RB67 Pro-S & Landscape/Night Photography?

I have just purchased an as new Pro-S with the 127mm lens which I hear

is one of the good ones. I am not particularly interested in Portrait

and lean more towards outdoor, landscape, architecture and low

light/Night photography.

 

My question without notice to all users of this lovely beast is 'Who

among you shoots this style and what have your results been like?' I

am very curious to hear all results as I have facility to develop and

print my own 6X7's and can't wait to get started. I don't care that

it's heavy and what some people might call slow, I guess I'm for the

old style of doing things which has you thinking about your shots

before you blast away.

Go to the "Gallery" section. On the RH side, about halfway down the page there is a search box. Type in RB67 and hit "Go", it will give you all the pictures on the site where that was the camera recorded as having been used.

fire the big mirror first, then release the quiet leaf shutter, is very applicable to this type of photography.

I enjoyed shooting at night on a tripod with my RB.

I use my RB for everything and love it. (Although looking to buy a Contax 645 to replace my 35mm gear, RB doesn't handhold very well.) I have the 127KL lens as well as the 65KL and have been very pleased with both. I second the recommendation of using mirror up. I always use mirror up on the RB for landscape work. And remember to watch the bellows drag if you're doing macro work. Have fun!

I have done some night shooting with the RB, and can attest that the lenses are pretty good at eliminating ghosting and flare when there's light source in the picture. I installed a Beattie screen in mine (matte grid, no center spot), and found that the brighter image really helped. Makes a big difference during the day, too.

 

Night scenes often have very high contrast. If you're shooting B&W, you might consider water bath development. AA's book "The Negative" tells all about it.

 

Happy shooting!

To all who have answered so far...

It's a beautiful camera though I really can't see what all the fuss is about in regard to the weight of the thing, just me? I've got the grip that goes with the RB and found it actually quite pleasant even without the (eye level) prism finder to give me the image around the right way!

 

I have been perusing the manual and am fast realising the need for the mirror up option when using long exposure times and for achieving maximum sharpness. This is my first foray into medium format photography, my 35mm gear is a Contax 139. The guy I bought this outfit off threw in a beautiful old Linhoff tripod which has some enormous extention, twice my height and I am 6ft. I feel very privledged indeed to be using this camera and have absolutely nothing untoward to say about it. The feel and finish all the way round is one of superior craftmanship and quality, superlative!

Psi

 

I really can't see what all the fuss is about in regard

to the weight of the thing, just me?

 

Come back in a year and tell us if you still feel the same way. I doubt it. You need to outlive the honeymoon period!

Re- Weight/Honeymoon period...

 

I'm not really the type who has problems once the honeymoon is over.

If you buy something predisposed to the dissapointing realisation at

some later date that what you bought was flawed, then you probably bought the wrong thing to begin with.

 

I usually feel the same way about design options in objects I buy long

after I have bought them. Perhaps I should clarify my statement a little. The weight of the RB is utterly insignificant to me and doesn't bother me at all, It won't bother me a year from now because

it doesn't bother me now. It just doesn't feel that heavy to me and

thus the statement 'the fuss...just me?' qaulified. Horses for courses, swings and roundabouts, pure subjectivity? Certainly.

First, use mirror up on your shots. I am sure that the mirror slap has caused a few avalanches and stampedes in its day.

 

Second, I shoot landscape with my RB67 ProS, as well as some studio work. I get excellent quality slides and negatives from the camera, and have never been disappointed in its performance. The detail is sharp and the contrast is good. I hope to enjoy this camera for many more years.

 

Third, I have several lenses, and a backpack to carry it (and the light meter, PD hood, film, tripod, etc.). At middle age one wonders if lugging this stuff up and down the sides of mountains and valleys is really worth it. Well, when I get the film back the answer is always yes.

 

Enjoy!

 

Mike

Mike...

Your comments are greatly apreciated, getting a strong weather proof

backpack for the RB is my next move and a hell of a good way to keep fit into the bargain. As to you final comments about why it's worth it, EXACTLY!

As far as a weatherproof pack goes, I just got the Lowepro Nature Trekker AW. Certainly big enough to carry 'RB' and its accessories, as well as some 35mm equipment.

 

Mike

About the weight issue... A few inches in additional image quality seems to weigh in heavily, at least in comparison to similar technology, and there is not much you can do about it. Standard 35mm reflex cameras such as the Nikon 100 and others weigh roughly about 1000g, the F5 is up there with 1400g while viewfinder cameras such as the Leica, Contax and Voigtlander are slightly less. The 645 SLRs (Contax, Mamiya, Pentax) are in the 1000g - 1300g range, the twin-lens 2.8GX is 1275g, the 6x7/6x9 rangesfinders (Mamiya, Fuji) weight in at 1200 -1500g, the Hasselblads are traditionally lightweight (1500g for the 501, 1660g for the 205), the Rolleis are a pound heavier (1920g for the SL66, and 2040g for the 6008i), the 6x7 SLRs are a next step with 2250g for the Pentax 6x7II, 2490g for the Mamiya RZ and 2690g for the RB. The leader of the pack of course is the Fuji 680 III with 4070g. 4x5 field cameras also easily weigh between 2000 and 3000g. All numbers are for camera with standard type lens.

 

If one wants to express it graphically: for one Fuji you can carry two Rolleis or three 6x7/6x9 rangefinders or the equivalent in lenses. Anybody can do their math and interpret these numbers in different ways. I'd say none of the professional cameras is really lightweight, but there are still huge differences. There are also considerable differences in lens weight, but that's another chapter. And some cameras such as the Rolleiflex SLRs or the Mamiya RB/RZ have built-in features like bellows or motor-drive that would take up additional weight in other systems or might not be available at all.

 

In general I am the type who fills up his Lowepro backpack any which way. When I am shooting 35mm, I tend to carry more extreme lenses, a 500mm telephoto as well as 15 and 20mm wide angle lenses. When I am shooting 6x6, my longest lens is a 500mm or a 300mm with 1.4x converter while 40mm or 50mm are there on the wide angle side. With 35mm, I tend to get all the extremes while in 6x6 I get better quality in the medium range. I lost lots of sweat this summer when I was chasing mountain goats in the Aosta valley with medium format gear. With 35mm I would not have gotten some shots in the quality I eventually achieved but probably some other even more exciting shots.

 

Thus, Psi, enjoy your RB as long as you thrive for the 6x7 quality and as long as you have the energy to carry it around...