Almost Pulled the Trigger on a Mamiya RB67 Pro But...

[orsetto]

Bah, ole Ansel slummed with a Hasselblad or two occasionally- Mamiya RB67 or Pentax 67 will give negs a bit larger than that, so should still be in the running ;).

[arthur_gottschalk]

I do think the 69 year-old OP will be constrained hiking with the RZ and the stuff that goes with it. For that reason I say Hasselblad. And as OP must know, Ansel used one almost exclusively for the last 20 years of his life and I don't think it hurt his pictures. As for me, when I want 6x7 I use my Mamiya 7II. Those lenses are great. But I have yet to come to terms with the 150mm lens and it's viewfinder, which I find to be a PITA. What's more, I often crop the 6x7 image into a square!

[rodeo_joe1]

I recently watched a documentary of 84 yr old Sir Donald McCullin using (handheld) a hefty Mamiya Press or Universal 23 - not sure which. I'm pretty sure that the tank-like Mamiya Press makes an RB67 look and feel like a positive lightweight.

[danac]

Ansel was a consultant for Hasselblad from the time he met Dr. Victor Hasselblad in 1950. He received every subsequent model for testing. His famous Moon and Half Dome, 1960 was taken with the Hasselblad.

 

From Ansel Adams by Mary Street Alinder:

 

With age, arthritis and gout began to afflict Ansel, and his larger view cameras became increasingly cumbersome for him to operate. He found it necessary to have an assistant to carry and set up his equipment; even making the necessary adjustments before and exposure was difficult for him. The Hasselblad proved to be the perfect camera for him at just the right time. He did not need the help of an assistant because it was relatively small an lightweight, and he could position it himself on a tripod. Its negative size was decent - two and a quarter inches square - and the quality of the negatives he obtained was splendid. The Hasselblad became his preferred camera for most of the rest of his life.

I'm actually a young 69 and have always stayed in good shape although chronic fatigue has slowed me down over the last few years. My weight is exactly the same as it was when I earned my first black belt rank in judo at 19. I think I could handle the RB/RZ or the Pentax over a moderate five mile hike. The Hassleblad sounds interesting but I would still prefer the rectangular 6x7 format.

 

mag-micksh: I do have the pick-up truck.

Edited March 13, 2020 by danac

[andyfalsetta]

I watched a half hour show on Ansel Adams shooting around an old farm house in Northern CA. He used a 500C exclusively on that shoot. Loved his car with what looked like a shooting platform on top too.

[orsetto]

I recently watched a documentary of 84 yr old Sir Donald McCullin using (handheld) a hefty Mamiya Press or Universal 23 - not sure which. I'm pretty sure that the tank-like Mamiya Press makes an RB67 look and feel like a positive lightweight.

 

The Mamiya Press Universal is indeed more than a handful. Its the most fun you can have with 6x9 short of a Speed/Crown/Century Graphic, but it weighs a TON: just shy of 5 lbs, all cantilevered off your left wrist via the grip. The solid metal film back alone weighs as much or more than a Nikon F3 body, which should give you some idea. After two years, I'm getting to the point where I can't really handle it anymore: the weight distribution is clumsy and awkward. But I still love the thing.

 

Don't have my RB67 anymore, but just took a pic of the Press next to my Hasselblad 500cm (with comparable wide angle lens) to give a size comparison. The RB67 would be half again larger than the Hasselblad and weigh somewhat less than the Press. The 'blad and RB are arguably much easier to handhold and operate, because the waist level reflex design shifts most of the weight to your palm and focus hand, where your fingers fall more naturally to support and control. The RB67 is more streamlined than the Press, but its a big bulky box not terribly suited to neck or shoulder strap for very long (a shorter hand strap is the popular option for carrying when not in a backpack).

 

I find the rack-and-pinion bellows focusing of the RB67 and Mamiya TLRs much easier to dial in than the standard lens helical focus ring of the Hasselblad and most other medium format systems. But the bellows extension can get a bit ungainly with certain lenses and/or close distances.

 

Edited March 14, 2020 by orsetto

[arthur_gottschalk]

I watched a half hour show on Ansel Adams shooting around an old farm house in Northern CA. He used a 500C exclusively on that shoot. Loved his car with what looked like a shooting platform on top too.

 

It's amazing how his pictures benefited from his elevated shooting platform. I often wonder how I could get up from ground level as he did. Perhaps a step ladder?

[arthur_gottschalk]

Just got the first two rolls back from my (embarrassed to say) new 555ELD. This camera weighs a ton but I had no problem shooting hand-held with a 60mm lens. Do I need this camera? Obviously not. Do I love it? Yes!

[arthur_gottschalk]

Speaking of the Mamiya Press and other heavy medium format cameras, there's a beautiful Linhof Press 6x9 camera with three lenses for sale on Ebay. I'd love to have it but it's $4500.00.

[rodeo_joe1]

I often wonder how I could get up from ground level as he did. Perhaps a step ladder?

Land Rover or Jeep with a roof platform and access ladder. There are pictures of him using it. I've also seen pictures of Dorothea Lange on top of or next to a similar vehicle.

 

Perhaps they were standard issue, since both Lange and Adams worked for the same outfit at one time. (Adams is quoted as criticising Lange's exposure technique, but in my view she took far better portraits than Adams.)

I'd love to have it but it's $4500.00

Linhofs are nice, but four-and-a-half grand's worth of nice? I'll take a Mamiya and the change, please.

Edited March 14, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1

[orsetto]

Just got the first two rolls back from my (embarrassed to say) new 555ELD. This camera weighs a ton but I had no problem shooting hand-held with a 60mm lens. Do I need this camera? Obviously not. Do I love it? Yes!

 

Congrats: the 555ELD is somewhat rare and hard to find compared to other 'blad bodies, pairs nicely with the 60mm and 100mm. A bit expensive vs 553ELX (unless you really will use a digital back on it). OTOH, it is really nifty, and personal valuation sorta depends on what other Hasselblads you're comparing it to: vs the ridiculous asking prices for manual wind 501cm and 503cw, the 555ELD remains almost a bargain, the 553ELX is definitely a bargain, the 500ELX an outright steal. With these later EL bodies, you get the most important improvement of the 501cm/503cw (drift-proof foam-free non-vignetting larger gliding mirror) plus a built-in compact motor drive for half or a third the price. A wonderful deal if you don't mind the added weight and noise of the motor.

 

And yep, its still smaller than an RB67 ;). Tho likely weighs as much.

[arthur_gottschalk]

Look forward to trying it with the 100mm when I get it back from David Odess.

[andyfalsetta]

Speaking of the Mamiya Press and other heavy medium format cameras, there's a beautiful Linhof Press 6x9 camera with three lenses for sale on Ebay. I'd love to have it but it's $4500.00.

Two years ago I found a complete kit on ebay for under $600. Granted I got a little lucky but I'm sure it will happen again. Linhoff Model III with three lenses, the correct lens cams and focus scales (not that I will use the rangefinder), sports finder, and the aux finder that is used to estimate which lens might be best for the shot. I love shooting my 4x5; it is a deliberate process, slowed down, and totally enjoyable. What incredible detail these devices will provide.

[arthur_gottschalk]

I gave up 4x5 with the demise of Polaroid, Readyloads and Quickloads. Too much like work for me now.

[danac]

Could someone please elaborate on the potential focal plane shutter issues regarding images made with the Pentax 67?

[ben_hutcherson]

The curtains of a focal plane shutter have some amount of mass, and during an exposure all of that mass is moving in more or less the same direction.

 

In a 35mm camera, this tends to be mostly insignificant. The shutters are comparatively small(especially in modern Copal-type shutters with ultra light weight multi part blades) and is small relative to the overall mass of the camera even though the curtains tend to move at relatively high speed.

 

The Pentax 67-along with several other focal plane shutter MF SLRs-uses traditional and relatively massive rubberized silk curtains. The Pentax curtains cross the long dimension of the frame(actual dimension a bit less than 7cm) in about 1/30 of a second. During that time the curtains have to accelerate to-hopefully-a constant speed before moving across the film, and then after crossing have to be braked to a stop. Each of those steps imparts some change of momentum to the camera itself, and can cause movement of the camera. In addition, the same sequence happens twice per exposure-once at the beginning and once at the end.

 

At relatively short exposures, especially handheld, the two curtains move close enough together and total exposure time on the film itself is short enough that there's little opportunity for the issues caused by the curtain to show up. On a tripod, as you approach the flash sync speed, it tends to become more significant, but as exposure time increase past the flash sync speed, the induced vibration is a relatively small part of the overall exposure and consequently is not significant. I'd consider times between ~1/30 and about 1/4 on the P67 to be in the "danger zone" with the focal plane shutter.

 

Incidentally, shutter-induced vibration is not that much of a problem in leaf shutters. The leaves themselves are relatively light compared to focal plane shutter curtains. More importantly, though, the motion happens in several opposing directions at the same time, so it tends to counteract itself.

[orsetto]

The effect varies tremendously from photographer to photographer and P67 to P67: just as with the Hasselblad 500cm and Sony A7R, some people swear the P67 is useless below 1/125 even on a tripod while others scoff and say they routinely shoot it at 1/8 with tack sharp results. You would need to shoot a few rolls in your preferred circumstances to really know how much (if at all) it would affect you.

 

The P67 shutter is gigantic and fires with a great deal of force: when mounted on certain tripods with certain lenses, the force of the shutter firing can rock the camera from side to side during exposure (even with the mirror locked up: this isn't a mirror slap issue). Do a Google search for "Pentax 6x7 shutter shake" and you'll get forum thread hits dating back to 1997, with varying degrees of user complaints and cures.

 

In a nutshell, most of the complaints center on speeds from 1/2 thru 1/30, with 1/15 being the most challenging. The shake is much more likely to bite with tele lenses between 300mm and 600mm, although the 200mm can also be unexpectedly problematic. Many workarounds have been reported, the most common being to press down on the prism with one hand while firing the cable release or shutter button with the other. Using your camera bag or dedicated weights to damp the tripod is also a common trick, and some tripod/head specs work better with P67 than others (carbon fiber seems preferred by many).

 

Here is an older random thread with a decent overview and some good damping tips if scrolled halfway down:

 

Pentax 67 shutter shake

 

The shutter shake phenomenon diminishes greatly with lenses wider than the standard 105mm, is somewhat counterbalanced when handheld, and the Pentax 6x7 was a very popular choice for critical aerial mapping and reconnaissance applications. As always in these matters, YMMV.

Edited March 16, 2020 by orsetto

[danac]

In the case of the Pentax 67 I would only be using it for b&w landscapes. My lens choices would be either a 45mm or a 55mm for wide angle and 90 or 105mm for normal perspective. I have no pressing need for a telephoto. This, I assume would make the shake problem less likely but if I used #8 or #15 yellow filters or a red #25 (as I often do with my Canon FD lenses) that would mean slower speeds especially with the latter. Thus the possible need for a sturdy tripod. Lots of compromises to consider with medium format. :confused:

[ben_hutcherson]

One of the things the P67 has going for it is that for a given focal length, lenses are often 1/2-1 stop faster than the same FL in the RB67 system.

 

Probably the most staggering is that the 105mm lens, which is one of the legendary normal lenses of the system, is a whopping f/2.4, where the 90mm RB67 is f/3.5. I get my exact FLs mixed up, but the mild tele I have for my P67(either 150mm or 165mm) is f/2.8. I did get rid of my 55mm f3.5 in preference to the 55mm f/4, which is much smaller, takes a "normal" 77mm filter and not the 100mm bayonet monstrosities, and has somewhat less flare.

 

The faster lenses can let you get away with a bit higher of a filter factor for an equivalent lighting situation and still have a hand-holdable shutter speed, although DOF is dangerously shallow with an f/2.4 lens.

[orsetto]

Reports of P67 shutter shake complications have almost always been linked to 200mm and longer focal lengths: its far less common with the 105mm, drops off considerably by 75mm and virtually nobody complains of it with the 55mm. Multiple factors must combine for it to be significant: lens magnification + lens/camera mass + shutter speed x specific tripod+head specifications. Highest probability of shutter shake intrusion is with the 300mm thru 600mm lenses deployed for landscape at speeds between 1/2 to 1/30th.

 

You are very unlikely to be bothered by shake issues with the 55mm. The 90mm or 105mm might be very slightly vulnerable depending on shutter speed. Most complaints center on 1/15, if you can nudge one speed above or below that you should be golden with 105mm and shorter lenses.

 

Of more concern is obtaining a properly functioning P67 body: as with Mamiya RB67, those currently trading hands most often are pretty beat (people are holding on to the good examples). The big Pentax was prone to issues with shutter, film advance and meter prism: buy from a dealer with a return policy in case the camera is faulty. Of the three major variants (original 6x7, 67 with mirror lockup, and 67II) the most desirable is the mid-period 67 with factory mirror lockup feature. This version had several internal upgrades. The original 6x7 without mirror lockup had some teething pains, but some owners sent them in to be retrofitted with MLU and some of those received film advance upgrades in the process. The final different-looking 67II has appealing features but can be harder to find in fully functional condition (and much more difficult or impossible to get its bespoke circuitry repaired).

Edited March 17, 2020 by orsetto

[ben_hutcherson]

Of the three major variants (original 6x7, 67 with mirror lockup, and 67II) the most desirable is the mid-period 67 with factory mirror lockup feature. This version had several internal upgrades.

 

I thought that, including the 67II, there were 4 total variants:

 

No MLU

MLU "Asahi Pentax 6x7"

MLU "Pentax 67"

And finally 67II

 

I thought the third version(marked only Pentax, and 67 vs. 6x7) was supposed to be the most reliable.

[orsetto]

Yes, thanks for the reminder: I meant the one marked "67" instead of "6x7" - it wasn't clear in my post.

 

The second "6x7" MLU version can be almost as good: depends on date of mfr. The trouble with shopping the second version is many of the first version were sent in to Pentax to have MLU added, making determination of exact internals difficult (some were completely rebuilt to near-"67" standards, some weren't). The "Asahi" branding can also be a bit of a red herring all these years later, as cameras circulate from all over the world on eBay. If you're not already a dyed-in-the-wool Pentax enthusiast, narrowing your search to the third version (named "67") will simplify matters.

[kmac]

Now however I just discovered that if you store these lenses for a long period, they must have the shutter released or the spring will take a memory set. This will negatively affect the timing. When purchasing these lenses there seems to be no way to tell whether or not they were stored improperly no matter how nice they look outwardly.

 

I wouldn't be too concerned. Modern springs improved greatly over the years from the springs in very early cameras. Quality fine grained carbon steel and more precise heat treatment methods after WW2 meant modern springs were almost indestructible and live longer. Memory set would be negligible IMO if a shutter was left cocked, and there is also a catch that holds the mechanism in it's cocked position, and while the spring is still under tension, it doesn't come into play until the catch is released, and it's mainly the "movement" of springs going through their "throws" that tends to make them lose their tension, like bending a piece of wire till it breaks, it takes movement to do that. Springs lose their tension more by constant use, than by sitting in one position under tension. So the lenses to avoid are ones that have had a life of constant use, not necessarily the ones that have been left cocked, they would have to go through many seasons of extreme hot a cold before they lost their tension. Heat treatment of idle springs (but still under tension) is affected by oxidization (rust), left in acidic environments, extreme heat and and extreme cold. Only under those harsh conditions will a modern cocked shutter spring lose it's tension and induce memory set.

[danac]

Kmac: That's what I have been informed regarding semi-auto magazines.

 

I am now leaning back in the direction of the RB67 and RZ67 models but don't know which one yet.

[orsetto]

If fitted with similar era lenses (K/L on the RB), there is no significant optical advantage to RB or RZ.

 

The RZ offered electronic control of its leaf shutters, which for some photographers was crucial in the days when transparency film was king. Systems with mechanical leaf shutters in each lens (like RB67 and Hasselblad) were vulnerable to exposure variations as one changed lenses. Compensating for this could get tiresome (and expensive) for pros. So the RZ was developed as an alternative/supplement to RB. Going electronic also allowed Mamiya to offer features like an AE meter prism option, and the final variation of RZ was the only Mamiya 67 truly compatible with a digital sensor back.

 

For enthusiast use today, the decision can be difficult. Having 100% consistent shutter speeds across all lenses is nice, but it involves battery dependence, and more than a few aging RZ bodies have fast battery drain issues that resist diagnosis and repair. If you don't have a pressing need for lens-coupled AE meter prism, hiking/landscape might be better served by the mechanical RB. Choosing late-model K/L lenses will give you great optics and best odds of consistent shutter accuracy.

 

Of the three RB body versions, the middle "Pro-S" is the best value. The later "Pro-SD" is newest and commands an excessive premium, the older "Pro" model has no double exposure prevention interlocks. The newer "Pro-SD" film magazines can be used on the older Pro and Pro-S bodies, and desirable for their lack of foam light seals. The older backs are less expensive and a better cosmetic match to the older bodies, but they employ a lot of foam seals that decay with age and cause light leaks. If you don't mind having them overhauled with new seals to be sure they're good to go, the older backs are just as good as the SD backs.