Check the above references for full data on the related tests, testing standards and techniques, and interpretation of the lens resolution and other test data. The RZ lenses also did very well in contrast (see article) All three of the lens tested turned in a stunning ALL EXCELLENTs rating for resolution at every f/stop tested. Both the 110mm and 65mm also turned in all "HIGH" values for contrast, both center and edge. Now you know one good reason that Mamiya RB/RZ kits are so popular with professional and serious amateur photographers alike, and one of the biggest sellers in the U.S.A. and European markets.

Photo notes:

Professional Mamiya RB 67 Camera with 150mm portrait lens with disc, 120 film back. The camera is about 10 years old. The disks that come with the lens are: 5.0; 5.6; and 6.3. There is also a lens hood with this camera. It has a waste level view finder. It is not a Professional S model but the one previous to that. The lens on the camera is a Mamyia-Sekor SF C. This camera has a revolving back for verticle and horizontal pictures.

RB67 Roll Film Back Photo Notes:

Mamiya RB67 with 127 3.8 C Lens, waist level finder and a Beattie Model D-56 Back held on with a custom adapter. The adapter is alost 1/2" thick and very, very solid. This cameras takes 70mm film and has a split back. In English that means you can shoot approximately 650 pictures in 6:45 format without reloading.

Medium Format Digest Posting:
From: Don Carter [email protected]
Subject: Response to RB67 vs. RZ67
Date: 1998-05-05

Scott,

You may or may not know that the RZ body will function without a battery using the RB Pro, PRO S and the KL lenses for the Pro SD. There is a rotating switch that allows the use of the mechanical lenses. This makes the RZ body the most versatile of the 4 bodies that have been produced in the RZ/RB line. It will accept virtually every RB and RZ lens ever made, with an adapter "G" it will take RB backs, and I believe it will accept some of the RB finders.

When the battery is dead, the RZ lenses will fire at only one shutter speed ( 1/30? not sure which as I do not have an owner's book in front of me), so even the electro mechanical lenses are usable without power, although limited in speeds.

If you purchased your main lens in the KL series for studio work, with an RZ body, you would have system that would function with or without a battery. You could add RZ lenses when you needed their features.

Though I don't shoot people very often, I do shoot scenes with rapidly changing light. I find the RZ with an AE finder and an RZ lens that can utilize the finder's features makes capturing the moment many times faster and much easier than when I had an RB and a hand held meter. The meter has spot and average modes. My natural light exposures since getting the AE finder are at least as precise if not more so, than when I was using my Sekonic L408 meter with the RB.

I do not miss one bit having to crank the RB body lever to cock the shutter and lower the mirror and then crank the film advance lever. The single stroke RZ lever makes for fast work as the light changes.

I haven't tried the fine focus feature of the RZ Pro II body but I find the focusing system of the RZ Pro to be easy to use.

You should be aware that the older RB lenses, not marked KL are not in the same league as the newer RZ and KL lenses when it comes to resolution, distortion and color rendition. I was never happy with the image quality of RB Sekor C lenses that I have owned ( 50mm, 90mm, 127mm and 360mm.

Good luck with the decision.

Don

From Medium Format Digest:
From: tom meyer [email protected]
Subject: Response to Availability of focus screens for Rollei SL66E
Date: 1998-08-18

hey!

i just got my sl66 and it looks waaay brighter than my mamiya rb. i put a screen in the mamiya made by a guy in decatur ga. named bill maxwell for 1/2 the price of a beattie and he engraved a grid on it for an extra 5 bucks! hard to beat!! did it in 3 days too! bill maxwell @ maxwell precision optics 404.939.6644 makes beauty loupes, too!

tom meyer

From Medium Format Digest:
From: James Chow [email protected]
Subject: latest MF news from Japan Re: Mamiya RZ67 pro lenses, Contax 645
Date: 1998-11-24

I noticed in the just-released December Nippon Camera issue that Mamiya Japan is planning to release a pr. of new tilt-shift lenses for the RZ67 pro to work with the tilt-shift adapter. The lenses are a 180/4.5 and 75/4.5. The release date is set for July 1999 for Japan.

Also, an ad for the Contax 645 lists the release date as Jan 20, 1999 in Japan. The new Pentax 67II should be out by now...I plan to drop by Yodobashi Camera to check it out (and the prices) this week.

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
[1] From: Bruce Shu [email protected]
[1] Aquatica 67 u/w housing
Date: Fri Mar 19 1999

Would appreciate the benefit of anyone's experience, good or bad, with the Aquatica 67 underwater housing. I am in the process of ordering it for my Mamiya RZ.

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: [email protected] (Ooffy)
[1] Re: Graflex XL and RB67
Date: Tue Oct 26 1999

RB67s were first offered with Mamiya (Univeral) backs and had avialable a rotating adapter which would take Graflex roll backs. Mamiya very soon offered a copy of the Graflex (which in short order became the "standard" back for the RB67 and RB67s came with the formerally "optional" rotating Graflex adapter because no one was buying the Mamiya Universal-style backs. Graflex roll bakcs will fit a RB67 and work just like the early RB67 backs (cock camera, hit trip lever on back, advance film). The Graflex ground glass assembly will not mount on a RB67 - the Mamiya rotating adapter lacks the clip rod to hold the assembly.

Good Luck

Ron Bennett

Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999
From: [email protected] (K H Tan)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RZ lenses

Hi

I am a professional photographer who shoots mainly studio portraiture and use the exact same outfit that you'll be buying.

I went through the same decision making process some time ago.

I am not sure what Mamiya America's normal lens package is, but in some countries, you have choice of either a 90mm or a 110mm as a 'normal' lens in the package.

For a full length portrait in a smallish studio, the 110 is a good choice (it's about a 53mm in the 35 format; actually, I prefer and use the 127mm KL from the RB series on my RZ since it is slightly longer, and even close up to the subject, little perspective - not optical mind you - distortion is evident). The 90mm might add a little too much distortion (you might actually want that, depending on your aesthetic style) when used too close to the subject.

The next lens to get for a head and shoulders, or at least a half body shot, could be a 180mm or a 150mm. Personally, I chose the 150mm as it is easier to focus with that f3.5 vs f4.5 (using the stock focussing screen), and is easier to handhold. However, many portrait photographers choose the 180mm for an even flatter perspective.

Annie Liebovitz is well known for using the RZ 140 macro extensively in her portrait work. Personally, I feel that the perspective with a 150mm is already flat enough for a half body or close crop head shot (its like a 75mm in the 35mm format, the 180mm about a 90mm equivalent in the same format), and it allows you to be closer to the subject - a psychological consideration. The 140mm Macro could also be a consideration if you plan to also do macro work. It costs a little more of course. How much space you'd usually have to execute your photos matters in the final decision I would think. A 150mm is wonderful choice for more confined spaces.

In the bigger picture, depending on your style of portraiture, you might need an even wider lens for environmental style shoots.

Landscape photographers use an entire gamut of lenses from the wide to the very long, depending on subject matter and aesthetics. If by now you already have two lenses, a third might be a long lens. Consider a 50mm, which is about a 24mm in the 35 format.

KLIN [email protected] wrote:

::I am a photography student and will be buying an RZ67 in the coming
::months. I can afford maybe two lenses for it, (besides the "normal" lens
::that comes with it as part of thepackage I am buying). I am wondering
::which two lenses I should get. I will be mainly shooting full length
::portraits and alot of landscapes. Any ideas/suggestions? Thanks.
::
::
::W. LIN

Date: Wed Apr 19 2000
rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Shinichi Hayakawa" [email protected]
[1] Re: mamiya versus leica

> Technical ? No.

Well, maybe, there are a few. For one thing, designing a faster lens requires also designing a larger-diameter shutter unit. The present shutter unit for M7 looks like #0. Designing a larger unit--say, #1-- with a top speed of 1/500 is very, very difficult. You know, the top shutter speed of Mamiya RB/RZ67 lenses--with #1 shutters--is only 1/400.

Also, if they are to design such a new shutter unit from the scratch, they have to release several new lenses to justify the development cost.

Shinichi

Date: 15 Oct 2000
From: [email protected] (Heavysteam)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Best MF under USD 1000 ?

You should have no problem finding an RB67 Pro-s with lens and back for under $1000. What you will get is:

1. A BIG 6X7 image. If you are going to medium format to get a bigger film image, why go half way with those "little" 6X6 and 6X4.5 formats?

2. Flash sync at all shutter speeds. If flash sync at faster speeds is important to you, don't even bother looking at the Pentax 67 with it's focal plane shutter.

3. A robust, rugged, reliable mechanical camera.

4. A revolving back which makes changing from horizontal to vertical frames a breeze, even when mounted on a tripod.

5. Built-in bellows for much closer shooting than fixed-mount 6X7's.

6. Reflex viewing.

7. A wide array of high-performance lenses at reasonable prices, with some that are truly outstanding.

8. A wide array of accessories for viewing and shooting, making it a full-featured system camera.

9. A widely used and accepted system with a good base of readily available components on the used market at reasonable prices.

10. Full support for maintenance from Mamiya.

And pay no attention to those woosies who claim the RB is too much camera to carry around. Try hauling around a 4X5 or 8X10 field camera, lenses and tripod. Remember, these cameras sort out the sissies who are too weak and lazy to haul equipment into the field to keep them out of the way of the real photographers.

Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000
From: [email protected] (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB Vs RZ

Eddy [email protected] wrote:

>I am going to add a medium format and was wondering which is a better
>choice if I do not plan on using the AE control and prism.
>Are the lens of same quality?
>Any other recommendations?
>
>Mainly for portrait, group portrait, product and interior shot.
>plan to get soft focus and Shift lens.
>
>Thanks for sharing your experience with me.

THe RB KL lenses are basically the same formula lenses as the RZ lenses, the C lenses are just a bit less contrasty in adverse light but a better bargain in the used market. Only kL lenses are available new for the RB, the Cs no longer being made and some parts no longer available for some C lenses. The older non C lenses are said to be softer than Cs, you can't prove it to me by the one non C I own but there is a difference in the coating being single coated for the non C / non KL.

As to the soft lens, I passed on this since I have a fairly diverse selection of Lindahl accessories plus PhotoShop anyway. I suggest a pro hood arrangement over the soft lens be that from Lindahl or Lee or whom ever. The 180 mm. lenses are available ( especially non C) at very reasonable prices, it's a great head and shoulders lens. The 127 is a great couples or small group lens, is slightly short of normal and the standard 90 gives you a slight wide angle view for groups of 10-20 people or so. The 65 makes a good scenic or so called envoironmental portrait lens.

The bodies are are bit different, the RZ reported to be a bit lighter and having more electronic features. The RB is all mechanical leaf shutter operation. If you go with a used RB I suggest at least the ProS version for its lockout functions ( less chance for double exposure and other errors, the lockouts won't let you remove the back without a darkslide and so on).

For studio operation or portraiture in general it's mighty hard to beat either camera. I love my RBPro S for formal H+S portraiture and also use it for other forms of shooting ( wedding formals, family portraits, some personal scenic shooting). If compactness is your desire look to another system, this is a real tank of a camera and I highly recommend handling any system before you buy. Large photo shows are a good place to go see all this stuff under one roof.

Speaking of photo shows Hunts Photo and Video is having their annual show this weekend starting today at Bostons World Trade Center.

David Grabowski

Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000
From: "Andrew M Packer" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB/RZ lenses What's the difference/better betwwen them?

[email protected] wrote

>How can I tell between the RZ and RB lenses? Would either work on either the
>RZ/RB bodies?

RZ lenses have the designation "Z". They have no shutter speed setting ring (the RZ controls the leaf shutter electronically). RB lenses have the designation "KL" (the most modern), "C" (older) or no particular letter at all (oldest). They have a shutter speed ring with speeds of 1/400 to 1 second plus T.

RB lenses can be used on the RZ body, although the infinity focussing position for this combination has the bellows racked out a few millimetres. The RZ body cannot control the shutter of the RB lens, which must be set manually. The RZ auto-winder cannot be used if an RB lens is mounted on the RZ body.

RZ lenses can NOT be used on the RB body, as there is no way of controlling the shutter speed (even if it could be controlled, the lens could not be focussed properly).

=====Andrew Packer

Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000
From: [email protected] (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB/RZ lenses What's the difference/better betwwen them?

[email protected] wrote:

>Greetings,
>
>How can I tell between the RZ and RB lenses? Would either work on either the
>RZ/RB bodies? I was wondering as so that I can invest my interest in the
>right direction. I thank you all in advance.
>
>Chuck

KL lenses for the RB are reported to be a similar formulated lens as the RZ lenses which are contrasty compared to older RB lenses. My suggestion is to not swap lenses around between sytems and if you want the later coating and don't mind the expenes go with KL lenses for the RB if you choose that system. There are plenty of good reasons to consider the RZ ( they just don't apply to my kind of shooting , so I use the RB with C lenses personally), like very consistant shutter , the latest lenses ( especially good in scenic shooting) and a bit lighter. It's the lastest camera in design, and probably will be supported for affordable, semi affordable digital upgrade later on, least before the RB would IMO.

For a really pro camera with somewhat affordable accessories the RB is a good place to go in 6x7, tons of things around for this system. The RB will be a bit less to get going with, the trade off boils down to weight and just a touch more bulk, no electronics.

David Grabowski

rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Mike" [email protected]
Date: Sun Jan 28 2001
[1] Re: RB-120 film in a 220?

Running 120 thru the 220 magazine places an increased load on the film transport system(s) which may cause serious damage.

Mike

www.mfcrepair.com

> Mike wrote:
>
> > Can anyone tell me what problems I would have running 120 film through
> > my 220 back. I realize when the counter gets to 10 I would need to put
> > my lens cap on and fire off 10 blanks. What about the starting arrow  on
> > the leader paper will it line up properly for the 120 film?
> > Thanks
>
> I run 120's through my RZ's  220 backs - they are a bit tighter to run  due
> to the thicker backing plate but work.   Just have to be aware when the 10
> frames have been taken. and wind till the film is off the spool.
>
> rm

[Ed. note: Thanks to David Grabowski for sharing these pointers!]
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001
From: [email protected] (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Differences between Mamiya RB and RZ cameras?

Leo [email protected] wrote:

>Hello all,
>I have owned a M645 in the past, and am looking to purchase a 6x7 format
>camera in the not-so-distant future? Im looking at the RB and RZ 67
>cameras and am wondering what the main/critical differences between the
>two are? I will be using the camera in an outdoors (non-studio) setting
>for landscape photography (perhaps some close ups)..
>
>Any other viable alternatives? Pentax or??
>
>Any help is appreciated,
>Leon

I agree with most of what Andrew has alread stated. I would add a couple of things. Fist off the RB lenses are only of the same formula as the RZ lenses in the KL series. That stated, certain examples of C lenses are quite up to qualities similar. Most non C lenses ( non KL as well) are a bit softer than rest of the choices or at least require more care in shading with outdoor shooting.

For scenics specifically I think I might consider the Pentax over an RB/RZ , this is a very popular camera for that kind of shooting and the lenses are very good throughout and less expensive than some other choices. However since I own the RB anyway, it is what I use for scenics shooting in 6x7.

I highly suggest if possible going out and renting the systems you are interested in, I think B+H will rent as well if there is nothing near by. The RB/RZ is quite the camera system to lug around and is not the camera choice for all people, though a formitable foe non the less.

David Grabowski

Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2001
From: "Steve Lewis" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB questions

Chris

There are three models of the RB; the RB Pro, the RB Pro S and the RB Pro SD. The only major difference is that the Pro SD has a larger lens throat to allow use of the 8 x 8 film back. The non 'C' lens had a single coating and the 'C' lens were multi coated. All these lenses will fit the Pro and Pro S cameras and will fit the Pro SD camera with an adapter ring which is supplied with later lenses or can be bought separately. The new KL lenses are a complete redesign of the old lenses and are consequently more expensive. They will only fit the Pro SD body. All the lenses will fit on the RZ but you will lose some auto features. All the backs are interchangeable and the only advantage of the 220 back is that you change the film less often. The film and processing costs are twice the cost of 120 !

HTH

Steve

Chris Downing wrote

>I recently purchased a Mamiya RB67 Pro S from a family friend.  I have a
>127mm lens and a single 120 Pro S back for it.  I would like to get  another
>back or two, and a wide angle lens would help out too.
>
>What is the difference between the non-C, C, and KL lenses?  I hear some
>lenses are compatible with the RZ as well (which means nothing to me) but
>will only work on the Pro SD model as opposed to the Pro or Pro S.  Why  is
>this and which lenses would those be?
>
>Also, will a 120 Pro or Pro SD back work on my Pro S?  If it does, are there
>any limitations to this?  I see more Pro backs available used, and at a
>pretty decent price.  The difference in cost between a used 220 back for the
>Pro or Pro S does make a difference for this college student.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Chris

Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001
From: "Andrew M Packer" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Difference between RB67 Pro and RB67 Pro S?

Mike Jordan wrote

> Can someone tell me what the difference between the RB67 Pro and
>Pro S is? I know the Pro didn't have the double exposure lock and
>that it's an older camera, but I'm not sure what other differences
>there are.  I use to have the RB67 Pro S which I got in 1977 or 78
>and have been looking to get another one ever since I sold it in
>1984.  I've found someone selling a Pro but don't know the
>differences.  The Mamyia site didn't have any information on the

>Pro, although it did on the Pro S.

Mike

In addition to the lack of a double exposure lock, the Pro has no indicator on the focussing screen whether you are in landscape or portrait format (on the Pro-S and Pro-SD a set of lines appear on the screen when the back is rotated into portrait format), and the Pro has not got a self-erecting focussing hood. (I'm not sure what that means - the Pro focussing hood is easy enough to raise and to collapse down.)

You might find that a subscriber to the Mamiya site could enlighten you further, even if there is no "official" information about the Pro on the site.

=====Andrew

[Ed. note: Thanks again to David Grabowski for sharing this info with us!]
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001
From: [email protected] (David Grabowski)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB/RZ lens lines

"Jim & Lora Wutrich" [email protected] wrote:

>Does anyone care to provide a $.25 tutorial on the Mamiya RB/RZ lenses,
>i.e., rank the different lens lines from poorest quality to best quality,
>note idiosyncrasies, etc...
>
>I've been shooting 330S's for more than a few years and am looking to  move
>up... but not until I'm more familiar with the product line.  So, exactly
>what is the difference among the "C, Z, K, K/L", unmarked, and other  Mamiya
>lenses that I'm not aware of...  Do all RB lenses fit RZ's, and v.v.?
>
>Would appreciate all info.
>Regards,
>Jim

KL lenses are the latest and greatest for the RB camera, said to be of the same formular as the latest lenses for the RZ. C lenses are where I draw the line personally, non marked lenses you take your chances on contrast and flair control. Pretty much they all are quite sharp except perhaps for specific examples of a particular lens. IE; one 90C lens ( for example ) may or may not be up to the standards of another 90C lens. I would say all KL lenses are quite good, contrasty, sharp.

Known exceptional lenses, probably the 50 for the RZ, 65 for the RB and the famous 150 soft focus for portraits. The 140 macro is quite a lens as well, though personally I just use the inexpensive extention tubes with whatever lens. Non are shabby with the exception of the already mentioned occasional dud, in whatever focal length ( I own a 180 I could take or leave, not impressed with contrast control outdoors on that one, another might be great).

RB lenses fit the RZ but not the other way around.

David Grabowkski

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001
From: Karen Nakamura [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB lens needs CLA -- recommendations?

David -

> You could send it in to Mamiya, they have set pricing on a given
> service though but fast turn around. Portland Photographics can't hook
> you up with someone for a cleaning? Cleaning sticky leafs is a pretty
> standard service but overall you know the problem is just going to get
> worse.

Mamiya's flat rate for an overhaul is $185

I found a place on the internet that will do an overhaul for $110 + $10 shipping.

There's a woman locally (D. Dolan?) who also seems to do repairs, I'll see how much she comes out to.

> Just FWIW and in case you are new to the RB or mirror up in general,
> you are using a release at the lens for tripping the shutter? You do
> understand the operation of the mirror up function? I wouldn't want to
> see you send your lens for cleaning and find out you just didn't use
> it correctly in the first place. Like yourself, I don't really see why
> it would only stick in mirror up .

I am new to Mamiya but I don't think it's operator error. I noticed it when running some polaroids, with mirror up, I was getting the same amount of overexposure (totally white) even though my shutter speed was set to 400/250/125 etc. So I took off the back and looked at what was happening when the shutter was released.

With the MLU dial set to 'M' and a release fitted into the MLU socket, when I release the body release, the mirror goes up and the leaf shutter in the lens closes only about 10% of the time when the camera is placed horizontall. When the camera points towards the sky, the leaf shutter closes each time. Seems to me to be a straightforward case of a stick leaf shutter...

Karen

From: "Tom Bloomer" bloomer@/"NoSpam>"/snip.net>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB67 lenses
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 

After about five years of research on the web, my conclusion is that the GS1
lenses are better than the SQ lenses - even the PS series.  That said, I
think the PS series SQ lenses compete well against the Zeiss offerings and I
have seen many user comments on the SQ lenses that agree with my assessment.
Unfortunately I no longer have a link to the web site that posted the test
results between Pentax 67, Bronica GS1 and Mamiya RZ lenses.  The test was
for a wide, normal, and short tele from each system.  It showed the GS1
100mm normal lens was better than either the Pentax or Mamiya RB normal
lens.  The Pentax 55mm F4 was better than the Bronica 65mm and the Mamiya RZ
65mm.  The Bronica 150mm was better than the Pentax 165mm F2.8 and the
Mamiya 165mm F4.  But we're talking hair splitting margins . . . not enough
to make a difference in the final decision for me.

Every user review that I have seen on the GS1 raves about the quality of the
100mm F3.5 as the best MF normal lens they have ever used.  There are sweet
lenses and so-so lenses made by every manufacturer.  The Mamiya 7 lenses are
supposed to be the best MF lenses ever made - every test and user review I
have seen confirms this.  The Bronica SQ 80mm lens is on a par with most
normal MF lenses.  The new 180mm and 135mm lenses for the SQ series are
reputed to be world class performers.  The Bronica wides compare favorably
to Mamiya.  The Hasselblad 100mm F3.5, 120mm F4.0, and 180mm F4.0 are the
sweetest of the Zeiss offerings.  The 50mm FLE Hassy lens is also reputed to
be very nice.  The 55mm F4.0 for the Pentax 67 is often claimed as one of
the best MF wide lenses made.  The 200mm F4 Pentax 67 and the 400MM F4 ED
Pentax 67 are reputed to be stellar performers.  The short tele-portrait
lenses of all MF brands are well suited to their forte - soft wide open -
sharp stopped down - nice bokeh.

Bottom line - just about any 6x7 system will outperform 6x6 once you crop
rectangular.  Of the currently available (still manufactured new) 6x7
cameras and lenses, there are really no "dogs" that I have heard about.  If
I was looking for a 6x7 street camera, I would not rule out the Fuji GW670
II or III.  I owned the GW670 II for about a year and I would put that 90mm
F3.5 EBC lens up against any other manufacturer's lens for sharpness,
contrast, and bokeh . . . is the Mamiya 7 with the 80mm worth 3x the cost?
Maybe if you also need interchangeable lenses.  If you are looking for a
street camera with big film, I would start with the Mamiya 7 or the Fuji
GW670/690.  Everything else in that format gets bulky and heavy - especially
when you add a prism finder, a grip, and additional lenses.
--
Tom Bloomer
Hartly, DE

"Christopher M Perez" [email protected]> wrote 
... if the question is concerning Bronica lenses in general, and not limited
to GS-1, then the Mamiya RB stands a good chance of providing better lenses.
In Bronica 6x6, the lenses we've seen so far lead me to believe they are on
par with Pentax 67 lenses.  That is to say, OK, but not real exciting.

Want _real_ exciting?  Mamiya 7 lenses are incredible.  Nothing we've so far
seen comes close (except for a few 135mm/150mm and maybe a 240 Fuji A and
110XL large format lenses).

I hope this helps - Chris


"Tom Bloomer /snip.net>" bloomer@/"NoSpam> wrote 
> I agree with QG on this one.  If you are thinking about the RB or RZ,  you
> should be making your decision based on the features of the system.  It is
> not light weight or portable.  If you are looking for a studio camera you
> should be comparing the RB/RZ to the Fuji GX680.  The Bronica GS1 does not
> have a revolving back which makes it much lighter.  It does not have bellows
> focusing, so it's lenses do not focus as close as the RB/RZ/GX680.
>
> That said, the GS1 lenses are reputed to be the best 6x7 lenses -
> outperformed only by the lenses for the Mamiya 7.  Price wise, used Bronica
> is always a bargain compared to other brands.  Quality wise, Bronica lenses
> are extremely rugged and well finished.  You should not be disappointed with
> the lens performance in any of the systems mentioned above.  The overall
> system features and how you plan to use it should be the determining
> factors.  It might be worth it to go to a camera shop where you can see and
> handle each system to get a feel for what works for you.  Once you get to
> 6x7 format, lens performance issues become less important.  You can get nice
> a 20x24 out of any modern 6x7 camera working within the limitations of the
> system.
> --
> Tom Bloomer
> Hartly, DE
>
> "Q.G. de Bakker" [email protected]> wrote 
> Neurula [Sydney] wrote:
>
> > Hi how do the Mamiya RB67 lenses compare with Bronica ones? Price-wise and
> > quality-wise?
>
> Mamiya RBs (and RZs)  belong to the category cameras where it no longer
> makes sense to worry about lens performance (or build quality). They are
> simply more than good enough. The decision whether or not to get a RB (or
> RZ) should be based on considerations concerning format, weight, etc.


From: Martin Jangowski [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Whats Diff btwn RB67 Pro S &Pro SD?
Date: 16 Oct 2001 

Neurula [Sydney] intelligence@!!!technologist.com> wrote:
> Also can older RB & RB Pro backs be used on RB PRO S & RB PRO SD?

The big difference between the Pro-S and the older models are the 
interlocks built into the camera. The transport lever on the back
is blocked until you released the shutter, you can't remove the
back withouit putting the darkslide back etc. This is all missing
in the older models, and a very strong encouragement to buy
at least the Pro-S. The difference between the Pro-S and the -SD
is a bigger lens mount on the SD (the lenses are still compatible,
but there are two exotic lenses that don't fit the Pro-S). These
two lenses aren't exactly household items (a 75 Shift lens and 
a 500mm tele AFAIK), so you don't give up much with a Pro-S.

Yes, older backs fit the Pro-S(D), but the interlocks don't work
and in my eyes it's not worth the hassle.

Martin  


From: Tan [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RZII OR RZ
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 

[email protected] (LABLUZWRKS) said this on the Internet:

>can anyone shed the main difference between these two cameras, rzII and rz, and
>is the rz II really worth the extra cost , im looking to buy used. 

I have both cameras, let me help you here:

Briefly,

1. The RZII has finer 'half' stops in the shutter speed range below 1/250th (not
that impt really - most folks would just fiddle with the aperture)

2. Brighter stock screen

3. Reworked wind mechanism (supposedly more robust)

4. A better 'electronics' off setting to use RB KL lenses - there were
supposedly problems with the RZ when you put some RB lenses on them (causes the
electronics to be screwy when the lenses are mounted - haven't seen the problem
myself).

You'd say that the RZII is to the RZ like the 645Pro series is to the 645 Super.
Difference in actual use is, marginal, for most people. 

Most of the RZ and RZII accessories and (all) backs are completely
interchangeable. The darkslides for the RZ and RZII film backs are supposedly
NOT interchangeable though. Check with Mamiya for prism interchangeability. I
think they are somewhat backward, but not forward compatible.

With both the RZ and the II, you would be wise to check out the mechanics
thoroughly before you buy them. This is especially true of film backs. Mamiya
has recommendations for servicing the backs after X no. of rolls (I forget the
actual count, but you can with them). This is advisable for ANY medium format
camera film back in heavy use. I once had a secondhand back that stopped working
when the entire crank mechanism came loose in an RZ film back. This back had
probably seen extremely heavy use. Anyway, the screws holding the wind mechanism
assembly came loose! It was a simple matter of just screwing them back and using
some Loctite. The RZII backs are more robust.

One last thing: if you buy one and use manual film wind, consistency of film
frame spacing is very much dependent on the consistency of your wind action -
new camera or not. You won't get overlaps but the spacing can be inconsistent if
your wind stroke is as such.

Both are great cameras!

Shout if you need more info.


From: Sergio Azenha [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RZ Lenses
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 

>I have a basic understanding of the differences in the RB/RZ lens lines,
>i.e., non-C, C, KL and Z, however I'm being thrown for a loop with respect
>to the RZ's Z, W and W-N lenses.  I've been using the Orion Blue Book to
>price various pieces of equipment;  there's two entries under 180mm f/4.5 -

Hi,

Actually, the RZ lens series designation is not that complicated.

All of the lenses are marked "Z" (because they belong to the RZ
series)

The lenses marked "W" have marks between the aperture full stop (e.g.
my 110mm W has marks between f/2.8 and f/4, between f/4 and 5.6). This
way it's easier to use the aperture ring in half-stops. The "W" stands
for "Wide", I guess. Anyway, the difference between non-W and W lenses
is generally only the half-stop markings in the aperture ring, so if
you get a nice non-W lens don't go mad about "upgrading" to the W
version! ;)

Then, there are some lenses (I can only think of the 180mm right now,
but there may be others) which are marked "W-N". The "W" stands for
"Wide", as suggested above, whereas the "N" stands for "New". In other
words, the "W-N" lenses are revised versions of older lenses. So, the
180mm W-N is the (optically, I guess) revised version of the old 180mm
and 180mm W lenses.

This does make sense, doesn't it? :)

regards,
Sergio Azenha
PORTUGAL



From: "Andrew M Packer" [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya C lenses for the RB67--a question
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 

Matt Clara wrote 
>In what way are these lenses superior to their non-C counterparts?  In some
>cases KEH shows a $200 difference between the two.

1. The pre-C lenses were single-coated; the C (and newer KL series) lenses
were multiple coated.  (Yielding perhaps less flare & better contrast)

2. The shutters on older pre-C lenses, in many instances, can no longer be
repaired if they fail, as parts are no longer available.  I am not certain
whether the change in shutter design coincided with the change in lens
coating - you may find out more at www.mamiya.com.

Don't, though, be put off buying a lens simply because it is of pre-C
manufacture.  They are still very fine optics.

=====Andrew


From: David Grabowski [email protected]>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya C lenses for the RB67--a question
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 

Matt Clara wrote:
> 
> In what way are these lenses superior to their non-C counterparts?  In some
> cases KEH shows a $200 difference between the two.
> Thanks,
> Matt

Non C lenses are more prone to contrast loss in bad light. My
180mm. lens  for the RB is a non C and needs the full pro
shade when used outdoors in stronger daylight. The contrast
loss is more than noticeable if not using the shade and a
small rubber job won't fix this up.

There are c lenses and then there are C lenses, the later
design comes close to matching the KL line for coating and
contrast hold out. KL is tops  and right up there with the RZ
line of lenses in performance ability.

Don't let C coated lenses fool you into thinking you are
covered for repairs , they haven't made C lenses in years,
many of these parts are out of stock as well ( found that out
the hard way ). By the same token a local repair guy may be
able to fudge out a repair on either non C or c lenses.

The KL line is still in production, very expensive by
comparison though. I try to buy at least C grade lenses for my
RB.

David Grabowski



From: [email protected] (Thom)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB/RZ experiences
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 

[email protected] (Msherck) wrote:

>I'm moving from the 645 format to the 6x7 format, mostly for a little larger
>slice of film, and the Mamiya RB or RZ cameras seem to be useful cameras.  I'm
>a bit concerned about the weight, though:  about half my shooting is on a
>tripod, the other half is hand-held.  Is this practical with a Mamiya RB or RZ
>for someone without bodybuilder muscles?  How long can you hand-hold without
>your arms, wrists, shoulders, or hands getting tired?  Thanks!
>
>Mike

I've carried my RB-67 since 1979 and Super 23 since 1970 and haven't
regretted it one bit.  Part of the good part of these cameras is that
the weight helps you keep the camera steady when hand held.  I have a
lot harder time holding a 35mm as still as these two 6x7's.

THOM



From: Karen Nakamura mail@gpsy
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RZ Polaroid on an RB, possible?
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 



Nope, the Polaroid is incompatible.

You can get a RZ-G adaptor that will let you use RB 120/220 backs (not
polaroids) on a RZ however they were discontinued a while ago and are
almost impossible to find.

The hoods and prisms are incompatible.

The only compatibility is with the lenses.

 - Karen


 [email protected] (tendim) wrote:

> I've got a Mamiya RB Pro-S, and I'd like to get a Polaroid back for it.
> While I know that RZ lenses will not work with the RB, what about other
> accessories?  Backs, non-metering prisms, etc?
>
> Thanks.
> -Patrick



From: "Moishe Appelbaum" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: What is bellows focusing? (Mamiya RZ67)
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002

Rather than the focusing being in the actual lens, it is built into the
camera.  Just like using a macro lens on a bellows.  This does not
necessarily allow you to get any closer with the RB system, it is just
different.  I don't believe there are any bellows draw exposure issues with
the Standard RB system.  For more info, you should ask Tom at Midwest Photo.
He can tell you everything you need to know about either system.
614-261-1264 or [email protected].  Better to call though, you'll get a more
detailed answer.  They don't work on commission so he won't try to sell you
anything.

Moishe

"NYphotoboy" [email protected] wrote ...
> I'm tossing around the idea of the Pentax 67II vs. the Mamiya RZ67, and I saw
> that the Mamiya has "bellows focusing."  The brochure sort of makes it sound
> like this allows any lens to become a close-focusing macro lens.
>
> Can anyone explain how exactly a bellows focusing mechanism works, and why it's
> an advantage?
>
> Thanks much,
>
> Kerr



From: "Axel Farr" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: What is bellows focusing? (Mamiya RZ67)
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 


Hello Kerr,
...



It works as the name says: You have a bellows between the film and the lens
mount - just as it is nowadays still used with large format cameras. The RB
67 is one of the few cameras which uses this principle in medium format.

Advantage:

- the lens can be made without focussing helix, which makes the lens a
little bit simpler (but most lenses for the Mamiya still have focussing
helix!)

- focussing can allways be done the same way, independent from the lens used
(e.g., for the K-6 bayonet of the Pentacon or the Kiev 60 you get
east-german Zeiss lenses and ukrainian Kiev-lenses. They differ in the
direction of the focussing helix used, the ukrainian lenses turn the wrong
way).

- with a lens, which has focussing helix, the close-up rings are build into
the camera. With the 105mm lens, the Mamya can focus as close as 1,5 ft.


Disadvantage:

- did you ever try to use the focussing helix of a 80mm lens on a 300mm
telephoto? No, because the reachable close-up would be inferior. So longer
lenses need an own focussing helix, because the bellow does not extend far
enough.

- when you get closer, you need to take effective aperture into account. The
limit to 1/10th to 1/8th of focal length for the focussing helix normaly
used with lenses is not meant to discriminate MF photographers, it is simply
a means of making you think: ok, to that limit I need not think about
effective aperture, but when I use a ring, then I have to regard this rule.

- you do not have a distance scale, if the lens has helix and a scale, you
must always be shure to have the bellows in shortest position.

The reason, why bellows focussing is not used in most modern MF cameras is:
large scale differences between lenses need large scale differences in
focussing helices/gears. It does not make sense to focus a 300mm lens with a
focussing helix  which is also suitable for a 50mm lens. Second is that
bellows get used - they can get light-leaks by a simple pin, something which
does not occur when you are using metal for the body.


Greetings, Axel


From: [email protected] (Willem-Jan Markerink)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Differences between Mamiya RB67 Pro S and Pro SD?
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 02

 "R.W. Behan" [email protected] wrote:
Hey, you experts out there, what improvements did Mamiya make to the RB67
Pro S to transpose it into a Pro SB?   I'm thinking about retiring my dear
old Mamiya C330 and moving into the RB67, but would like some sage advice
on the matter.  And all the advice in this group is sage, indeed.  So TIA.
 Cheers,  Dick B.

Difference between Pro and Pro-S is much larger, SD basically only adds a
wider 'throat', to accept the 75mm shift and 500 APO.
...

--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
[email protected]
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]


From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 
From: Gene Johnson [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rollei] RB screen in a Rolleiflex

Ugh.  My secret is out.  I've been doing this for a while.  Getting the
focus right is a little tricky on this one for some reason. But you're
right, don't do it his way.  The viewer has to be shimmed.  Curiously, the
thickness of the shim has not appeared to be the the exact difference in
thickness between the groundglass and the new screen.  I've had to check
them and adjust.  The only downside is that the fresnel side ends up on top.
Have too keep it clean.  A nice soft brush, like sable works nicely and the
screen should stay nice for years.  Also, I do not recommend the
score-and-break method.  Use either a very fine (32tpi) hacksaw blade, one
of the very fine tooth japanese flushcut saws, or best is the X-acto saw.
Be very careful not to scratch anything.  The Mamiya screen is very nice
though.  Very bright, and sharp.  Since today is not friday I can say no
more.

Gene
----- Original Message -----
From: "Siu Fai" 
To: 
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:07 AM
Subject: [Rollei] RB screen in a Rolleiflex


> > There is an European search engine named 'euroseek'
> > http://www.euroseek.com/
>
> Great search engine for our European guys ;-)
>
> With this search engine, I found the following page that describes how he
> has cut a  Mamiya RB screen to put in his Rolleiflex:
> http://home.t-online.de/home/pjwum/rolleiflex_screen.htm
>
> A WARNING: The description he gives for aligning focus is not the correct
> one. Focus should be adjusted by the taking lens and not by the mirror. I'm
> pretty sure that this may work but it is not how it is supposed to. Having
> the mirror fixed loosely may eventually damage it. So be warned!
> The F model do not need recalibration anyway.
>
> Siu Fai



From rollei mailing list:
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 
From: Jerry Lehrer [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rollei] RB screen in a Rolleiflex

SF

Please realize that the Mamiya as well as the Pentax 67 screens
have the matte (focusing) surface on one side and the fresnel
side on the other.  Rollei screens have both on the same (down)
side.

Your suggestion, if followed, would really mess things up.

Jerry Lehrer


From rollei mailing list;
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 
From: Gene Johnson [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rollei] RB screen in a Rolleiflex

The reason is that Rollei screens put the matte on the bottom.  The neat
part is that the fresnel is also on the bottom since they combine the
fresnel and matte into one surface.  Thar leaves a shiny clear surface on
top.  Mamiya puts the matte on one side and the fresnel on the other, then
covers it all with a sheet of glass.  This has advantages and disadvantages
for us.  I think separating the two makes a better screen.  Nicer to look at
than a Rolleiclear. Brighter and sharper with much finer fresnel rings.  The
theoretical disadvantage is that the rings are exposed on top.  Like I said,
If you're careful, no problem, and you have a very nice screen for much less
money than a Beattie or a Maxwell. I've done it on three Rolleis with really
nice results.  I have a feeling I'm going to have a much harder time finding
screens now.

Gene


From: Don Farra [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Hasseblad or Mamiya??
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002



Kym,

Personal opinions follow: I have a RZ67 II pro and love the camera.
 Like yourself years ago I had to decide between the Hassy and the
Mamiya systems.

I tried the Hassy for a while but found it better suited for outdoor
shots such as weddings than the studio.  It is  fine camera and easy to
hand hold.  Yet I found the Hassy film backs to be a little troublesome
at times, and often had to search for the dark slide.  And on rare
occasion the camera shutter would jam, requiring a special tool to unjam
it.  Then there was the odd attributes of having the shutter cocked
before mounting a lens, or at least that was I was taught to do.  Then
there was the odd thing taught to me about releasing the mirror and then
the shutter.  But the images were worth the extra effort, very sharp and
nice colors.


So for me I use the RZ67 in the studio and the Mamiya 7 for outdoor images.

Reasons for me selecting the RZ67 over the Hassy.

0)  Image quality, bigger negative resulted in better image quality.
 Comparing Zeiss to Mamiya only showed me that computers and the
machines that grind the lenses have reached near perfection.  That
modern medium format lenses don't have to be as sharp as their 35mm
counterparts to create some super sharp and high quality images.

1)  What sold me on Mamiya lenses was their electronic shutter.
 Accurate exposures no matter which lens I used, unlike the small
variations found on mechanical base leaf shutters.  No odd attributes
like cocking the shutter before mounting.  And they are built solid as a
rock, and weight as heavy as one.

2)  The other consideration was system cost, the Mamiya represented to
me a better value.  By this mean the cost of the lens and other system
items such as film backs (dark slides mount on rear of back and two
exposure counters), remote controls, motor drives and AE prisms was less
than their Hassy counterparts.

3)  The film format of 6x7 and the rotating back and cropping AE prism
was also a plus for me.  The 6x7 format "fits" better on to a 8x10 than
a cropped 6x6 format.  The degree of magnification was also a plus,
since the 6x7 required less to obtain the same rectangular print size.
 (My mamiya M645 Super  is a pain to use with a flash bracket when it
comes to rotating the camera, whereas the RZ67 is a breeze, just rotate
the back instead.)

4)  A small consideration went to the fact that the professional fashion
and portrait photographers that I admire most and who could afford any
camera system used the Mamiya 67 II Pro.

Again these are only my personal opinions and the choice is up to you
and you alone.  Pick the system that will best serve you needs now and
in the future.  Chose the system that you are comfortable with and that
is the one you will do you best work with now and until it is stolen again.

But if you don't mind I would ask you reconsider medium format option
and consider instead the digital camera.  The Canon D60 and Nikon D100
are nice for the money and produce good quality images.  The Canon EOS -
1Ds with 11.1 Megapixels (to be announced late September 2002) and full
35mm frame sensor array is also a winner in my opinion.  The clients of
tomorrow are going to expect digital results and so will the consumer
customers that come in for portraits and weddings.  It might be a good
time to switch over and take advantage of the new medium now that it is
becoming affordable.

Best of luck to you,

Don

Kym wrote:

>I am replacing a stolen Hasselblad 500c system and have been asked to
>consider a Mamiya RZ 67 Pro II instead, I don't have any experience with
>Mamiya so I was hoping for some advice from users?
>
>Kym



From: "Dan Beaty" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya 645 Lenses vs Hasselblad
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002


When the Mamiya rep was here some years ago, he admitted that the earlier RB
lenses where not as sharp as the competition. He asserted that the designer
had portrait photographers in mind and that the "look" was intentional.

But there do not seem to be as many generations of designs in the 645
lenses. The 80mm C normal seems to be identical in optical design as the
later N model, for instance. The 45mm C had two designs, apparent in the
smaller filter size for the late one. But I compared the later C with the N
model in the store, and the only difference I can see is in some of the
markings like the depth of field scale.

Now of course we have the test reports of the new Mamiya AF lenses, which
compare very favorably to the Zeiss lens on the new Contax cameras. But it
is really difficult to compare "apples to apples" here.

In my situation, I would most likely want to compare an older version
Hasselblad with a more recent Mamiya lens, because the prices of these would
be more within my budget. And even the improvements in the newer designs
would not concern me as much, for I do not need so much additional sharpness
at wide apertures.
--
Dan Beaty
Columbus, Ohio USA
http://www.livingtruth.com

UrbanVoyeur [email protected] wrote
> I think it is a question of vintage. In general older Hassy lens outperform
> older Mamiya lens, as very recent Hassy lenses have in my limited experience
> outperformed very recent Mamiya lenses.
>
> In the middle it gets fuzzy, and depends a lot on the lens and the vintage.
> In many cases Mamiya lenses from the late 80's, 90's and 00's will
> outperform Hassy lenses from 50's, 60's and 70's
>
> --
> J
> www.urbanvoyeur.com


From: "Heritage Cameras" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Help buying an RB67 Pro-S
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002


"Idolize55" [email protected] wrote...
>
> If I buy an RB67 Pro-S body by itself, does it come with a 120
> rotating film back? I thought the woman in their customer service
> department said they do, but I don't think I see one attached in
> the photos they have posted.

As others have said, it all depends... a complete RB67 Pro S "body" consists
of the camera with...

Focusing screen
Waist-level finder
Rotating back adapter
120 Back
Dark slide

...and any or all of these accessories may or may not be included! It's best
to check with the dealer to be sure.

> My next question is this: When buying an RB67 Pro-S, are the lenses
> I should be looking at the the "C" models?

The original lenses had no "C" designation, and were single coated. From the
mid 1970s, the C series (marked as such) were multi coated. The much later
K/L ranges are too, and are apparently redesigned for better performance.
All will fit the Pro S, apart from the 500mm f/6 APO and the 75mm shift
lens.

Hope this helps.

Dave Pearman
Director, Heritage Cameras Limited
http://www.heritagecameras.com



From: "Dan Beaty" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Help buying an RB67 Pro-S
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002

My 2 cents on pre C lenses: If you can try them out for a couple of weeks,
you might save some money and still meet your needs. I had a non C 50mm RB
lens for my RZ that gave good results. I mainly upgraded to an RZ lens
because the RB lenses focus past infinity on an RZ, and they allow for all
electronic features.

I could see no difference in flare control or contrast from my RZ lenses in
normal conditions. The newer lens was a bit sharper on the edges in
resolution tests, but it depends on how much enlargement you need to do.
--
Dan Beaty
Columbus, Ohio USA
http://www.livingtruth.com
...


From: "Peter St�cklein" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya prism question
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002


> I just bought a Mamiya RB67 metered prism on eBay (haven't gotten it yet). I
> also just bought an RB67 Pro-S camera. Will the prism fit/work with the camera?
> I didn't even realize it wasn't a Pro-S prism. :(

RB Finders will also work with RZ cameras. RB backs adapt with G-Adaptor to
RZ. Most lenses fits also newer Bodys (RB --> RB ProS --> RB ProSD -->
RZ --> RZ II).

In case of the RZ without comfort (electronic metering and so on).

Thanx to Mamiya!

Peter



From: "zeitgeist" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya Lens Opinion...
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002

The lenses in my wedding kit are, 45mm, 110mm (my work horse lens) the 145
soft lens, (wow, this you gotta have) and 210.  and the fish eye.

for what you are doing I'd look at the 35mm, which I also have but if I'm
going ultra wide I'll use the fish.

Look at most Nat Geo's and it seems most of the images are taken with super
wides.



From BJP Equipment News  29 November 2002:



Mamiya is to launch a 43mm f/4.5 aspheric ultrawide lens for the RZ67II series,
featuring a slip on hood, an angle of view of 92 degrees(!), an internal focusing
system, and a minimum focusing distance of 28 cm. The lens provides a 25mm lens on a 35mm
SLR field of view when used with the latest 24x36mm digital sensors....




From: "Dan Beaty" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Which Mamiya RB67 gear is compatible with the RZ67?
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002


The older RB lenses all work on the original RZ with no problem, only they
focus past infinity. I am not sure about the newer KL lenses for the RB,
which may have even better functionality.

There are 2 main advantages of the RZ over the RB. One is the one stroke
shutter cocking and film advance. The other is the greater choice of
options. The RZ with RB lenses can be used without the battery in a
emergency also. I think some of the safety features such as dark slide
locking and multiple exposure prevention might be lost when not using the
electronics.

I thought I would mostly use the waist level finder also. But found the
metered prism to be very useful in the field, especially when changing backs
with differenct film speeds.

DB

R.W. Behan [email protected] wrote 
> Cerebros:
>
> Try this, for openers:  http://www.mamiya.com/sitemap.asp?id=283
>
> Hope this can be of some value to you.  (But I'd urge you to stick with the
> RB-67 system.  The mechanical simplicity is worth a ton of electonic
> wizardry, IMO.
> Cheers,
>
> --
> R.W. Behan
> Lopez Island, Washington
...


From: "DM" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: I need help with my RB67 Pro-S
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002

"Idolize55" [email protected] wrote...
> I wanted to shoot with the "T" feature for approximately a minute-long
> exposure. But when I set it to "T" I notice the shutter stays open, and doesn't
> close, so if I want to close it I have to push the mirror back down (which
> isn't very convenient). Am I doing something wrong?

Do the following.......

1. Set the shutter speed to "T".
2. Set the "mirror-up" switch to the mirror-up position.
3. Attach a cable release to the mirror-up switch.
4. Release the mirror by pressing the shutter button. You should now see
nothing through the viewfinder AND the diaphragm should be closed - just
look at the front of the lens.
5. Press the cable release. The diaphragm should open. It will stay open
until you (gently!!) turn the shutter ring back to the 1 second position.

That's it! As for the mirror-up mode, the same applies for any shutter
speed.

DM
>
> Also, I'm not sure I understand the "mirror-up" feature. Every time I switch it
> over to that feature nothing happens. It works the same way it does if I hadn't
> switched it.
>
> I'm just really upset that I can't figure these features out. Can anyone give
> me some pointers?  :(


From: Tom Westbrook [email protected]
Subject: Re: Replacing the foam light seals on the RB backs.
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 24 Jan 2003


Se this: http://www.macuserforums.com/[email protected]@.ee745a7/0. It's a
thread on the MamiyaUSA user forum site. It tells you how to get the foam
replacement kit for about $10 from their parts dept.

BLKnWHTwisner [email protected] wrote:
> Hi,
> I have several RB backs, and I want to replace the light seals myself.  Can
> anyone tell me what type of foam to buy, and maybe where to find it, and also
> the correct type of glue to use.
> I have looked at the backs, and it doesn't look like rocket science.  But, let
> me know if I am wrong on this.
> Lauvone
> www.lauvone.com

--
Tom Westbrook
http://www.twestbrook.com


Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Problem with RB and strobes
From: Jerry Gardner  I used my RB67 Pro-S in the studio at school for the first time last
> week. I've used strobes with a 4x5 camera, but never with a MF camera.
> Has anyone had problems while using strobes and an RB? All my shots
> are extremely underexposed, and some seem like the light of the strobe
> wasn't even captured. When I was using the strobes it seemed like the
> light shot off well before I heard the mirror flip up in the camera. I
> realize the strobe is supposed to go off before the shutter/mirror do,
> but this just seemed like the mirror was reeeeally slow. I hope
> there's something I can do, because I bought this camera to do a lot
> of studio work. :(

Sounds like you have a flash sync timing problem (sync firing the flashes
before the shutter opens). Can you fire the shutter with the back removed?
If so, point the lens at the flash and press the shutter release while
looking at the back of the camera. If the sync is working correctly, you
should see a bright circle of light when the shutter opens.

--
Jerry Gardner
[email protected]


From: "DM" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Problem with RB and strobes
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002

Don't know if you've solved the problem, but here goes.........

You almost certainly have a sync problem, as has been stated, but an easier
way to confirm it is to....

Set the shutter speed to one second.
Connect the sync lead to the light meter.
Set the aperature to whatever the meter says.
Put the camera in "mirror up" mode and attach a cable release.
Now release the mirror.
Then, release the shutter and immediately afterwards fire the strobe using
the light meter.

If you have a Polaroid back you'll know immediately. If not, when the film
is developed, if it's correctly exposed you'll know that..............
a. Your flash meter is giving correct readings and.......
b. The lens diaphragm is closing down to your chosen aperature, so it's OK
too.

In which case you have a straight forward sync problem.

By the way, the X setting can appear to be set when it's not. So, you might
want to double check it.

DM



From: "Brian Ellis" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Difference between Mamiya RB67 and RZ67?
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003


I assume you're aware of the fact that both the RB and RZ are large, bulky,
heavy cameras. While they are excellent cameras for their intended purpose,
that purpose is primarily studio/indoor work. Neither would be my first,
second, or third choice as a medium format camera to carry around outdoors
doing the type of work you describe.

In 6x7 medium format cameras I'd suggest that you  consider the Pentax 67II.
The 67II with the auto prism has the aperture priority that you'd like.
Since so many pros are switching to digital, you can get good buys now on
used 67IIs as well as many other medium format cameras. The Pentax 67 is the
previous version of this camera and it too would work well for you plus
they're a good bit less money than the 67II but the 67s don't have aperture
priority.

Just my opinion of course, I'm sure there are people who carry their RB/RZs
all over the place and are happy doing so.

"TheKeith" [email protected] wrote...
> I don't know much about medium format but am researching 6x7 medium format
> systems. I am interested in a used RB67 or RZ67 but don't know the real
> difference between them. The RB67 is obviously cheaper but what exactly am I
> giving up with this model versus the RZ67? The only automatic feature I'm
> interested in is aperture priority - everything else can be manual. Do I get
> aperture priority with the rb67? Help would be appreciated - thanks.


From: "R.W. Behan" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Difference between Mamiya RB67 and RZ67?
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003


Hi, Keith--

Well, I'm one of those guys who lugs my RB67 Pro SD all over the place,
indoors, outdoors, hand held, tripod, whatever.  It is ALL mechanical; even
the metered prism is NOT linked to the shutters.  (It does an excellent job
of metering, but you have to transfer the shutter speed/aperture readings to
the lens manually.)  I do not find this intimidating or inconvenient, and
the all-mechanical nature of the RB is a supremely intelligent design choice
on Mamiya's part.  SOME of us, anyway, prefer the simplicity and reliability
of traditional cameras to the geewhiz auto-everything, high-tech,
computerized, battery powered complexity of modern equipment.  Mamiya has
made great technological progress in lens design and manufacture, and in the
precise construction of bodies, backs, finders, etc., all of which I find
attractive.  I will leave the electronic wizardry to others, suspecting,
anyway, most of it is marketing hype.  Sure, if you're shooting action stuff
for Sports Illustrated, the auto-everything camera provides real advantages:
you can concentrate exclusively on your viewfinder.  But that's not the kind
of stuff people use RB67's for.  If you're working at a pleasant, slow,
deliberate pace, I find the all-mechanical, do-it-yourself camera very
appealing.  Won't argue this point, though: lots of cameras, lots of valid
opinions, lots of applications.

Cheers,

--
R.W. Behan
Lopez Island, Washington

"TheKeith" [email protected] wrote...
> I don't know much about medium format but am researching 6x7 medium format
> systems. I am interested in a used RB67 or RZ67 but don't know the real
> difference between them. The RB67 is obviously cheaper but what exactly am I
> giving up with this model versus the RZ67? The only automatic feature I'm
> interested in is aperture priority - everything else can be manual. Do I get
> aperture priority with the rb67? Help would be appreciated - thanks.


From: "Christopher M. Perez" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: RZ 110mm lens performance - comments (long)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003

I have been thinking about the quality of Mamiya SLR lenses. [whine
mode on] This after my Hasselblad 500C/M has been in the shop 4 times
over the past 6 months. The front and rear of the 'blad body was 3 thou
sandths of an inch out of alignment. The mirror gave a focusing error
of 1 foot at 5 feet. A barndoor spring bent after the camera, wrapped
in foam in a plastic case, slid off another case and dropped 6 inches
(yes SIX!) to the floor. Then one of the film backs started to overlap
the first and second frame (that 'ol clutch problem). What's next? A
lens spring failure?[whine mode off]

At a photoswap this past weekend I carped about my 500C/M fate with
Hasselblad users. Some do weddings. Others do street photography. And
others do portraits. ALL said 'it's just the beginning... keep a pair
and a spare on hand... they'll be passing each other on their way to the
repair shop...' Ouch! I'm just a hobbiest who's neurotic about
resolution. [yep, whine mode is still off]

I came across a decent Mamiya RZ with 110mm Z f/2.8. In search of
better MF camera system reliability, I bought it, took it home and
tested the lens. Here's what I found. Using a USAF resolution chart
from Edmound Scientific to read lines per mm (l/mm), TMax100 film,and
souped in D-76:

Center/Middle/Edge/F-Stop
-------------------------
68 60 60 f/2.8
60 68 68 f/4
76 85 68 f/5.6
76 76 68 f/8
76 68 76 f/11
68 68 68 f/16
54 54 54 f/22

Since I'm completely neurotic about such things, here are a few
apertures comparing various lenses I've tested over the years (
 ):

Center/Middle/Edge/F-Stop
-------------------------
68 60 60 f/2.8 - Mamiya RZ 110 Z
68 68 38 f/2.8 - Hasselblad 80 CT* Planar
54 34 19 f/2.4 - Pentax 67 105 SMC
60 60 38 f/3.5 - Koni/Omega 90 Hexanon
67 53 53 f/2.8 - Bronica 80 Zenzanon-PS

Center/Middle/Edge/F-Stop
-------------------------
76 85 68 f/5.6 - Mamiya RZ 110 Z
95 85 60 f/5.6 - Mamiya 7 80 L
96 96 54 f/5.6 - Hasselblad 80 CT* Planar
85 85 48 f/5.6 - Hasselblad 120 f/5.6 C Planar-S
76 67 21 f/5.6 - Pentax 67 105 f/2.4 SMC
67 67 38 f/5.6 - Koni/Omega 90 f/3.5 Hexanon
60 67 60 f/5.6 - Bronica 80 Zenzanon-PS

Center/Middle/Edge/F-Stop
-------------------------
76 68 76 f/11 - Mamiya RZ 110 Z
85 76 60 f/11 - Mamiya 7 80 L
85 76 60 f/11 - Hasselblad 80 CT* Planar
76 76 60 f/11 - Hasselblad 120 f/5.6 C Planar-S
67 67 48 f/11 - Pentax 67 105 f/2.4 SMC
67 76 48 f/11 - Koni/Omega 90 f/3.5 Hexanon
60 67 60 f/11 - Bronica 80 Zenzanon-PS


Observations:
Based upon single copies of most of the lenses listed above, I can
climb a long ways out on a limb and share a few observations.

First, Hasselblad's Zeiss 80mm Planar is a very very fine lens. It's
equal appears to be the Mamiya 7 80mm L. These lenses deserve the
reputations they've gained over the years.

In the second group, the Mamiya 110 Z performs ever so slightly better
than Pentax's 105mm SMC and the 110 Z is about equal to an old
Hasselblad Zeiss Planar-S 120mm f/5.6 C lens.

In the last group, Bronica's Zenzanon trails Koni/Omega's Hexanon by
about 10%. Users report good performance from these systems.

Frankly, I was a little disappointed with the Mamiya 110 Z performance.
The brochure I have says something about 'ultra high performance'.
That description might apply to the Hasselblad and Mamiya 7 L-series
80mm lenses. But not, IMNSHO, the Mamiya RZ.

However, after roasting the language in the Mamiya brochure, take a look
at the Mamiya 110 Z edge performance. It is consistantly higher than
anything I've seen thus far. So I'm left wondering; has Mamiya traded
center performance better edge resolution?

Thanx for listening - Chris


From: [email protected] (Thom)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Question for Mamiya RB/RZ
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 

"Mehawitchi" [email protected] wrote:

>I have a complete Hasselblad 500 C/M outfit (body+ 60mm+80mm+150mm). I'm
>considering to shift to Mamiya because I'm more comfortable with the 'ideal'
>6x7 format.
>
>Would appreciate your response on the following.
>
>1) Is Mamiya equally reliable as Hasselblad?
>2) Which Mamiya system is more durable and reliable: RB (mechanical) or RZ
>(electronic)?
>
>Thanks in advance for your input.
>
>Hani

I bought my RB-67 in 1979 and its still working fine and it was used
in a studio as the main camera for many many years. I've never had it
or a lens go on me.

But the bad news is, its not true idea format. Ideal format is a
ratio of 1:1.25. The Mamiya Super 23 is true idea format but the RB
is not. Its 66x57mm or 1:1.158. An ideal portion off a 120 square
would be 57x45.6 but my 645 back for the RB measures 57x40 or a ratio
of 1:1.425, almost the same as a 35mm.

If your enlarging to an 8x10 the RB neg will be 3484.8 sq mm's usable
vs 2599 sq mm's for the 6x6 neg. Is that worth the money to you???
Thats only a 34% gain. I love my RB but for big enlargements I use my
Super 23 or a 4x5 view. My S-23 also takes 6x9 negs and they make
impressive enlargements or chromes!

THOM



From: [email protected] (Thom)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Question for Mamiya RB/RZ
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003

"Mehawitchi" [email protected] wrote:

>I have a complete Hasselblad 500 C/M outfit (body+ 60mm+80mm+150mm). I'm
>considering to shift to Mamiya because I'm more comfortable with the 'ideal'
>6x7 format.
>
>Would appreciate your response on the following.
>
>1) Is Mamiya equally reliable as Hasselblad?
>2) Which Mamiya system is more durable and reliable: RB (mechanical) or RZ
>(electronic)?
>
>Thanks in advance for your input.
>
>Hani

I bought my RB-67 in 1979 and its still working fine and it was used
in a studio as the main camera for many many years. I've never had it
or a lens go on me.

But the bad news is, its not true idea format. Ideal format is a
ratio of 1:1.25. The Mamiya Super 23 is true idea format but the RB
is not. Its 66x57mm or 1:1.158. An ideal portion off a 120 square
would be 57x45.6 but my 645 back for the RB measures 57x40 or a ratio
of 1:1.425, almost the same as a 35mm.

If your enlarging to an 8x10 the RB neg will be 3484.8 sq mm's usable
vs 2599 sq mm's for the 6x6 neg. Is that worth the money to you???
Thats only a 34% gain. I love my RB but for big enlargements I use my
Super 23 or a 4x5 view. My S-23 also takes 6x9 negs and they make
impressive enlargements or chromes!

THOM


From: [email protected] (BLKnWHTwisner)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: 13 Mar 2003 
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB 67

The RB cameras are very sturdy cameras. The RB is the oldest of the RB line.
Then came the RB ProS then the RB Pro SD.

The RB does not have a double exposure prevention mechanism on it. The other
two do. IF this is a problem for you, I would opt for the Pro S. The lenses
will fit all three, but the KL lenses will not fit the older bodies, just the
SD model.

I use them all the time, they are great cameras, a little heavy, but that isn't
a problem unless you have some physical reason it will bother you.

The 6x7 Neg will make enlargements above 16x20 with no problem. As with other
Cameras, the better your exposure and development, the better the enlargements.

Lenses from 35 mm to 500 mm are available, and also one zoom lense.

Hope this helps.

Lauvone
www.lauvone.com



Subject: Re: Mamiya RB 67
From: Karen Nakamura [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 

> Can anyone tell me something about this camera. Preferably from personal
> experience.

On my home page are some thoughts about my own RB 67:

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/MamiyaRB67.html

I think the executive summary is: Very heavy, excellent quality studio
camera.

Karen



Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 
From: "F.C.Trevor Gale, Space Electronics Consultant." [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB 67

Martin Jangowski wrote:
>
> Fine Art Photographer [email protected] wrote:
> > I believe the KL lenses have a bigger diameter than the older lenses. I know
> > that I have to use a spacer on the older lenses on my SD body.
>
> > I would be sure before I bought a KL lense to use on the Pro or ProS bodies.
>
> AFAIK only two KL lenses _don't_ fit a ProS... some long tele lens
> (500mm?) and a 75mm shift lens. These have the larger rear diameter
> that only the ProSD mount has.
>
> Martin

Thats the new 500MM apo and the 75mm shift, yes. All the others will fit
the pro-S.
It's a great studio camera.

regards, Trevor Gale.


From: Martin Jangowski [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB 67
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 

Fine Art Photographer [email protected] wrote:
> I believe the KL lenses have a bigger diameter than the older lenses. I know
> that I have to use a spacer on the older lenses on my SD body.

> I would be sure before I bought a KL lense to use on the Pro or ProS bodies.

AFAIK only two KL lenses _don't_ fit a ProS... some long tele lens
(500mm?) and a 75mm shift lens. These have the larger rear diameter
that only the ProSD mount has.


From: "Jeffery Harrison" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: constant shutter speed of Mamiya R67
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003

I assume you mean RZ67 (if you meant RB67 I don't have a clue since I don't
own one and have never used one). If you do check the on/off switch that is
around the shutter release button. It has 3 settings on/off/emergency. The
on and off setting are pretty self-explanatory the "emergency" (my term, I
forget what they call it) lets you shoot without power and bypasses a lot of
the safety interlocks. When you set it to this position you can take
pictures with the dark slide in place and it will only shoot at 1/400
regardless of where you set the shutter speed at the dial.

Jeffery S. Harrison

"Lingual" [email protected] wrote 
> Hi All,
>
> I borrowed the R67 from my friend recently, start trying medium format,
> could you please advise why the shutter speed is fixed even thought i set it
> to 1/400 second or to B mode,
> The len is the standard f110
> mamiya Sekor Z , f=110mm , 2.8 - 22
> I had replace the battery (4LR44)
> Thank you your time to read this post,
>
> Sai Pak


From: David Strip [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Why are 220's so stupid expensive?
Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 

"David J. Littleboy" wrote:

> "Jeffery Harrison" [email protected] wrote:
> > Only $100? Be glad you're not shopping for a 220 back for the RZ67. New
> > they're around $600 or so (BH lists it at $669 with a note to have them
> > email a better price).
> We're not talking about backs, just inserts...

I don't recall ever seeing just an insert listed on ebay, but B&H indeed
lists inserts for the RZ67 Pro II. The 220 is $413. That's less than $600
for a back, but still way above the $100 for the 645. For the RB67, it's
about $500 for the back, $355 for the insert.


From: "JK" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RZ67 and Pro II - Difference between Accessories?
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 

I have an RZ (the I. version) with several backs, some Mk. I's, some Mk.
II's. To my knowledge, the only two incompatibilities between the two RZ
versions involve the back and the winder. The incompabtility with the film
backs doesn't involve the bodies - it's just that a RZ back or insert won't
mate with a RZII insert or back. The second, the thing about the winder,
you've already noted.

I've used both AE prism finders, the one for the RZ and the second one for
the RZ II (the one with the knobs on top, rather than the side). Both are
perfectly compatible with the RZ, and I'd imagine this would also hold true
for the RZII. I can't speak to compatibility with RB finders/prisms.

Another thing: I don't think the RZ or the RZ II *can* use RB film backs
without a special adapter. I have that adapter, and it lets me use RB film
backs, like the 6x8 back. (Unfortunately, the film gate of the RZ is smaller
than in the RB, which means the images are still 6x7.)


"MM" [email protected] wrote 
> I've just recently bought a Pro II body and am looking to add to my system.
> I was reading the manual and saw that it said that the Pro II could use:
> 1) Backs designed for the RZ and the RB
> 2) Viewfinders designed for the RZ and the RB
>
> However, it went on to note that the RZ Winder I could not be used.
>
> Can anyone tell me then if there are any differences between the backs (and
> viewfinders/prisms) designned for the RZ and those for the Pro II?
>
> Thanks
>
> MM


rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
From: "Dan Beaty" [email protected]
[1] Re: Mamiya RZ67  and Pro II - Difference between Accessories?
Date: Tue May 20 2003

The page I found states that the older PD prism will NOT work on the RZII
and the older AE prism requires a $119.00 modification to be used on the II.
Here is the link:

http://www.macuserforums.com/[email protected]@.1dcdfdf3

Dan


From: [email protected] (Thom)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RBs & RZs, Too Heavy For Backpacking?
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 

[email protected] (Dan Quinn) wrote:

>I've been considering a move up from 6x4.5 to 6x6 or 6x7. The 6x6, IMO,
>offers the greatest ease of use in the field and in the darkroom. With
>a little croping, though, it is no more than a 6x4.5. Focal lengths
>for 6x6 are not ideal for my purposes.
>
>The RBs & RZs with their rotating backs offer the always upright posi-
>tion and waist level viewing of the 6x6. With the camera upright my
>current tripod and heads can handle some extra weight.
>
>I've read that the two Rs are very heavy and it's implied they should
>not be a backpacker's choice. Are there any with experience packing
>Up and Up in the great outdoors with these heavy weights. Dan

After tiring of a speed graphic with a keith 90mm back I started withe
my RB but now being almos 60 makes that more of a bear. There is one
main problem with the RB. I love it dearly but its not a true 6x7 so
if your going to lug a 120 camera around try either a 6x6 or something
like a Koni or a Super-23 which has a true 6x7 or ratio of 1:1.25.
The 645's out there aren't that either and you loose a little on the
ends.

I bought a complete SL66e kit a an auction for US$40 the other day and
after the cleaning bill gets paid off it will be my field camera.


From: [email protected] (Kris)
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB lens on RZ body??
Date: 27 Jun 2003 

Annie...

I have the same problem. I have a shoot tonight and have an RZ with
an RB lens I just bought. Anyway, I did a quick film test this morning while
varying my settings on the camera and researched the info online. The
most important thing is to set the collar around the shutter release
button to the orange dot. You do this by depressing and holding in
the button while turning the collar.

What this does is overrides the shutter speed controls in the RZ body.
From this point out you set both the shutter speed and the aperture
on the lens itself.

Make sure that the nob on the lense is set to the red "�N" instead of
the orange "�M". Also to be safe, set the shutter speed on the body two stops
slower than on the lens (ever though it is disabled, someone else
recomended it.)

One more thing to be careful of: The safety for the darkslide does
not work when the collar is turned to the orange dot. So be sure you
have it out.

Good luck tonight!


From: Christopher Perez [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB lens on RZ body??
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 

Annie,

It might be too late, but for the rest of community:

- Mount the lens on the body
- Turn the shutter speed locking mechanism to full manual (if you're
looking at the front of the body, there is a lever that prevents the
full turning to the left of the shutter lock collar. Depress the lever
and twist the collar fully left past the normal shutter lock position)

- The electronic shutter speed dial on the camera body is now disabled
- Set shutter speeds on the lens instead of on the body

Good luck. I hope the shoot went well for you.

- Chris

Annie Abbott wrote:
> Groupies,
> I bought a Mamiya lens on eBay and it just arrived via Fedex. Doh, stupid
> me...I wasn't paying very close attention when I bid. It's an RB 90/3.8 and
> I have an RZ67 Professional body. Naturally, I have a shoot scheduled for
> TONIGHT. I know this lens works with my RZ, but can somebody tell what I
> need to know? What exactly do I need to do differently when I use this RB
> lens?
> Annie


From: James Meckley [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya RB lens on RZ body??
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003
...
The RZ's shutter speed dial has a position labeled "RBL" (for RB Lens).
Set it there and leave it there. Attach the RB lens to the RZ camera as
normal. Then set your shutter speeds via the shutter speed ring on the
RB lens. If you're using studio flash, it must connected to the PC
socket on the RB lens; an IR trigger on the RZ hot shoe will not
function. Everything else, I believe, works as normal.

James Meckley


From: Scott Wuerch [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: Mamiya KL-M vs C lenses
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003

Lew wrote:
> Could someone please give me an explanation of the differences between these
> two lens families for RB67?
> -Lew

Slightly different mount size. KL lenses are made to fit the new RB (Pro SD)
with a wider mount hole to allow for mounting up the 500mm as well as the
tilt-shift lens. With the adapter in place that comes with the lens, the KLs
will mount to the RB and the RB Pro-S.

Not sure if there are any other differences internally...take a look at the MAC
web site for more detailed info.

--
Scott Wuerch
Mind's Eye Photography
[email protected]


From: Randall Ainsworth [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RB67 Portrait Lenses
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 

> I recently got a 150sf and I'm stunned by how good it is. It really gives an
> amazing effect. Following advice on an internet article I use it with the
> no.3 filter in place.

It's been too many years to remember which disc I used to use...but
just enough to soften zits and wrinkles...went whole hog if I had to do
some glamour type specialty work. But it's a gorgeous lens. The only
bad thing I can say about it is that strong specular highlights would
sometime give the image of the disc pattern.


From: "Gear�id � Laoi, Garry Lee" [email protected]
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Subject: Re: RB67 Portrait Lenses
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 

I recently got a 150sf and I'm stunned by how good it is. It really gives an
amazing effect. Following advice on an internet article I use it with the
no.3 filter in place.



 
End of Page