Need help making a decision (Mamiya RB/RZ67)

[mike 12345]

I'm going to Italy in about a month, i've just sold all my 35mm film

stuff and a Dslr and with the money from that i'm buying some second

hand medium format kit. I've been looking at the RB67 ProS and the RZ

Mark 1.

 

I've narrowed it down to around 3 choices, as follows:

 

One: A Mamiya RB67 Pro S with a 127mm KL lens(rather than the old C

type), a waist finder, a 120 back, a spare 120 back, a polaroid back,

and some decent filters.

 

Two: The same Mamiya RB67 ProS with 127mm KL, a waist finder, a 120

back and also a very nice 250mm KL lens, but no spare 120 back, no

filters and no polaroid back.

 

Three: A very nice RZ67 with either a 90mm KL, 110mm KL or the 140mm

Macro KL lens and a waist finder and 120back.

 

I can't decide which to go for. My photography is usually a bit of

everything (landscapes, people, still lifes etc) in case anyone was

wondering. I know no one can make the decision for me but i was just

looking for suggestions/comments or ideas.

 

Thanks. Mike.

[blakley]

The 110 lens has the big advantage that it opens up to f/2.8. If you're coming from

35mm, you may appreciate this - it's also a spectacularly sharp lens.

 

The spare back is a big plus - 10 frames goes fast sometimes. A polaroid back is a HUGE

plus - I never go through a shoot with the RZ without using a few polaroids.

 

A 140 is a little short for portraits - you'd be happier with 180 if you plan to photograph

people in head&shoulders poses. 250 is probably too LONG for comfort for this use, as

you'll have to shout directions to your sitters.

 

I've never used a macro lens with the Mamiya, but my guess is it's a bit tricky as you'll

have to calculate exposure compensation for bellows extension.

 

The RB is a little more fiddly to use but doesn't require batteries (a plus for me) and is

incredibly tough.

 

I'd discount choice 2 - the 250 lens is the only plus-point and I find this focal length not

very useful on 6x7, especially in the field. This leaves you with 1 and 3. If I were making

this choice, I'd probably tend towards package 1 - especially if I thought I could lay hands

on a decent 110 KL in the future.

 

PS get a nice handheld meter!

[pavelp]

Since you won't be using AE finder and RZ lenses, you pretty much loose all the advantages that RZ gives you (except couple hundred grams of weight (RZ is lighter) and single move advance).

 

Also, if you shoot just about everything, 90mm lens might be better choice than 127. 90mm gets you closer for details (I believe the max magnification with 90 is 0.51 and with 127 it's 0.41 (20% difference)) and also gives you more of angle of view. I usually find "normal" length lenses just tad longer than I need.

 

BTW, are you aware how heavy those cameras are? Not exactly my choice for travel (I will be travelling to Europe next year and so far it looks I'd be taking C330S with metered Baier prism, some lenses and good camera bag).

[martin_jangowski]

Pavel Pinkas wrote:

 

> BTW, are you aware how heavy those cameras are? Not exactly my choice for travel (I will be travelling to Europe next year and so far it looks I'd be taking C330S with metered Baier prism, some lenses and good camera bag).

 

Well. not exactly my choice of a travel kit, either. The C330S weights more than 2kg with prism and 80mm lens. Nice boat anchor (and excellent camera), but as a travel kit?

 

I carry two Mamiya 6 bodys with all three lenses as travel kit, _this_ is a lightweight and excellent travel camera.

 

Martin

[enrico_pocopagni1]

Hello Mike,

please consider that using KL lenses over RZ body you will loose some magnification at closest range and you'll have to check infinite focus because KL lenses focus beyond infinite on RZ bodies. It could be worth have an extension ring (45mm should be enough). You'll sacrifice electronic controlled long exposures too (up to 8 sec.) Have you considered buying a full RZ system (lighter and easier to use)?

 

Greetings from Italy

[terry_stedman]

I've used my RB67 - quite a bit heavier than the C220, which i've also handled - and I have to say that its no big problem lugging it around. The bigger problem was hand holding it without my hand shaking - I hear that a grip will fix that problem. The only way to know if it will be a problem with you is to try it out yourself.

 

I commend you for wanting to get a KL lens, but bear in mind that you can buy 3 older lenses for the price of a KL.

 

I'd suggest going with the RB67, but also think about getting a tripod. A good, solid tripod with a ball head. Right now, thats what I'm lacking in my set up - believe me, a cheap tripod will not work with such heavy cameras!

[mike 12345]

Thanks for all the replies! I wasn't expecting so many people to write something. I know the RB/RZ aren't light cameras but i'll be carrying it in a backpack with a sturdy Manfrotto(Bogen to Americans) tripod and i'm hoping the quality of the images will make the weight worth it.

 

I've ruled out the idea of the 250mm lens myself. It's a choice between option one and three really now. I know i mentioned the RZ came with KL lenses. Maybe i'm wrong, the 90, 110 and 140mm lenses i was looking at for the RZ are actually RZ lenses with the little blue band around the front of the lens. I thought those were KL lenses.

 

Thanks, Mike.

[james_kennedy1]

It sounds like the RZ system has the RZ lenses, in which case you don't need to worry about focussing past infinity. I'd go for the RZ, it's lighter and faster to use, plus you get electronically timed exposures out to 8 seconds - it does take batteries, but if you're not using the AE prism, they last for ages anyway.

 

Whichever system you decide on, make sure you get a second back. You can crank through 10 shots in a hurry, and having a second back can save a lot of hassle - especially if you've got someone else with you to load it!

[mike 12345]

Yeah the RZ camera i'm looking at has proper RZ lenses. Sorry, i think i confused everyone on that issue. One other question, does the RZ have a brighter viewing screen in the waist level finder than the older RB ProS???

 

Thanks, Mike.

[pavelp]

Well, if the RZ system comes with RZ lens, I would pick that one. The accuracy and extended range of electronic shutter is nice to have (unless you expect to get to situations where you do not want to be battery dependent). RZ is also somewhat lighter (200 grams or so) and the single motion film advance and shutter cocking might be some advantage too.

[james_kennedy1]

Yes, the RZ screen is much brighter than the RB screen. Not sure about aftermarket screens like the Beattie models, but if you've got the standard screens, then the RZ is definitely better.

[blakley]

The Beattie screen is noticeably brighter than the RZ screen, but you give up a lot - the

icons which illuminate on the RZ screen to tell you about battery status, darkslide

interlock, etc... are absent on the Beattie screen, so all you see is colored lights. I stick

with the Beattie 'cause my main use is in a studio which is REALLY dark, with just one (or

sometimes two) strobes with dim modelling lights, against a black background. If you're

shooting in even moderately good light, I'd use the RZ screen, which is quite bright itself.

 

Package 1 still looks better to me because of the extra back and polaroid back. I also

think the 127 lens is a better deal than the 90, and I still like the 110 best of all.

 

Tripod is a good suggestion (don't get a ballhead - the camera is so heavy you'll tip the

tripod if you forget to lock the ball). And don't forget the handheld meter!

[bill_dewberry]

easy, pick the best, the Rz with the 140, best body, best lens.

[joe_paulo1]

it has to be the Rz, i had my rb pro sd for only about 6-7 months before its small

flaws( e.g lack of exposures past 1 sec and no single advance) made me buy a RZ pro

2. good luck -joe

[mike 12345]

Thanks to everyone who replied. It turned out the RZ cameras with the 110mm and 140mm lenses were sold. The only RZ left had a 90mm lens. I decided to go for the RB instead with a very clean 127mm KL lens, two 120backs and a polaroid back. I would have liked a newer RZ but i decided the RB with two backs and a polaroid was a more sensible option.

 

Thanks, Mike.

[douglas_green1]

Personally, I think that the RZ with the 110mm lens is a superb starting point. You could pick up the older RB lenses for very cheap (I paid less than $250 each for the 65mm and 180mm RB -C lenses, which work fine on the RZ, and both are excellent as well.

 

Definitely get an L-shaped grip, if you intend to hand-hold at all. The older, mechanical RB L-grip costs a fraction of what the new electronic RZ one goes for, and it works fine on either RB or RZ.

 

The ergonomics of the RZ series are far superior to the RB for field use.

[peter_smith11]

Instead of a tripod you might consider the collapsible Manfrotto monopod, operated by a squeeze grip. Won't allow slow night exposures but will do everything you need in daylight.