The "Experiment" is Over: I Love my RZ More Than Ever

[jbcrane_gallery]

<p>Good Evening All,<br>

This isn't a question, rather a recap of the past 3 years shooting medium format film with my RZ and extolling the virtues of the system. I'm posting this in the event anyone contemplating a move to the Medium Format looking for a little more information may find it useful. The executive summary: the experiment is over-the RZ is a keeper.</p>

<p>I picked up my RZ Pro II with the 110 lens on *bay 3 years ago, more or less as an "experiment" to see if the image quality difference was worth the extra <em>everything</em> to build out and haul another system around. For the past 3 years I've juggled 2 systems: my Nikon DSLR/35mm system, and the Mamiya RZ system. Nearly everywhere I've gone I've taken at least the Nikon D/SLR & 35mm system when efficiency was a mandate (sharing lenses, accessories, batteries, etc. make this the obvious choice for a compact and fully functional system). There have been other trips I've left everything else home and shot only the RZ system to force myself to get comfortable doing so. Recently I traveled to Washington state's Olympic Peninsula and had in mind some very specific medium format black & white work I wanted to accomplish. Bringing the RZ was key.</p>

<p>At first it took a while to learn to shoot the camera in a style that leveraged its strengths, rather than pretending it was a small, nimble, fast-shooting camera - though with practice it surely is cable of being more nimble and fast-shooting. Though I hand-hold it at shutter speeds down to 1/60 second with 400 speed film, most of the time I'm shooting ISO 50/100, Mirror-up on a tripod at f22 or smaller.</p>

<p>I've been scanning with the Epson V500 with very satisfactory results for "proofing" work. When I have an image I want to get the absolute most out of, a drum scan is the obvious (but expensive) option. Once, I did a head-to-head on the same negative: a Tango drum scan vs. the V500 flat bed scan. Needless to say the Tango was superior, but not by nearly as much as I'd imagined. At a cost of $100, vs. the $200 Epson, The Epson Scan held its own quite well, with the drum scan definitely not $100 better. The V500 is capable of capturing plenty of the films image data and creating a very tight, high-quality image - without having to drum scan everything you shoot.</p>

<p>I've been storing my chromes/negatives in a 2-inch 3-ring binder with archival sleeves and it's bulging with pages of film now. I love the fact that I don't have to ever worry about losing all my images in a crash (even though I'm very well backed-up). I love laying the archival sleeves on my litebox and marveling at the original films beneath the loupe. I love the fact that the very piece of film I'm viewing was with me on my trips. And I love the idea that I don't need to turn a computer on to view an original film. </p>

<p>Upon return from any trip, the 120 films are usually the first to the lab; the ones I'm most excited to see. Yes, the RZ is heavy compared to the D/SLR's. Yes, it requires a little extra tinkering and fidgeting sometimes (my battery went dead at sunset on a trip, but I was able to swap it out very quickly and not miss a beat), and no, it's not water sealed. But man alive... the image quality is out of this world. Every time I get my films back from the RZ I simply <strong><em>can't</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>believe</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>the</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>quality</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>of</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>the</em></strong><em>-</em><strong><em>image</em></strong>. The amount of information that negative/chrome contains is mind-boggling.</p>

<p>I've had people ask how I decide when to shoot which camera/system. I've arrived at the following guideline: My Nikon F6 is still my "go-to" camera when I need to be absolutely sure of getting a shot - and now virtually an extension of my hand. My D3s is for my "heavy shooting" assignments; football and "thousands of exposures" type work. For artistic and creative invigoration shooting the RZ consistently excites me in unique ways. The other cameras are capable of creating art, too. But there's something special about the Mamiya - I don't know if it's the quality of lenses, the size of the 6x7 frame, or what... but "the look" of the films is unique. </p>

<p>The experiment is over. The Mamiya has long-since earned its own bag. Over the past 3 years I've enjoyed the buyers market and added lenses for pennies on the dollar: the 65LA (fantastic lens), the 140 Macro (fantastic lens), the 250APO (fantastic lens), and both extension tubes. Such low cost for such high-quality glass is the complete antithesis of the expensive, digital, juggernaut. The FE701 prism finder, flip-up magnifier, G3 bellows, double cable release and a few additional backs - all in fantastic condition, also pennies on the dollar - round out a useful and diverse kit. I've had one lens need repair, sending it to MAC Group and for a couple hundred dollars came back good as new. I've bought from private parties, KEH, *bay and others - all with wonderful success. My freezer is growing ever more full of 120 film of different flavors and it beckons my creativity, which most importantly is wholly reinvigorated, seeing photographically in ways I've never before known - trusting the RZ has the technical chops to deliver my creative vision - providing I do my part. </p>

<p>For anyone tired of cookie cutter digital and wanting to invigorate their creative vision, I'd strongly encourage you to take advantage of this unique moment in time where the supply and demand curve has rendered such high-quality gear so attainable. It won't last.</p>

<p>For a gallery of images made with the RZ over the past 3 years, please visit: http://jbcrane.zenfolio.com/mamiya</p>

<div></div>

[ondebanks]

<p>Excellent account of your growth in this system, John. I hope the moderator will leave it be - even though it's not a question, it's essentially a reply to the questions that many people may have in their heads about using the RZ system.</p>

<p>I checked out your link too - gorgeous images. I think they owe this mainly to your vision and your dedication to getting to the right place at the right time - but I don't mind giving the RZ some credit too!</p>

[jason]

<p>Thank you for wonderful information. Many ask about Medium Format. I use it, Medium Format, from time to time. I had a Pentax 6x7. I hated the format. I disliked I couldn't proof each roll on one 8 x 10 sheet. I needed extra negative pages.. I had to work hard to find reasonable "so called "professional" process labs. I traded the Pentax for a Leica M-6. I owned it for over 20 years and shot less than 100 rolls!<br>

I kept the Rolleiflex with 75mm Tessar. The difference between Medium Format and even the best of 35mm is huge. Sure there are no 0.95 lenses. One uses the Rollei/Medium Format for more lit situations!<br>

I have used the RB/RZ system. It is superb in many ways. Compared to Hasselblad I found the lenses not so great. They are sharp. They are contrasty. I see distortion.. My preference though was always the Mamiya 6x7 rather than the Hasselblad. These were not my cameras but the Advertising Agency. I was terrified of loading and when using the 'Blad, jamming it! Film loading the RB/RZ very easy.<br>

Holding those huge negatives is a treat. Printing and not scanning a joy unto itself.</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>I think it is not a RZ topic... maybe it`s only because its price, not excessive if compared to current digital systems or premium film cameras.</p>

<p>All you`re saying applies to most modern MF film cameras. Say Hasselblad, Pentax, Rollei, Fuji, or even LF cameras with MF backs (I also like my RZ, but I find even more pleasure enlarging that 6x9 negatives!).</p>

<p>Shooting and processing MF (film, actually) is enchanting. But sincerely, I don`t find the same satisfaction with smaller film formats; my F6 (used only for chromes) is almost abandoned since the FX format. And I agree, as you mention, I`m currently tired of that "cookie cutter" digital look.</p>

<p>Very nice gallery, I like both b&W and color images. Congratulations.</p>

[mtk]

<p>What John Said ...+1. For me to have sucess with my RB67, I have to do what John does...leave everything else at home and force myself to get to know what these cameras are capable of. I also find it challenging to realize I only have "12" exposures, finding 12 worthy subjects is fun itself. Simply put: the cost-fun-quality ratio is laughable for this euipment. Keep up the great work John!</p>

[sallymack]

Thanks for your post, John. After 10 years, I still feel the same thrill using my Hasselblad that you do with your RZ. I'd

used a 35mm film camera for years before that. Congratulations. --Sally

[jbcrane_gallery]

<blockquote>

<p>Ray Butler wrote:<br>

Excellent account of your growth in this system, John. I hope the moderator will leave it be - even though it's not a question, it's essentially a reply to the questions that many people may have in their heads about using the RZ system.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you Ray. That's very much the intention: to preemptively address the same questions I've asked this forum over the past 3 years. I recently had someone ask my recommendations about getting into the Medium Format. At first I felt unqualified to render a response, being so new to it. After further thought I realized what I have learned may be exactly what another contemplating the move might want to know.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and also:<br>

I checked out your link too - gorgeous images. I think they owe this mainly to your vision and your dedication to getting to the right place at the right time - but I don't mind giving the RZ some credit too!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you again, Ray. I keep trying - and failing - repeatedly. Other times things align and I'm smiling while standing at the litebox. Always, I'm glad I'm out there, watching life unfold - whether I make an image or not. Thank you for your reply.</p>

 

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<blockquote>

<p>Jason Gold wrote:<br>

I disliked I couldn't proof each roll on one 8 x 10 sheet. I needed extra negative pages. I had to work hard to find reasonable "so called "professional" process labs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jason, the 6x7 format is not convenient for the 3-holed pages in my binder system and it drove me nuts at first! Now I accept it as one of the charming attributes of the system and just keep going. And I'm extremely fortunate to have a great lab here in town I can drop a roll off in the morning and have it in the afternoon. I'm doing my best to keep them in business.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br />and also:<br>

The difference between Medium Format and even the best of 35mm is huge.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If my Nikon F6 created 6x7 frames I'd be the happiest guy on the planet. When I shoot 35mm film I'm confident I'm getting the best quality image I can get with that system, so it's OK. But...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and also:<br>

I have used the RB/RZ system. It is superb in many ways. Compared to Hasselblad I found the lenses not so great. They are sharp. They are contrasty. I see distortion.. My preference though was always the Mamiya 6x7 rather than the Hasselblad. These were not my cameras but the Advertising Agency. I was terrified of loading and when using the 'Blad, jamming it! Film loading the RB/RZ very easy. Holding those huge negatives is a treat. Printing and not scanning a joy unto itself.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am a devoted fan of the Mamiya lenses - epsecially the APO series. The clarity, detail, precision, color rendition, sharpness, and contrast with which they render an image blows me away time and again. And though I'm usually not focused on speed when shooting the RZ system, loading the backs is relatively fast and easy. That's one of the reasons I carry multiple backs. And I am in complete agreement - holding those huge films and being able to view without a loupe is wonderful. Thank you for your reply.</p>

[User_5888660]

<p>I have the Mamaya 7 and RZ systems. They are my go to MF cameras. I'm glad you found a system that works for you and that you enjoy.</p>

<p>One statement bothers me about your post, however: "For anyone tired of cookie cutter digital and wanting to invigorate their creative vision,..."</p>

<p>Why did you even have to go there? You found the right tool for you. Why denigrate the choice of others? </p>

 

[jbcrane_gallery]

<p>Hello Allen,<br>

There's no denigration-implied or otherwise, and I'll resist stepping into the argument you invite with this response. My value of digital and 35mm systems was clearly stated. It's true, the last sentence may have been better worded to side step such responses. For that I apologize.<br>

Kind regards, John B. Crane</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>After many thousands of digital shots, I must accept that I sometimes miss something different; as someone said, in opposition to that "clinically sharp" digital images, shooting film, and specially b&w, is a relaxing exercise (to me). Obviously I`m refering to the "straight" digital and "straight" film output, without too much processing.<br /> I don`t find denigration here, specially if this came from people who regularly shoot in both media.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p> Nice story to hear, John, and it makes you a card carrying member of the Mamiya RB/ RZ fan club. I've been a member since 1984 and still enjoy my RZ outfit. Continued good luck with your system.</p>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<p>Thanks Louis, I'll shrink-wrap that card and carry it proudly in my billfold ;-).</p>

[colin_dullaghan]

<p>I'll just chime in with another thank you for sharing this inspired, inspiring post. You've perfectly echoed so many of the things I discovered too upon "experimenting" with an RB67 this year. It quickly and definitely became my favorite camera, even though I realize I still have much to learn.<br>

Happy exploring.</p>

[andre_noble5]

<p>Hey John, I agree with you wholeheartedly. <br>

I have the same camera. Your photos demonstrate the allure of film, as it can take an ordinary, nicely lit sunset and turn the color palette into something special. I showed my fifth graders your film shots. They said they are awesome.<br>

If your think the RZ is nice, wait til you get the urge to get an RB. I have both. The RB feels like the quintessential film camera.</p>

<p>A few years ago I bought an Rodenstock APO 105 medium format enlarging lens from the bay in new condition for $125, and a Rodenstock APO 50mm lense for $70, also in new condition. They were plentiful and cheap. That is no longer the case.</p>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<blockquote>

<p>"...even though I realize I still have much to learn.<br />Happy exploring."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Colin, thank you for your reply. You're not alone ;-)... I believe the learning is what keeps my passion for it alive. Keep shooting!</p>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<blockquote>

<p>I have the same camera. Your photos demonstrate the allure of film, as it can take an ordinary, nicely lit sunset and turn the color palette into something special. I showed my fifth graders your film shots. They said they are awesome.<br />If your think the RZ is nice, wait til you get the urge to get an RB. I have both. The RB feels like the quintessential film camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you Andre. I find myself wondering what other 120 cameras are out there, waiting to be shot. These poor, magnificent feats of engineering just sitting, collecting dust on someone's shelf remind me of the toys in "Rudolph,", alone on their island of misfits ;-).<br>

Over time I'm sure I'll be adding other MF cameras, though I must admit a bit of internal tension when the topic comes up. I love my 35mm gear, especially my Nikon F6 (and my D3s), and have to restrain myself from picking them up every time I head out. The purist in me longs to "simplify," deferring to one system for everything, to make life simpler (and my pack lighter).<br>

But then I get my chromes back from the lab, put them on the light box, and experience the reward of the extra effort. There's a quality to even the average image, somehow enhanced by the size, clarity, color and contrast of the film - that almost makes you feel like you're standing there at the scene again, reliving the moment you made the image. Often times none of these nuances survive the translation from light box and loop - to displaying the image small on the web. Sometimes this fact discourages me from even trying. Other times, though, I can almost catch a hint of the moment. Keep shooting and thank you for your reply.<br>

<img src="http://jbcrane.zenfolio.com/img/v28/p915448279-2.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[david_brinson]

<p>Hello John,</p>

<p>I read your recap with interest, as, I too have an RZ system which I purchased used @ eight years ago around the time the DSLR cameras were becoming more widely used. I was starting to shoot a few weddings and portraits on my own as a little side business, having shot Bronica medium formats and Nikons. Anyway, to try to keep up with the curve, I "went digital" with my work and the RZ laid idle for the most part. I still have it and am excited about breaking it out and beginning to use it again. Everything is in good shape, as I had it stored in an airtight Pelican case. My question is about processing. I do not have an expensive scanner nor do I have a darkroom. Can you recommend to me a decent lab that can process my film and commit it to a CD for me to post edit? I suppose I will be shooting color as I can change the image to BW in computer of course.<br>

Also, I tried to link to your RZ examples and the link is not longer working. I would like to take a look at them.<br>

Thank you for your post and any direction you can provide.<br>

Regards,<br>

Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<p>Hello Dave,<br>

Thanks for your note. The link to the RZ work has been reorganized to the following "120" gallery:<br>

http://jbcrane.zenfolio.com/p572167072<br>

Regarding a good lab, I use a place here in Fort Collins, Colorado called digi-graphics. They do a brisk mail order business and have always done good work for me. Regarding a scanner, I use an Epson V500 for quick, preliminary scans just to get the image into the computer. I drum scan images I want to bring the most out of - but honestly - the Epson does a terrific job in most cases. Liberate that RZ from the Pelican case and give him some air. He won't disappoint you.</p>

<p>kind regards,<br>

John B. Crane</p>

[frederic_venne]

<p>Good day everybody!<br>

I am new to this forum and I don't even own an RZ yet. I have been looking and researching a lot about the brand and model of MF I should go with. Bronica's are so cheap, Rollei's 6008AF looks amazing but so expensive and Hasselblade a bit too expensive too. So a month ago, my choice stopped on the RZ67 PRO IId. The reasoning behind my choice was the availability of the lenses, accessories and the fact that different digital backs are and will be available in a "not to far" future (apologies for my english, I'm a frenchie).<br>

So far, I have bought, an angle hand grip - did not liked the idea of a fixed grip while shooting waist level. Bought also a meter prism, 6X6 120\220 rollfilm back (rare) and a mirror lock-up\release shutter. So I am waiting for the RZ67 PRO IId to reach the last minute on *bay to bid and hopefully I will get it. I also want an 6X4.5 and Polaroid back plus 3 120 backs. I will already have the 110mm and am looking to get the 65mm ULD and 210mm APO. I think I should be very well equipped to play for a long time.<br>

I know, some of you might say that I am going backward buying accessories before even having a camera, but I am 100% sure about my decision especially after reading this post.<br>

It is funny that I had the same idea, as you John, about the processing. I was researching the processing costs and what not in my little town and for 2$ (yes, 2$) they will process the film only. So I thought I should use a scanner, but which one? Well, after reading many reviews, I bought a week ago the Epson V600 . And if I really like a particular shot, I will have it professionally scanned or printed.<br>

So I cannot wait to have this baby in my hands and re-explore my region and start shooting again.<br>

So I would like to say thank you for posting you own review\experience with the RZ. I know now, I have made a good decision!<br>

Cheers and happy shooting!</p>

<p>Frederic Venne - Banff, AB</p>

[jbcrane_gallery]

<p>Hello Frederic,<br>

Thanks for your post and a warm welcome. You'll love the system. It sounds from your list that you'll be well equipped for a variety of shooting situations for some time to come. I can not imagine a more beautiful playground than Banff in which to exercise a quality medium format system. Looking forward to your images.<br>

Kind regards,<br>

John B. Crane</p>

[bob_sunley]

<p>Frederic,<br>

Who processes 120 film in Banff? I assume that is C41 processing.</p>

<p> </p>

[frederic_venne]

<p>Thanks John! I cannot wait to start shooting!<br>

And Banff Photography are still developing film, but not sure what kind of process or machine they use. I will see how they do, and if I don't like what they do I will ship my films to Vancouver.</p>

<p>Fred</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>apologies for my english, I'm a frenchie</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't apologise. You should see what some of the alleged English speakers come up with!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>some of you might say that I am going backward buying accessories before even having a camera</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That will just make you more determined to get it. In 1986 the double bass player in my band didn't own a bass but he knew he was going to get one and started buying spare strings before he finally bought a bass.</p>