Photo thanks to Dale Sawyer - NeoClassix
[email protected]

The collapsible Plaubel Makina 67 rangefinder with fast 80mm f/2.8 nikkor optics is an almost legendary camera. The Plaubel Makina 670 adds 120 and 220 capability. Its lens is also a nikkor 80mm f/2.8. There is a nice LED light meter in these camera, so you don't need to carry a separate one. Many former users praise the sharpness of its lenses and its mechanical sturdiness. This camera was a favorite with traveling photographers who wanted a large 6x7cm image but in a small format camera that could fit in a jacket pocket. See photos above to see how the lens could extend and fold back flat.

As a result, these cameras are often sold at prices that are surprisingly high (kilobucks). Given the lack of spare parts (Plaubel corp. is long gone), and reported problems with bellows and other fragile mechanics, I find this a high price for a user camera. For a third or less the price, you can get into a fuji folder offering 6x7cm or 6x9cm, as well as wide angle lenses, and even autofocus on some models.

Photo notes:

BEAUTIFUL FOLDING MEDIUM FORMAT!! For those of you that don't know this camera, it is a VERY IN DEMAND 6x7 camera no longer marketed in North America. It has an 80mm/2.8 NIKKOR (Yes, the glass is made by Nikon for Plaubel) lens with a LEAF SHUTTER (Flash at all speeds and no battery required), speeds B-1/500. Built in LED meter and LARGE, easily focusable rangefinder (Parallax corrected). All operations are perfect, comes with original box and instructions.

Date: Sat, 25 Apr 98
From: John Gilbert [email protected]

Subject: RE: [Rollei] Off-subject: Plaubel Makina 67 folder

The Plaubel Makina 67, 670 and 670W share, in my opinion, a nasty design flaw. The metering circuitry is dependent on a leash of 8 fine wires that extend between the body circuitry and the lens panel along one of the scissor struts. This bundle of wires is flexed quite severely every time that the camera is erected from its collapsed state. Eventually, without a great deal of use, one or more of these wires will fracture causing loss of meter function.

Repairing this fault is a major undertaking as the camera has to be stripped down massively to gain access to the whole path of the wire loom. The repair is not that difficult but takes several hours (= big bucks!). I have done this repair twice on a Plaubel Makina 67. I took detailed disassembly notes and photos the first time through. I repeated the effort because I was not happy about the type of wire that I chose on the first attempt; it was too thick and not flexible enough. The second repair, aided by the notes, still took seven hours without a break.

In a similar vein, the fine, plastic covered braided wire that travels along the same scissor strut to cock the shutter is also subject to failure eventually. Replacement of this too requires the same degree of disassembly but it is a little less finicky.

Neither the cocking cable nor the wiring loom are available as spare parts any more but they can be duplicated without too much effort.

The Plaubel Makinas, when working, are a delight to use and take superb pictures thanks to the Nikkor 80 mm lens. But believe me - they are doomed to break down eventually.

Dr John Gilbert
Forensic Science Centre
21 Divett Place
Adelaide SA 5000
AUSTRALIA

[email protected] (home account)
[email protected] (work account)

From: [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.misc
Subject: Re: ? about polarizing and warming (Makina 670)
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998

Hi Joe, The Plaubel Makina 670 is a truly great camera. For a polarizer i would use a Heliopan. The rotating part of the filter is marked with a scale that runs from 0 to 20. Hold the filter up to your eye while looking at what you want to photograph and rotate the filter until you get the degree of polarization you are looking for. Being careful to keep the filter oriented so what was at top remains at top, make a note of what number is at the top of the ring. Attach the filter to the lens androtate the ring until thatnumber is on top. Heliopan says the Filter factor is between 1.5x and 2x, but my experience is that it is closer to 1.75x or 2x. To subtly warm up chromes I like the Heliopan KR 1.5. I keep this filter mounted on virtually all of my lenses. i shoot mainly Fuji Velvia (RVP) and Provia 100 (RDPII). yes they are a little more expensive than tiffen or hoya filters but aren't your pictures worth it?

Ellis Vener
Ellis Vener Photography
[email protected]

Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999
From: Ethan Sprague [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: PLAUBEL 67 Comments

Good Day- I was perusing your site and read the comments about the Plaubel Makina 67...You might want to post this, as I have a lot of experience with this camera, and use it professionally all the time...

Potential Buyers of Plaubel 67 Camera:

26 years of photography experience, and I am here to tell you- BUY this camera.

The 670 is overpriced, and you can find a Plaubel 67 for $900- $1300.......

Sharpest lens ever- also, with thumbwheel, fastest focusing as well- Your thumb advances the film, activates shutter, and focuses- You can work real fast like that...

80mm Nikkor lens is fast. The meter on one of mine, which was in fairly beat up condition when bought, is amazing- meter accurate to ONE TENTH of a STOP ...

We sell Mamiya 7's where I work ( I could have one for free if I wanted it ), and would MUCH rather have a Makina 67...

Fits in a jacket pocket, I used it to shoot for Nabisco Annual Report, they loved the quality...

Don't listen to "Nay Sayers" who say, "Don't buy into a system with the lens struts, and you can't get parts for it."

If you make sure that the camera has not been abused, and a test roll shows the viewfinder accurate. BUY IT !

These cameras last forever as long as they are not "hammered"........and you don't drop it...(but that is true of ANY camera)...

I would prefer the Makina over Minolta RZ, Hasselblad, Mamiya 6MF or Mamiya 7, or Fuji Rangefinders..

This is a MAGICAL camera, originally built for photojournalists (heavy use).

Makina 67 is truly special- You cannot compare this camera to ANY 67 camera.

Happy Shooting,

Ethan Sprague

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "[email protected]" [email protected]
[1] Re: Plaubel Makina ?s
Date: Sat Jan 30 1999

I have both the 670 and the 67W, and will say the 670 (which I bought new) has never given me one bit of trouble, is very sharp. The advance mechanism is two-stroke, which makes it desirable and more reliable.

The 67W is a favorite camera, but I have to advance it slowly so as not to skip frames-trying to continue it working. It is not as sharp as the 670, though I am comparing it to Hassy lenses, so...

I do wish the rangefinder focusing was easier and the frames clearer, but great cameras. I look at the Mamiyas, but am not convinced.

Still and all, I prefer SLR's. Except for the obvious.

Tim Francisco

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Michael K. Davis" [email protected]
[1] Re: plaubel makina
Date: Tue Mar 23 1999

Hi!

Travis Ruse [email protected] wrote:

: Is there an exposure meter in the this camera?
: What does the little button on the back of the body do?
: What does the asa ring on the lens for?

There is a 10-degree spot meter with + and - LED's above and below a green center LED that lights when any correct combination of shutter and aperture is selected.

The little button on the back of the body is a momentary contact switch that activates the meter.

The ASA ring on the lens communicates the current film speed to the meter.

This is a guess, but I suspect you are asking these questions because you have put batteries into a Plaubel Makina 67 you have in your posession and the meter isn't working. This is perhaps the most common problem with aging Plaubels. Repeated extension and collapse of the folding lens eventually fatigues the meter harness that runs from the lens back to the body, across the top of the bellows, within the scissor struts. This same action can defeat the shutter release cable, too.

I consider a meterless Plaubel Makina 67 to be a tremendous value, as long as it was offered with that declared. I always found the 10-degree spot meter to be a nuisance -- too wide to be selective, not wide enough to do averaging. Mine has always worked fine, but I always use a separate spotmeter instead.

The 80mm Nikkor is a truly wonderful lens. Quoting an article I posted in January:

If you check out Christopher Perez' web page of resolution tests for MF lenses, the tests results shown for the Plaubel Makina 67's Nikkor 80mm f/2.8 were taken with my camera.

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

My rangefinder was found to be a bit off, but these lp/mm figures were measured at center, middle, and corners of the frame for BOTH f/8 and f/11:

85 76 67 (average is 76)

The only lens that betters it, of those tested so far, is the Mamiya 6MF 75mm f/3.5 with these lp/mm figures at center, middle and corners, occuring ONLY at f/8.

95 85 53 (average is 77.7)

At f/11, resolution drops to:

85 85 60 (average is 76.7)

Notice that at both f/8 and f/11, the Nikkor 80mm f/2.8's average resolution is just barely below the average resolutions for the Mamiya 75 f/3.5.

Notice also that the Nikkor does just as well at f/11 as at f/8 (better depth of field while maintaining best resolution.)

Lastly, notice that the Nikkor's resolution figures are more balanced from center to corners, falling no lower than 67 lp/mm at the corners, for both f/8 and f/11, where the Mamiya drops to 53 and 60 lp/mm at f/8 and f/11, respectively.

There's a lot more to assessing a lens's quality than just measuring it's resolving power, of course. I can say with some objectivity that these lenses are famous for having a lot of punch -- their contrast is very high, but I've never seen any MTF curves to confirm it. They also have very nice bokeh, which is uncommon for Japanese lenses (compared to German designs, anyway.) This is somewhat subjective, but I just find the out of focus areas to be very appealing. They look *natural*, not at all mechanical. It can only focus to one meter, but by running the lens all the way out, I'm able to get very nice Near Sharps as close as 18 inches when shooting at f/22 (the minimum aperture). I have several 16x20 prints where I shot close up subjects this way. With a Far Sharp no further than about 8 feet, you would think that everything else out to Infinity would be very unappealing. I can't put it into words how amazingly ACCEPTABLE they look. Anyone can see that it's out of focus, but there's no doubling of lines, no misshapen spectral highlights, it's just smooth and, again I'll say, natural looking. It's truly a great lens.

Mike Davis
--

From: paulg [email protected]
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: plaubel vs mamiya 7

Following on from the recent questions concerning Mamiya 7 optical quality. I was a long time Plaubel Makina 67 user (both 670 and W67 versions), and when the 7 came out had to do some tests, and found out that the Mamiya was far superior to the Plaubel (itself a good camera). The optics are really of the highest quality.

This is probably due to the actual progress in optical design/manufacture over the years, but also because all Plaubels are getting old now, and even the pristine examples (I had 3) exhibit some slack in the 'lazy tongs' fold out lens system. That means less than perfect alignment of the lens-film, and less than sharp photos. The difference was so dramatic that I did have to swap over, although I confess to keeping one Plaubel for sentimental reasons.

The 7 however is much much bulkier, (although weight is very similar) so you don't always take it with you when you travel, or go out for a walk... and having no camera at all is definitely the worse of all options.

Hope this is useful to anyone out there looking at light and portable MF67's.

From: "Londo" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: Fuji RFs vs. Plaubel Makina

The lightmeter of the Plaubel is known to have problems which are difficult to fix. No problem if you prefer a seperate, modern lightmeter. Apart from that, the Plaubel Makina is a majic camera with superb optical qualities. An amazing miracle (although I don't have first-hand experience with the Fuji). If you get a P-Makina for a decent price, suggest to buy it anyway.

MPS wrote

> I'd just about thought that I've decided to try a Fuji 670 when I
> happened to be made aware of the existence of Plaubel's Makina line.
> Ooopps.
>
> Is there anybody out there who's owned both of these who'd like to
> comment on their suitability and durability as carry cameras for an
> active amatuer photojournalist?
>
> Thanks,
> MPS

I have a Plaubel Makina 67 - very compact camera - sharp lens - can be carried in a jacket pocket - great for shooting in restricted areas and street photos - only minor faults is a fixed lens and it uses 120 film only. I also have a Fuji GL690 - an interchangeable lens manual operated camera - very solid built - excellent lenses comparable to the Plaubel - much heavier camera but still very usuable hand held - uses both 120 and 220 film which is an advantage to me.

Ed T

From: "Michael K. Davis" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 11 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: cautions.. Re: Fuji RFs vs. Plaubel Makina

Hi!

Robert Monaghan [email protected] wrote:

: see http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/g6x7.html#Plaubel67
: see http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html for Plaubel Makina 67
: nikkor lens tests - note huge drops if mis-focused even 6" in 61" test..

Chris Perez was using my Plaubel Makina 67 when he conducted those tests. Initially, he had relied on the rangefinder assuming it was accurate - this yielded the first, or uppermost, of three sets of results shown in his table at

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

When he saw these results - center resolutions as low as 48 lp/mm, he realized something was amiss and decided to triple the time and effort it takes to do these tests by using the rangefinder to focus five-inches in front and then five inches behind the target which remained at 61 inches - not knowing at the time whether the rangefinder was "near-sighted" or "far-sighted". The second, or middle, set of results posted in his table are remarkable. They show that at f/8 and f/11, the lens is bettered only by the Mamiya 6 and 7 lenses in center resolution, but take note of the superior corner resolution it has. If you average the three resoultions (center, middle and corner) for the Mamiya 7 80mm f/4 at its best aperture, f/5.6, (95, 85, and 60) you'll get an average resolution of 80 lp/mm. Doing the same with the Plaubel's Nikkor 80mm f2.8 at either f/8 or f11 (which had the same results of 85, 76, and 67), we get an average resolution of 76 - not nearly as dramatic a difference (80 vs. 76) as seen when comparing the center resolutions of these two lenses (95 vs. 85) and best of all - the Nikkor's resolution is much flatter from center to corner than the Mamiya, which falls to 60 lp/mm at it's best aperture of f/5.6 vs. Nikkor's 67 at its best apertures of f/8 and f/11. On that note, which lens is more useful at f/11? The Mamiya, with resolutions of 85, 76 and 60 (averaging 73.7) or the Nikkor, with resolutions of 85, 76 and 67 (averaging 76)? Which is better at f/16? The Mamiya, averaging 64.7, or the Nikkor, averaging 70?

The Nikkor 80mm f/2.8 on the Plaubel Makina 67 is truly SUPERIOR to the Mamiya 7 80mm f/4 - the numbers are there - you just have to take it all in instead of looking only at center resolutions. If you consider the practical aspect of shooting at smaller stops to achieve DoF, there's no question the Nikkor's resolving power is greater where it counts and it does so without sacrificing the corners.

I still shoot with my Plaubel Makina 67 regularly - carrying it alongside my Mamiya 7 II for which I have no intention of purchasing the 80mm until my Plaubel dies. At the moment, with the exception of the rangefinder error, the camera is working beautifully, including the meter - which is usually the first thing to go.

Still, I would have to agree with the consensus that buying a Plaubel Makina 67 is a risky venture, but that doesn't diminish the fact that it posseses one of the finest lenses ever made.

Mike Davis

: my impression is that the nikkor lens reputation accounts for the
: legendary status of the camera, but Mr. Gonzalez's review (URL above)
: and other posts I've seen suggest that while the camera was very good and
: compact and all that, the difficulty with repairs, camera susceptibility
: to impact misalignment (see lens test for criticality of this factor) and
: so on make it somewhat overpriced in the current market. You can find
: similar views in older MFD (mediumformatdigest) postings too by owners if
: you want to do such a search. The same review pages have info on fuji RFs.

: Personally, I'd probably look at the Fujis or perhaps the Mamiya 6/7 RF if
: I had kilobucks to spend for repairability issues etc.

: But since I don't have kilo$$, I've been rather happy with much heavier
: but amazingly sharp Koni Omega optics and 6x7 RF cameras with
: interchangeable magazines (RO200) - with $250 or so invested, I have both
: the 90mm and 58mm biogon optics, which rival the Plaubel's nikkor 80mm for
: resolution -and even the much pricier Mamiya 6/7 optics (note the RO was
: made by mamiya..). If you are mainly looking for high resolution, you
: can't really beat these puppies in 6x7 RF for lots more $$ ;-)
: grins bobm

From: "Michael K. Davis" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 14 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: Fuji RFs vs. Plaubel Makina

Hi!

Heavysteam [email protected] wrote:

: I suspect the Plaubel has become a collector's camera, as the prices are
: certainly far above what they are worth.    One shameless e-dealer (yes, the
: big one that starts with K) was advertising them in their catalog with prose
: that reads like they still make 'em.    Although I have heard good reports on
: the optics, they have always been accompanied with real horror stories about
: the lack of quality, constant breakdowns and expensive repairs.

Overall, I agree with your advice to avoid buying a Plaubel, especially if someone intends it to be their primary 6x7. I would like to counter your use of the words *lack of quality* however. Actually, I find the Plaubel Makina 67 to be extremely well made - with its heavy, die-cast aluminum body, it's very robust.

The *horror stories* are mostly about failed light meters and internal shutter release cables (that run to the lens from the shutter release button on the body.) Others have stripped the gears on the film advance and lastly, some have suffered alignment problems where the lens standard is not parallel to the back.

I attribute all of these problems to abuse and perhaps, a design that failed to anticipate abuse. I realize I'm walking a fine line in my choice of words, but let me elaborate and you can decide.

The light meter wiring harness and the shutter release cable switchback across the bellows within the scissor stuts that allow the lens to extend and retract. EVERY TIME I have shown my Plaubel Makina 67 to friends and strangers alike, I've witnessed thire fascination with how the lens can retract turn into PLAYING with it. I'm sure most Plaubel owners could tell you that it is FUN to press the release button, then snap and halt the camera body to POP the lens out of its recess. Similary, people will turn the camera face up, then press the release button to let gravity yank the lens back into the body. It slams home with the sound of a car door closing. It's infectious. It feels good in the hand - like torqueing the cylinder of a revolver back into the frame with a snap of the wrist - an equally ignorant abuse of fine workmanship. Even the best made guns can not tolerate this repeatedly.

The result? Wiring and cables fatigue and eventually break and the scissor struts start to wander.

I bought mine new in 1981 and have always treated it well, without foreknowledge or even prediction of these problems. It has always just made sense to open and close the camera gently. Similarly, I have never been aggressive with the two-stroke film advance. 19 years later, it's still working beautifully, suffering only a mild misalignment of the rangefinder.

So, I submit that the notorious Plaubel Makina problems aren't at all due to a lack of quality, but rather a lack of good sense on the part of some very fortunate, but heavy-handed people who took the craftmanship and spectacular performance for granted.

If you can get your hands on one that's currently working, just live by these rules:

1) Retract and extend the lens with two hands, gently.

2) Focus the lens at Infinity before retracting.

3) Do not focus nor fire the shutter while the lens is retracted.

4) Do not put the camera away with the shutter cocked.

5) Close the camera when walking about and for storage, of course.

6) Go easy on the film advance lever - anticipate the end of each stroke.

Mike

From: [email protected] (Heavysteam)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 15 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: Fuji RFs vs. Plaubel Makina

I would like to counter your use of the words *lack of quality* however.

Sorry Mike, I just can't isolate quality in a camera system only to features I like. You mention a laundry list of shortcomings in the Makina line. I'm not sure what quality chassis or lens construction does for you if the camera can't take pictures. The Plaubels have well-known reputations for the many defects you mention, and that is why my advice is to avoid them, especially in regards to what appears to be inflated prices due to collector interest. I'm not sure how much credibility I can place on warnings that you shouldn't fold and unfold a folding camera too much, or wind a rollfilm camera too fast. When a camera system suffers failure as a result of using the features in the system, it is called a design defect. My Mamiya RZ system doesn't need a list of cautions on how to baby it to avoid breakage-- it is designed and built for pro use and handling. There are just too many good medium format systems out there with excellent optics that are far more reliable and less costly that Plaubel just doesn't make sense for a user.

From: [email protected] (Heavysteam)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 07 Jul 2000
Subject: Re: Fuji RFs vs. Plaubel Makina

I suspect the Plaubel has become a collector's camera, as the prices are certainly far above what they are worth. One shameless e-dealer (yes, the big one that starts with K) was advertising them in their catalog with prose that reads like they still make 'em. Although I have heard good reports on the optics, they have always been accompanied with real horror stories about the lack of quality, constant breakdowns and expensive repairs.

Date: 25 Sep 2000
From: [email protected] (PeterH2072)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Plaubel 67/670 Opinions

Ken:

I have both a Paubel 67 and a newer 670, which I recently acquired. While I have several 35mm camera systems which I use in my work, the Plaubel Makina folder has become my favorite travel camera. As you know, the incredibly sharp and contrasty 80 mm Nikkor is the heart of both cameras. The improvements in the 670 include 120/220 film selection, a rugged hot shoe, improved neck strap anchors, an improved view finder / rangefinder, a safety catch for the back release, and an improved lens/bellows release mechanism. Frankly, the only feature of the 670 that IS important to me is the possible use of 220 film ... which allows 20 exposures instead of only 10 that the 67 is capable of. I even found a camera repair service that actually knows what they're doing with this unique camera!

Peter A. Hochstein

From Rangefinder Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RF List] Makina 67


Go to the Monaghan Medium Format Site; probably the most-or only-compact
modern 6x7 RF-I have seen images with the standard Nikon lens-they are superb.
http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/plaubel67.html

And there are many posts on the photo.net Medium Format Digest.  For those
who don't need interchangeable lens-this would be a fantastic camera to bring
back in production, and, as Dante may know, the camera was actually "sourced"
out of Konica!  Hunt those links and you will find an interesting history.
Also, take a look at the Marshall Press Camera-Mr. Mamiya's pioneer
design-like the Mamiya Press with the bellows of the RB-67-what a combination.


From: Mark Hubbard [email protected]

Subject: Response to PLAUBEL MAKINA - 67 OR 670?

Date: 1998-03-08


670 is newer, had a few improved features, therefore sells for more. Look
for stability of scissors-hinges when lens is extended. Great camera. Not
as great as Mamiya 7, however, so don't spend too much. The 67 sold new
about 20 years ago for $900. 
 



Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998

From: Mark & Sue Hubbard [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [Rollei] Off-subject: Plaubel Makina 67 folder



M.


The P-M 670s and 67s are wonderful but over-priced and over-valued at this
time, in my opinion. They sold for about $900 to $1200 new, as I recall,
and I drooled on a few but never owned one. They filled an important niche
in their time, providing a high-quality 6x7 image using "modern" lens
design. To me, that niche is gone with the availability of the vastly
superior Mamiya 7, which you mention, which provides much greater
versatility and better optics, AND the availability of older folders, such
as the Bessas, etc. which produce fabulous rectangular photos for a
fraction of the cost of a Plaubel.



I see that Don Carter bought a PM 67W on spec hoping to sell it at a tidy
profit. His price has now come down from $2000 to $1500 as not that many
people are interested in them any more. If you wait, perhaps the prices
will fall further and at some point, they will once again become a great
deal. For now, I think if you pay much more than the new price for one,
you are probably paying for what they were worth before a better
alternative became available. 


[Ed. note: see Warning note below re: Mamiya imports to US illegal...]

I know you're not interested in the 7 at this time, but Hadley Chamberlain
in southern California is buying them in Japan and selling them here as
"used" equipment, which is entirely valid -- there is no claim of
warrranty, etc. You can pick up the body and highly desirable 43 with
finder for about $2900, which is $1550 less than retail, and about a
thousand less than retail less best rebates. We bought ours from Calumet
(at full retail) about three years ago, but if I were going to do it again,
I would definitely go with Hadley.



All that said, if you can find a PM 67 or 670 in good shape (sound 
bellows  and secure standard) for a reasonable price, I'm sure you'll 
love it.



Best wishes,


Mark Hubbard

 you wrote:
>OFF-TOPIC:
>
>Lately I've been considering augmenting my Rolleis with a Plaubel Makina
>670. (For those unfamiliar, its a folding rangefinder 6x7 made in the late
>'70's and early '80's that folded is about the size of a largish paperback
>book.) I understand that the camera's Nikkor optics are excellent, and the
>camera should be reasonably durable. But who's servicing them these days?
>Any users on the list that can share their experiences with this camera?
>                                          

  

WARNING RE: Importing Mamiya into US Illegal


Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998

From: Bob Shell [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [Rollei] Off-subject: Plaubel Makina 67 folder


Mark,



It is important to know that it is ILLEGAL to do direct import on Mamiya.
They are in a different position from every other camera because Mamiya
America Corp. OWNS the trademark in the USA, and is not a subsidiary or
affiliate of Mamiya in Japan.  Because of these technicalities, Mamiya is
the only camera that it is illegal to do direct import on. 


Hadley knows this, and has run afoul of US Customs and had one shipment
seized and destroyed. 


There is NO SUCH THING as gray market Mamiya in the USA.  It is either
imported by Mamiya America or it is BLACK market, and illegal.  If you buy
one and send it to Mamiya America for service, they can seize and destroy
it.



Bob 



 
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998

From: Bill Barton [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [Rollei] Off-subject: Plaubel Makina 67 folder


Hi, just my .02 the lens was great on those cameras, however!!!!!
repairing one of those would be a problem. Any repair required a major
tear down, and they had the problem with the soft advance gears...
BTW they were made under contract by Mamiya


Bill   



Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998

From: Bob Shell [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: [Rollei] Off-subject: Plaubel Makina 67 folder



>Hi, just my .02 the lens was great on those cameras, however!!!!!
>repairing one of those would be a problem. Any repair required a major
>tear down, and they had the problem with the soft advance gears...
>BTW they were made under contract by Mamiya
>Bill

Bill,



Not true.  The Plaubel cameras were made in a factory built and owned by
Plaubel of Germany.  Mamiya was in no way involved in them.  Maybe you are
thinking of the Rapid Omega, which Mamiya built under contract to Berkey.



The problem with these cameras is not the gears, but the "lazy tong" 
struts which extend the front when you unfold the camera.  If you never 
fold them up, they hold up forever.



I wouldn't touch one with a ten foot pole as a user camera, though, since
parts dried up a LONG time ago.



Bob 






From: "Londo" [email protected]

Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format

Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001

Subject: Re: Plaubel Makina W67



The Plaubel Makina W67 is the best MF camera I ever had. The optic is
extraordinary and the results challenge any Scandinavian MF camera. The
range finder is exact and works very well. It is rugged, I have tossed
mine around in the field, no problems. 


Known weakpoints are the bellows (like any belows, check for leaks !) and
the lightmeter, which can fail due to flimsy wiring. I use a handheld
spot-lightmeter anyway, so this is not an issue for me.



Advice: If you can get the camera for a reasonable price, buy it anyway,
given that it is in good condition. You will like it! Even if you have or
will get other MF-equipment, the W67 is a very good complement for the
rest of your gear (whatever it may be), in particular for days when you
want to go out "light" and without the big bag full of stuff. 


"jjs" [email protected] wrote 



> I'm interested in the Plaubel Makina W67 because it looks to be compact,
> quiet and when closed, rugged. Is this true? Are there any known  problems
> with this camera? What of repairs?
>
> tia,
> jjs






Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Plaubel Makina 6x9?
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002

Geten wrote:

> My experience from the Makina is that it is very sharp but that it brakes
> down far too easy.

So that applies to the 6x9 too?

How rare is the 6x9 thing anyway? I know it's old (production ended,
when? 1953?) but ... never seen one, only noticed 1 mention in literature
so far, but sure enough there's someone with some info on the
'net... although not much about usability...
(http://www.cosmonet.org/camera/makina_e.htm)

I'm just curious.

> "Clark Pudley" [email protected] skrev 
>> Anyone use these cameras?  Any good?  How do they compare to other folder
>> 6x9s?

--
Mikko Nahkola [email protected]





From Rangefinder Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 
From: Philippe Murat [email protected]
Subject: Makina 67


Does anyone know about this camera?
I found that picture:

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/shinsaku/hiura/camera/mednikkor/cameras-b.jpg

and I must admit I never saw such a beauty, with a Nikkor lens...
Are these rare? Expensive? is it the kind of "L@@K, RARE, WOW!," or ??
Thanks

Philippe


From Rangefinder Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 
From: "Wilson, Paul" [email protected]
Subject: RE: [RF List] Makina 67


I've only had a chance to handle the camera.  It's very nice and quite small
for a 6x7.  By reputation the Nikkor lens is superb.  However, also by
reputation, they aren't the most rugged or reliable things and they're
expensive.  A Mamiya 7 is probably a more reasonable camera to use though
the fastest lens is f4.

Paul Wilson


From Rangefinder Mailing List:
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 
From: Allan Wafkowski [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RF List] Makina 67


Do a search on google.com, you'll come up with something. It's not a
very rare camera, but they didn't sell by the millions, so they are
worth something today. Plaubel Makina 67 came out in the early
seventies, and lasted for about 9-10 years.

You'll find this page of interest:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/plaubel.htm

Allan


[Ed. note: thanks to Simon Larbalestier for sharing these Plaubel 67 photos on his site!]
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 
From: Simon Larbalestier [email protected]
To: Robert Monaghan [email protected]
Subject: Re: Plaubel Makina 67/670

Hi Robert
well my plaubel arrived and very nice it is to ! :-)
i was wondering how can i post a question on your site and make it available
to other visitors?

my question would be along the lines of the availability of the lens hood,
eyecup and soft case for the 670 with 80mm lens

i have these for my 67 model but would like to aquire them for this newer
version

by the way if you have a moment 95% of the photos on my site were shot with
the 67 model

thanks again

Simon Larbalestier
[email protected]
www.simon-larbalestier.co.uk


From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 
From: Denise Garone [email protected]
Subject: RE: [RF List] (wasFuji RF 645) Plaubel Makina




> Mark, I've coveted a 670 for many years, but  the
> price and stories of
> fragility have kept me from taking the plunge. I
> understand that the
> Nikkor lens is awesome
> Gerry

In my experience, all true.  A wonderful camera,
though I am not so sure the bokeh aficionados would
give the lens the highest rating.
Mine has been sitting in the shop for the last three
months while the repairman tries to hunt down a
replacement film advance mechanism piece.  I'm not
optimistic, but I would do it all again.  I got my $
worth out of this one many times over.

-Stuart


From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 
From: Mark Kronquist [email protected]
Subject: Re: [RF List] (wasFuji RF 645) Plaubel Makina

...
> Mine has been sitting in the shop for the last three
> months while the repairman tries to hunt down a
> replacement film advance mechanism piece.  I'm not
> optimistic, but I would do it all again.  I got my $
> worth out of this one many times over.
> -Stuart

See if Bill Crispien at Custom Camera Craft can make a replacement (machine
one) for you 503 281 6855


From rangefinder mailing list:
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 
From: "Merritt, Robert" [email protected]
Subject: RE: [RF List] Looking for a 35mm in LTM

Yes, according to the brothers Stella:
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/hexarrf.html
http://www.davidde.com/jupiter35.html,
though Dante indicates it changes the metering pattern somewhat.

-----Original Message-----
From: Wade Heninger [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [RF List] Looking for a 35mm in LTM

Nick Merritt wrote:
>Phan -- I think you've gotten some good ideas from others, and the
>Jupiter 12 is definitely a good suggestion.  But, you're probably aware
>of some issues with the compatibility of this lens with certain camera
>bodies.  Which "humble" bodies were you planning to use with your 35mm
>lens?

Will it work on the Hexar RF?