Forum Übersicht - Mittelformatkameras » Seagull

Hallo!
Kann jemand etwas über eine Seagull 4A 103 sagen? Qualität, Abbildungsleistung, Preis

Danke
Palder

Ja, klickst du hier

EDIT: Kernaussage: Ich habe mit der Seagull 4A-103 fotografiert, gekauft mitte der 80er für damals DM 140,- neu. Die Abbildungsqualität wird erst bei deutlichem Abblenden brauchbar, daher habe ich sie wieder abgegeben. Ausserdem habe ich mit der Yashica MAT 124G gearbeitet. Das Objektiv ist wesentlich besser als das der Seagull, ...

EDIT: Die Mechanik der 4A-103 ist soweit ok. Das Sucherbild ist relativ körnig und dunkel. Mein Fazit: Für ein erstes ausprobieren der Mittelformatfotografie taugt die Kamera, das Erlebnis eines 6x6-Dias ist beeindruckend, verglichen mit KB. Abblenden auf 8-11 ist aber pflicht bei diesem bzw. bei meinem damaligen Modell.

Außerdem gibt/gab es bei diesen Kameras ein Problem mit der Sauberkeit!
Auch ich habe mir Ende der 80er aus nostalgischen Gründen so ein Teil für 80 DM (neu) gekauft.
Ich mußte ca. 5 verschiedene Modelle ausprobieren und kontrollieren bis ich eine wirklich saubere Einheit fand.
Die Bilder sind echt Klasse, das mit dem starken abblenden kann ich so nicht bestätigen, aber das liegt wahrscheinlich an der Serienstreuung, die bei diesen 6x6 Gehäusen enorm war. Außerdem hat mein Gerät eine "neuere" Linse.
Hier noch ein paar Links:

http://www.kameramuseum.de/1rst/seagull-6x6.html
http://www.photo.net/equipment/medium-format/seagull
http://www.jafaphotography.com/seagull.htm

Hier ist eine Übersicht, die ich vor langer Zeit einmal auf Englisch für meine Webseite geschrieben habe:

Experiences with the Seagull TLR 4A Series

By Marcus Erne, September 1999/January2001

Introduction

In 1989 I picked up a Seagull 4A TLR for $50 new at a discount photo-store in Germany.
Initially, I figured, it would look pretty neat in my small "curiosity collection" of camera bodies.
Having shot the first roll of 120 trannies out of curiousity, I was surprised by the superiorty of sharpness and, more obvious, of the image size.


Build

There are 3 models available.
The 4A, 4A-1 and 4A-103 cameras are 120 twin-lens reflex cameras. The look and make of the 3 models is basically identical.

The 4A-1 and 4A-103 are identical in all but the picture taking lens, and offer both a hot-shoe mount on the left side of the body.
Both of the above cameras have an improved top cover and a fresnel lens inside the viefinder for a brighter and sharper field of view.
The flash on the 4A (mine) works via cable connection, only. The socket is located in the lower left corner on the front side.

The look reminds a lot of a Rollei and the alloy body suggests ruggedness the lasts for a lifetime.Film: 120 roll film, 12 exosuresFormat: 6x6 cmShutter: Located between lens, 1 to 1/300 seconds and "B". Step-less
lever adjustment.Aperture: All 3 models f/3.5 to f/22, Step-less lever adjustment.Flash: "X" hot-shoe on 4A-1 and 4A-103, flash socket on 4A,
synchronously at all speeds.Focussing: Full-field precision ground screen focussing.Viewfinder: Waist-level viewfinder on 4A-1 and 4A-103 with fresnel lens
and with ground glass, only with 4A.Lens: 85mm, see "Optical" sectionFilm advance: Manual winding crank, automatically locating the formatand
cocking the shutter.Self-Timer: Built-in with a delay of 8-12 seconds.Exposure counter: Count and reset automatically.Dimensions: 102x102x146 mmWeight: 980 g 4A-1 and 4A-103, 975 g 4AI do not remember if I detected any mechanical malfunctions during the selection.

The manual states that the cameras comes with an accessory lens hood and a filter, which mine didn’t have. However, a one-piece plastic lens cap, a leather body cover and a primitive strap were supplied.
The leather body cover literally stinks! Therefore I recommend to through it away and replace the primitive and narrow strap with something more comfortable.


Optical

The optical set-up of all lens versions is copied from the Tessar style. All 3 models offer the same 75mm f/2.8 viewing lens.
The 4A,the basis of all 3 models, incorporates a 3-groups, 3-element f/3.5 picture taking lens, so does the 4A-103.
The 4A-1 has one more element to offer for superior image quality.
The lenses are not interchangeble,but permanent. The 75mm equals roughly a "normal" 50mm-lens in the 35mm format.

The focussing knob offers a DOF-scale that is relatively easy to read.

The main problem, when selecting my 4A camera body out of many, was the overall cleanliness of the interior and lenses. I made sure that is was possible to clean any type of dirt that I found. Most of the bodies had dust and dirt INSIDE the lens group, therefore I wouldn't recommend to mail order one. I bought the cleanest model I could find in that store (I must have gone through 15 different bodies).


In The Field

I took my Seagull once on an extensive photo trip to Spain to take a few landscapes with it. The results (besides my poor composition) were great. Being used to the 35mm system the outcome of the "huge" 6x6 cm slides was very surprising and impressive to me.
I determined the exposure either with my 35mm SLR or with a handheld selen-meter (Gossen Sixtino) I bought for 40 DM used.
The aperture or the shutter speed is set via a lever on both sides of the lens and takes only little to get used to.
Confusing may be the viewfinder image because left is right and right is left! Again, after a short while one gets used to it as well.
I found this camera to be useful in people photography and certain landscape photography (e.g. tree portraits).


Price

In 1989 approx. US$ 50 or 80 DEM.


Conclusion

I think Seagull is a very good entry/beginner camera for medium (6x6) format (or an adult toy camera) at very low cost. It may for some 35mm photographers (like me) be a cheap tool to investigate the 6x6 format. If you look for a more serious 6x6 then look for a Yashicamat.
After moving to a DSLR my 6x6 Seagull went into my collector’s items display…

danke!

Hallo,

genau diese Kamera habe ich vor 2 Tagen in den Müll befördert. Die Verschlusslamellen waren verölt. Der Versuch sie zu "entölen" schlug fehl.

Ist halt eine minderwertige Qualität und nicht die beste Verarbeitung.

Ich hatte damit ein paar Filme belichtet, diese waren auch nicht der Renner.

Die Kamera sieht aber in der Vitrine nicht schlecht aus.

Gruß /good.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="" border="0" alt="good.gif" />

Dimage-Kalle