Mamiya RB67 vs RZ67

Hi,

 

This is my first post on this excellent forum and I look forward to participating in informational discussions.

 

My inquiry concerns the Mamiya RB67 versus the RZ67. If you would be kind enough to describe the differences between these two camera bodies I would be most appreciative. I have become fascinated with medium format and look forward to acquiring one of these camera systems.

 

Thank you,

JayHT

I think this is one of those questions that can start a holy war :)

 

I'm firmly in the RB67 camp. The cost of entry is lower, the cost to outfit a system is lower, and you have a much better selection of accessories. The late K/L lenses are optically equal to the RZ67 lenses.

 

The RZ67 has the benefit of being a much newer design. The electronically timed shutters SHOULD hold their time better, although in practice I've found the RB mechanical shutters to hold up pretty well. Much like Seiko mechanical watches, I've found that Seiko shutters tend to just keep trucking along without attention. In any case, operationally the RZ is much simpler as you only have to operate a single lever to reset the mirror/cock and open the shutter and advance the film. On the RB, you cock the camera with a lever on the side of the body and then advance the film with a lever on the film back that looks like it came off a 35mm SLR. The RZ only has the body lever.

 

The two cameras otherwise handle pretty similarly, and again the RB K/L lenses are optically the same as the RZ lenses.

 

As I mentioned, accessories for the RZ are a lot more expensive. From what I've seen, film backs are about double the cost and lenses carry a premium. At least, though, you don't have to worry about the notoriously leaky light seals on Pro-S backs.

 

If you do buy an RB, you'll want to research all the variants on them. From oldest to newest, the bodies are the RB 67 Pro, the Pro S, and the Pro SD. The biggest difference with the Pro SD is it has a larger opening in the body to accommodate the 500mm lens. For other lenses, you SHOULD use a spacer ring to take up the slack. The spacer ring is metal with a rubber O-ring to seal it to the back of the lens. These were included with K/L lenses, but should be used with all lenses. You can probably improvise with a thick O-ring. I've also gone without the ring, and it never seems to cause an issue although allegedly it can lead to light leaks.

 

The lenses are designated, from oldest to newest, the pre-C lenses, the C series, and the K/L series. C lenses have a C on the front of them, while the K/L series is marked as such. The main difference between C and Pre-C lenses is in the coatings, while in many cases the K/L lenses have totally new optical designs. They are usually considered the best. They also have have what is called the "floating system" which I understand is for close range correction-it's a bit of a pain as you have to set the distance manually. Otherwise, though, these are the best lenses.

 

AFAIK, backs are compatible across all three bodies, although the Pro SD backs are the best as they lack the foam light seals of earlier backs.

 

To me, one of the greatest strengths of the RB system is that the revolving back adapter(which is a separate part from the camera body) has a Graflok back as used on later Miniature Speed and Crown graphic cameras. This means that you can use things like the Graflex roll film backs and cut film adapter.

Ben,

 

Thank you so much for taking the time to go into the detail that you have. You have greatly increased my understanding of these two systems. As I continue to study the issues that you have raised I look forward to other members offering their opinions and insights.

 

Regards,

JayHT

Agree with Ben. The only thing I would add is the RZ being an electronic camera, this is a negative in my view. Repairability of 1980s electronics is zero, and failures are often catastrophic rather than gradual or partial as in mechanical cameras.

I thank the both of you for your valuable input and I have decided to follow your advice. I will advise after I have had adequate time to get accustomed to the camera.

 

JayHT

Anyone see the Creative live class being shown live the last few days on combining medium format film with a 7 foot octa? I ran out of velcro, so when some arrives tomorrow will be able to velcro my trigger to the pentaprism and fire up to 5 lights. Tested the trigger and using a cable both worked. Is there a battery in the rb67 somewhere?

Tested the trigger and using a cable both worked. Is there a battery in the rb67 somewhere?

 

The only battery I've ever found is in the metered prism I have, which takes two SR76s.

 

Its function is totally independent of the camera, however. In fact, one "zeros" the needle on the prism via a dial on the side, and then has to manually transfer that reading over to the lens.

 

I seem to recall there also being motorized backs in some form or fashion, which would require a battery but I don't know where it goes/how it's connected. Again, that would be independent of the camera body itself.

Thanks, Ben, don't see one om my prism and don't need an on camera meter, I use a spot/ incident meter. Just wanted to be sure didn't need one to fire my strobes.

Well, having used the RZ system extensively while assisting and when starting out, I have to say it's a very reliable camera with very few quirks. Actually I never had a body quit on me during a shoot. And sometime we actually traveled the world (Mirror lock up, spare battery on hand, etc.).

The RB is to me a studio still life camera, as you have to advance the film separately from cocking the shutter (and no pro used them in the circles I worked in, aka major fashion publications).

If that's not a deal breaker and you want to be able to operate all manually then this is the way to go.

Any other way, the RZ is superior with more modern optics and a larger system.

My fav combo was manual Prism finder (That's RB) on my 2 RZ II, 140mm, sometimes 90 (had a 110, sold the 150 quickly and kept the 65 just in case, but the 140 is pure magic (to me)) and 3x 6x7 220 backs and a Pola back with cut to measure 6x7 horizontal and vertical slides, 81A of course, shooting portraits.

Now I know that dates me, but hey what a combo...

Edited August 31, 2017 by mark_schafer|1

The RZ is the evolution of the RB. Electronic shutters are a great thing, better than mechanical ones for the task, but mechanical ones still keep (at least) *one* important advantage. You must weight pros and cons of each technology. At least in my surroundings, there is no service for older cameras, it doesn`t matter mechanical or electronical. If I had to send it for servicing or repair, for sure cost will be high enough to make it not worth it.

RZ is superior with more modern optics

 

The RB K/L lenses are optically the same as their counterpart RZ lenses

Also, if you decide to upgrade to digital you can attach a digital back to an RZ67 but not an RB67.

Also, if you decide to upgrade to digital you can attach a digital back to an RZ67 but not an RB67.

The digital back can attach to the RZ67 Pro II but not the RZ67 Pro.

Also, with the RZ you have one lever to advance the film and cock the shutter. A real bonus in my book...

Hmmm... my RB67 has a digital back. So it is not true that only the RZ could have digital attached.