003 
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [Bronica] Opinions on 40mm and 50mm PE lens
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I am looking to buy either a 40mm or 50mm PE lens for my ETRSi. I
> > need some user opinions and facts. I would like to know what users
> > of these lens think. Plus does the 40mm have a lot of curvature and
> > will standard filters show in the edges?? 
> >
> > Thanks in advance and looking forward to what users have to say.
> >
> > dallas
> >
> > ps. I was looking at the 45-90mm zoom, but having to buy a whole new
> > set of filters in 95mm was a big turn-off.


From: [email protected] (Gary Beasley)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Sunpak TTL and the Bronica bellows
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003


I finally found the answer to the problem with the Bronica bellows and
flash problems using Sunpak TTL flash on my SQAi.
It seems that the Bronica engineers in their infinite wisdom did not
connect the flash lead to the connector pins on the bellows but put a
pc plug on the side of the front standard. This was kinda OK when I
was using the 622 flash as it had a pc cord plug as well as the
connections through the TTL adaptor. I could simply plug the flash in
both ways. But when I acquired a DX12R ringlight this flash had no
provisions for a pc cord to plug in. After studying the situation and
experimenting I've found you can use a male to male pc cord,
manufactured for a Metz flash, and connect the camera pc outlet to the
one on the bellows front standard and complete the circuit for firing
the flash. This may seem backwards at first glance but electricity
could care less how it gets there as long as you supply the wire.
Now I've got full TTL capability on the bellows setup with a minimum
of fuss and bother.


From: [email protected] (Gary Beasley)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Sunpak TTL and the Bronica bellows
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003

...

Addendum: I forgot to mention I had to put my 18mm extension tube
between the bellows and body to allow room to plug the pc cord into
the body. I'm getting images that look bigger than life size in the
viewfinder with the 80mm lens with the bellows racked out to full
extension.


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 
From: "Mark Rosen" [email protected]
Subject: Re: Updated 110mm SQ Macro Lens?

There are twio versions of the lens.

The older version is a 110mm f4 lens 67mm filter size
Magnification is 1:2
I bought mine in 1984-1985
I believe that was when the lens released
I think it was the first PS lens made.

The new version is a 110mm f4.5 lens 72mm filter size
Magnification is 1:1
...


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Updated 110mm SQ Macro Lens?


[email protected] writes:

> I was looking over KEH's used Bronica SQ 110mm Macro Lenses, when I
>  realized they have two different filter sizes... 67mm old Bronica
>  standard, and 72?
>  I had not heard of this.  The 72mm are more expensive.  Is this an
>  update on the SQ 110mm Macro lens?
>  Huff
>

The 110mm f/4.5 is the older of the two lenses.  It will focus down to 1:1.
It is a true macro lens.  It takes 72mm filters.  It is a PS series lens.
The 110mm f/4 is the lens that I have.  It will focus down to about 2 feet or
a magnification of 1:4.  It takes 67mm filters.  It is also a PS series lens.
 The 110mm f/4.5 weighs more than the 110 f/4.  I think the 180mm f/4.5 will
actually produce "closer" images than the 110 f/4.  It focuses a little under
3.3 feet.  Hope this helps.

Gary Eaton


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Updated 110mm SQ Macro Lens?

[email protected] writes:
> The older version is a 110mm f4 lens 67mm filter size
>  Magnification is 1:2
>  I bought mine in 1984-1985
>  I believe that was when the lens released
>  I think it was the first PS lens made.
>
>  The new version is a 110mm f4.5 lens 72mm filter size
>  Magnification is 1:1

I stand corrected.  You are right.

Gary Eaton


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 
From: "Mark Groep [email protected]
Subject: Re: Updated 110mm SQ Macro Lens?

Please also note the f/4.5 version no longer features a depth-of-
field scale, a necessary compromise resulting from the much steeper
focussing helicoid that enables the much closer minimum focus with
less than one turn of the focussing ring.

Mark
...


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2003 
From: lawrence reiss [email protected]
Subject: Re:Updated 110 SQ macro lens


The newer 110 f4.5 macro is a completely different lens design.  It goes to 1:1
which is really nice, but I found it difficult to focus easily at more normal
distances because the helicoid thread is so steep that only a very slight
movement changes the focus enormously.  It is for this reason that there is no
depth of field scale on this lens - the lines would be on top of one another.
I tried in vain to find some optical comparisons of the two versions, but never
found any (found something in German, but never got it translated...).    I
also tried contacting Bronica to find out something about the distances for
which these lense designs were optimized but never got a straight answer.

 I wound up with the older version for the convenience of focus and the 67mm
thread.  I also have the 180 4.5, which is a nice lens, albeit large and heavy.

   I have sometimes used a low diopter screw in close up lens on both of these
lenses to get just a little closer.    A macro lens rolled out all the way to
1:1 loses about 4 stops, and has very little depth of field.   At those
magnifications, unless your subject is fairly flat, or you have an enormous
amount of light,  35mm may actually give  more detail in a three dimensional
subject.   But I still wish I had an opportunity for a side by side comparison
of these macro lenses.   If you get the opportunity to make such a comparison,

I'd be interested in learning about your experience.

Lawrence


From bronica mailing list:
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 
From: Mark Rosen [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bronica SQa

Yes, there are two 80mm PS lenses

There is the standard version "PS"
then there is the "PS-B" version which only ships
with the SQ-B Kit.

The physical difference is that the B version is shorter
(squatter) then the standard version.
The standard version has the T/A switch.
It has been eliminated on the "B" version

http://www.tamron.com/

Look under menu Bronica, then Tech Info, then SQ Guide
then SQ-B for the differences between The SQ-B
and the rest of the line.
This is a history of the SQ line.

Mark




End of Page