film back

[thomas_trottier]

I just purchased a used Mamiya Super 645---I'm moving up from the 1000s. But

when it arrived in the mail I noticed that the film back does not fit snugly

onto the camera. In fact you can see light through it (near the top, not near

where the film is). Should I be concerned about this? Obviously I will run a few

rolls to check for light leaks, but I'm also concerned about the film plane

being off. Or should I just relax? Otherwise the camera is like new. Another

question: what madness prompted the world to go digital when all the film

technology was at the peak of its development?

[mauro_franic]

I was laughing when I first saw the title of the post. It crossed my mind that you were going to ask "why not a film back for the newest dslr -it's a joke". After the digital rush and landscape photographers have began to look back into film; the thought was funny.

[Ed_Ingold]

"what madness prompted the world to go digital when all the film technology was at the peak of its development?"

 

Your statement contains some factual errors. Would you care to rephrase?

 

(1) Digital photography is not madness

 

(2) Film has not improved significantly since before 1980, some 20 years before digital photography began its ascendency.

 

Oh, and yes - you should be concerned about light leaks. That hasn't changed either. However, most backs have a labyrinth light seal, which remains effective despite small gaps that do not exceed the depth of the labyrinth, especially if there is no lost motion.

[q.g._de_bakker]

Doesn't it say that some madness "prompted" the world to go digital? That isn't quite the same as saying that it "is" madness. ;-)<br>But yes, the implication certainly is present. And it's not entirely wrong: at the beginning of the digital wave, the madness that prompted the world to go digital was consumerism and gadgetism. Quality of digital photograhy was far (and it can be argued that it still is some today) less than that of conventional photography. But people thought it proper to switch anyway, resulting in some horrid pictures, no digital shooter of today would accept today. Things have indeed changed.<br><br>And that "film technology was at the peak of its development" is consistent with film technology not having advanced since no matter when. If it hasn't it still is at the peak of its development today. ;-)<br><br>Lastly, digital photography of course didn't begin its ascendency in 2000, some 20 years after you say film last improved significantly. It started quite a few years earlier. Perhaps even decades. ;-)

[nickwhite]

I have three backs for my M645Super - all fit snugly, so yes I do think you should be concerned about light leak anyhow.

 

There are two spring-loaded lugs on the back which locate with the corresponding L shape clamps on the body to lock the back in place - I suspect one of those lugs may be broken or maybe just not locking firmly; Do you have a second back? and if so does that one fit snugly?

 

The light seal Edward mentions is very shallow on these backs.

[thomas_trottier]

Thanks Nic that's helpful---all the lugs seem tight though and I don't have second back so we'll see. Thanks Q.G. for getting what I said. I don't think digital is madness, far from it. I compare digital and film as different kinds of painting. Oil and Acrylic are both painting, but each has its own laws and possibilities and limitations, and you have to find the best within each. What set me off was this: I love my Mamiya 1000s but it is a clunky, unsexy machine; recently though I got out my Nikon FE and took a few rolls and just marvelled at this perfect little bit of technology and started thinking about all the work that went into it. I won't do that again!

[alan_higgins]

Sorry, but I actually agree with the man. It makes me sick to the stomach every time I see a "Pro" with a digital camera. For me it has to be absolute quality or nothing

[rodeo_joe1]

My super backs fit reasonably snugly, but some more snug than others. The backs should fit tightly to the camera with no play in the fitting, but there may be a TINY gap seen at the top of the camera where the shell of the back gaps away from the mating plate. I'm talking about a fraction of a millimetre at most here.

 

Examine the mating plate of the back. Is it scratched, warped, dented or scored? The important bit is the raised ridge that acts as a light-trap. The plastic shell of the back isn't so important, and may not align with the mating plate properly, thus giving the impression that the whole back is gapping away from the camera.

 

Another test is to give the back a good tug while it's attached to the camera. It should not come away from the camera unless the release catch is pressed. If it does pull off, then the catch plate is worn or bent, and needs to be replaced or adjusted.

 

One other common fault with these backs is that the top left hand screw in the back (as seen looking at the mating plate) can be loose in its thread. This indicates that the back has been dismantled and carelessly re-assembled. If that's the case, then you should seek a replacement, since the socket of the screw will have been stripped of its thread and possibly cracked. The screws in the mating face shouldn't ever be overtightened. This can warp the mating plate.