Camera Review: Zenza Bronica EC

 I have been between things today and not really able to settle on a single thing to do with myself. I've had an itch to review the cameras I own, that aren't already well documented online. I mean I could write about my AE-1, but I doubt I could say very much that hasn't already been said. 

I'll do the cameras that are less well documented first.

My black  Bronica EC sitting on the stairs (and a fixer stain left of centre)

I'll try to cover the aspects of the camera I like and don't like, I'm not well equipped for product photography so if you want to see good pictures of the camera then I suggest Google. I also regularly compare this camera to the Mamiya RB67. This is for two reasons, the first being that I originally planned to buy an RB and the second is that a friend of Mine owns one, so I have a decent idea of how they feel. The older Bronica cameras also act as a kind of alternative to the RB, in terms of price.

I don't see the point in intensively comparing the also 6x6 Hasselblad 500c(m) to my Bronica when a Hasselblad system is at least twice the price. If you wish to spend north of £1000 on a camera system and value portability I would say without a doubt buy either an SQA system for 6x6 or a GS-1 if you're interested in 6x7. If you want the a studio camera then either an RZ67 or Pentax 67. On the the matter of Hasselblad's, other than mechanical serviceability, the cost of the Hasselblad system, especially the lenses, makes it a hard sell for anyone other than a poser or collector.

If you haven't already realised this is probably my most valuable camera, certainly if we're going off the price when New. They're not hugely common in the UK so I imported mine from Japan with the 75mm Nikkor for £250. That was in 2019 and was a good deal at the time, so I'd expect to pay around £300 from Japan now and maybe £350-£500 in the UK. This is still a good bit cheaper than even a crusty Mamiya RB67, which is what I originally wanted, but I was put off by the size and leaf shutters. Although I do wish I had an extra inch (what guys don't) this camera is actually a lot more refined than the RB67 which is a real clunky thing.

The camera will take 120 or 220 film and produce 6x6 (5.5x5.5cm) images. I've not encountered anything other than 6x6 and polaroid backs but the camera wiki article does list 645 as an option. As far as framing and spacing goes, I've not had any problems. Out of the MF cameras I've used this has the best film transport in terms of accuracy. It also uses removable backs, so you can shoot multiple types of film at the same time. The backs are removed using a rather novel system where you insert the dark slide and then give it a squeeze which will unlatch the back. This makes it pretty much impossible to remove the back without inserting a dark slide. The dark slide is held captive in the back when the back is off the camera. The back features a slot that the dark slide can be inserted into during use. The camera will not shoot unless the dark slide is removed. In fact for a medium format camera, which often expect the user to be a veteran photographer, the Bronica EC is pretty much fool proof. It wont do double expose unless you ask it to, it's impossible to shoot with a dark slide and the back won't come off without the dark slide.

The EC is actually the last in a longer series of cameras, which I would call the 'original Bronicas'. The first of these cameras came out in the late 50's and was the product of one mans lifetime fascination with Hasselblad. The original Zenza Bronica, which is short for Zenzaburo [Yoshino] Brownie Camera, was supposed to be a technical improvement on Victor Hasselblad's camera. So if you ever end up with a Bronica as lower cost alternative to a Hasselblad, don't feel as though you have the inferior tool. 

Enough History, I'll list out and comment on the features of the camera.

Lenses

Possibly the most interesting part of the Bronica EC/S2 system is that the lenses are independent of the focussing mechanism for focal lengths up to 200mm. This has the effect of making the lenses much smaller. The downside is that focal lengths above 135mm require extension tubes to allow for close up portraits. The system employed by the Mamiya RB/RZ67 that uses bellows is better than screw focus system used by Bronica for most situation, however the screw focussing mechanism used by Bronica will surely outlast the bellows used on Mamiya cameras. The screw system also allows the body to remain slightly more compact. Bellows are available but they are designed for Macro photography and are fairly expensive. If you focus mainly on tripod-mounted close ups, a Mamiya RB67 is possibly a more suitable camera than the Bronica EC.

The Nikkor-P.C 75mm 2.8 lens which came with the camera I find is the most equivalent to a 35mm 50mm lens. People will often compare lenses between formats using the image circle (the hypotenuse of the frame), but I find that this is misleading when you are dealing with different aspect ratios. The 'ideal' lens using this method is a 90mm, which is really to narrow to be useful. Adjusting the square frame to a 3x2 crop (the same aspect ratio as 35mm) you end up with a conversion factor of 1.53. This in a sense proves that the 75mm is in fact the best equivalent to a 50mm lens when using 6x6.

The 75mm lens performs as I would expect it. Unfortunately I've never used a Mamiya 7 or Hasselblad, so I can't comment on whether this lens stacks up against those highly revered cameras and their lens systems. I can say that I have never found myself disappointed with the sharpness of the lens. Both this and the not so popular Nikkor-Q 135mm 3.5 will out perform my Epson V550 flatbed scanner in terms of sharpness, although this is hardly surprising considering the V550 can't produce much more than 2400dpi actual resolution. The best thing about the 75mm Nikkor lens is how close is sits to the body focused to infinity. The lens and focussing helicoid only contribute 3cm to the cameras total length of 16.5cm when fully withdrawn into the body. A Mamiya RB67 is 23cm long with a 127mm lens for comparison

Nikkor 75mm 2.8: Shot at 1/60 f2.8  Ilford Delta 100. Scanned at 2400DPI, Epson V550

The 135mm, I bought cheaply on eBay because I read people online commenting on how this lens was a dog. I have not found this to be the case, but as before I have not seen all of what's out there to fairly make this judgement. I will say that this lens is a less modern design than the 75mm. It sometimes exhibits some spherical distortion in out-of-focus regions, similar to the much acclaimed Helios 44-2, but I find this effect to be rather charming. Distortion is minimal for in focus regions. I haven't shot it with colour film so I can't comment on the chromatic aberration or contrast characteristic, but I have found the lens to be sharp. It is single coated, so would require a hood in high contrast sunlight and is maybe not ideal for backlit subjects. 

In terms of size the 135mm increases the length of the camera to 23cm, which is comparable the RB67 with 127mm. I will point out that my camera does also squeeze in a focal plane shutter in that length however.

Nikkor 135mm 3.5: Shot at 1/8 f5.6 Ilford Delta 100. Scanned at 2400DPI, Epson V550

The 135mm needs extension tubes to focus any closer than the picture above. as a minimum you need a Bronica extension tube-A to use allow some extension. They more often come as a set A,B,C,D which is what I bought. If you're patient you can get them on eBay for not a lot of money. Only two of the tubes (A&B) are proprietary, the other two are just aluminium tubes with a metric thread. This means that you could buy more generic tubes if you desired, although I think the set covers the useful range of all the lenses. As far as I know Bronica nor any other company ever made macro lenses for the EC.

Finders

I don't think I'm alone in saying that when I first found out about medium format cameras I found the commonly used 'waist-level' viewfinders alluring. They have this kind of mystique, displaying a sharp image from the lens that can be viewed at a reasonable distance. Kind of like an analogue version of the screen on a digital camera. 

The waist level viewfinder is what comes with the most ECs and I find it is the optimal method of focusing in most situations. For a start it is very compact. The finder, which is really just a cover/light shade, folds away when it's not required and it does so in a very elegant manner. The user must only press the top cover down and the shades fold away automatically. On many MF cameras the user has to manually fold the shades before closing the cover. The cover has a flip up magnifier to assist focusing. I find the magnifier to be essential when shooting portraits as I struggle to achieve accurate focus with just the screen alone. The screen does however present an advantage when framing shots by offering a very large picture, with clearly defined edges. When taking landscapes on a tripod the ability to frame a shot in an upright position is very handy. 

Whilst tripod use in landscapes is a positive for the waist level finder, it actually becomes a bit of a nuisance when shooting portraits. If a subject is standing and you wish to take a portrait at eye level, you will require a ladder in order to frame the shot. Even a tall seated subject would have a short photographer struggling. Although I'm not short, this is what drew me towards the prism finder. I think there are multiple versions of the non-metered prism which offer different angles of viewfinder. The model I have puts the finder at around a thirty degree angle to the horizontal. This is the optimal angle for general use (since the camera is held from the bottom not the side), although someone only taking mug shots may see better use from the ninety degree (perpendicular to the focus screen) finder. There is also the light meter finder, but this is top down thing (like the waist finder but you have to crane your neck) and with EC TLs available, as well as high quality hand held meters, I see no reason why you would want this bulky thing. 

I find the prism finder less desirable than the focusing screen because it makes the camera really heavy, much bulkier, and because the standard focusing screen isn't a split prism, it's more difficult to focus. I only use the prism when my camera is at the top of a tripod, and if you're going to do that you'll need a heavy/sturdy tripod otherwise you risk tipping over, or at the very least introducing oscillations. With the 75mm lens and film the camera weighs 2.1kg with the waist finder and 2.6kg with the prism. For perspective a Canon Ae-1 with an FL (metal) 50mm 1.4 weighs just shy of 1kg. So 500g extra weight  from the prism is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you have to hold it up to your face and focus with the other hand.

One last thing to note on finders is that the finder from a Kiev six/sixty/6c can be machined for use on the Bronica. I have not used one, but I have read that they are brighter, and they appear more compact than Bronica finders. For a Russian made finder I find this surprising, anyone whose used a Zenit will know what I'm talking about, however I will not dismiss the Kiev finder until I try one.

Body & Back

I'm aware that this is becoming quite a long review so I'll try not to rewrite what's already cover in the camera wiki article or the manual. 

The body which I'm pretty sure is an alloy chassis with plastic and leatherette panelling feels incredibly solid. I remember handing it to someone who has only ever used modern eos digital cameras and seeing how surprised he was by the bodies heft. The heft does also mean that you get the feeling, should you drop this camera, you'll definitely remember doing it. For a camera with a relatively cubic form, it's well laid out for hand held operation. There are grips available, but I've never used one, and I'm unsure that it would be that practical. The way I hold my camera is with my hands cupped around the bottom. The form is such that when held like this the shutter and focusing controls are still easily operated. 

The wind lever on this camera is very stiff, the maximum shutter speed of 1/1000s definitely contributes to this. The lever does however have a ratchet and crank, so you don't actually have to rotate the knob to wind the shutter. The Shutter itself is an electromagnetic shutter. These are electromechanical devices and since this is the only electronic part, the Bronica EC should offer fairly good serviceability. The lenses and some accessories will work with the fully mechanical S2a should you desire a fully mechanical (and reliable) Bronica.

On my camera I have once experience the shutter lock up at the top the mirror stroke. If I remember correctly lightly prodding the mirror corrected this, although it's a sign that my camera needs adjusted. The end result was a blank frame. The shutter otherwise makes a sound that instils confidence in the camera. It is a very loud clunk. The shutter speeds seem to be accurate from what I've experienced, although I would expect this from an electronic shutter. There is a mirror lock up, which is essential for sharpness when using the lower-mid shutter speeds. You'd be forgiven for missing it though, since it is just a small lever on the left side of the camera. Once the mirror has been locked up the shutter must be fired. The whole mechanism, does give the impression that it was maybe a last minute addition, although it functions fine. Should you lock up the mirror by accident, the back can be removed to fire the shutter and reset the mirror.

The strap lugs on this camera are an annoying proprietary design, this means that unless you machine you're own mounts, straps can be an expensive import affair. The position of the mounts mean that the it would only really be feasible to wear the camera around the neck, as opposed to over the shoulder or on a hip clip. I can only really imagine a strap therefor being of much use to a butter fingers, or maybe a fashion photographer who has to deal with hand held light meter readings; You really wouldn't want this camera banging around on you chest. Besides the camera is really to heavy to hold lightly (nonchalantly)  and if you were to drop it with a wrist strap it'd probably rip your arm off.

The film back is a straightforward affair to someone who has experience with 120 film and is no more difficult to load than a manual 35mm camera, however the system may confuse a user new to 120 film. The film is loaded into an insert, and then the insert is loaded into the back, and then the back is mounted to the body. There is a double button system for opening the back so it's unlikely that the back would be opened accidently. The counter denotes each frame, and will count up to 24 (for 220 film). When the film is finished the back will automatically sense this and disengage the shutter from the body winder, allowing the user to fully wind the exposed 120 roll film.

On my EC I have experience some light leaks from the dark slide slot. The dark-slide does not use felt or foam seals, but corrugated copper seals. Over time I believe the copper seals have deformed leaving a tiny gap when the dark-slide is removed. The backs can be carefully opened and the seals can be bent to tighten them. In theory the copper light seal system should outlast foam or felt, although it is something to consider when buying used backs. The repair job took me less than 10 minutes from taking the camera off the shelf, to placing it back on the shelf, and required only a ph00 screwdriver.

The only other thing I can say about the body is that it doesn't have an off button, although the shutter may not draw any energy when it not in operation (the manual recommends storing the camera with the shutter released) an off button would give me piece of mind that the battery isn't going to be run down and start to leak. The closest you can get to an off button is the shutter button lock, which is achieved by twisting the button clockwise.

Conclusion

Do I recommend this camera? Short answer: yes. Longer answer: Yes, provided you see yourself dissatisfied with whatever camera you currently own. I would not suggest one of these as a first film camera since each picture is comparatively expensive to 35mm. It's also so large that it's not a walk about machine, it's for people with a good idea what exactly they want to photograph, and have a desire to photograph such things in high resolution. For studio use this would run with a Hasselblad 500c for a fraction of the cost. You only sacrifice flash sync speed with the Bronica and that's really nothing. I've lugged this camera up mountains and I can say that resolution is not what makes a photo. In short, this is a portrait machine. 

I have been guilty in the past of lusting over the hyped up film cameras that other young photographers clickbait on YouTube with. In a digital age there is little difference between running with the crowd or going with the under dog. Bronicas are cheap, especially to those who wait, so as a photographers camera this is one to go for. Especially the imported Japanese cameras, which are usually pristine. Just remember that nothing is forever, all cameras will eventually break, where and how they break will determine their fate from there on.

One more thing that may swing someone unsure of old Bronicas in terms of quality is this 1975 minifilm add. https://www.flickr.com/photos/nesster/3241554546/in/album-72157621778835031/ Notice how the Bronica system is more expensive than much revered Pentax 67 and Mamiya RB. In fact my underdog is closer in price to a Hasselblad!