werner1

<p>If the RZ does not do what you need it to do, then it is a lot of money sitting around that can be used else-ware. Will 6x7 backs be available for an affordable price in the future? I am sure it will be possible, but will there be enough RZ users around to warrant their production? ( I would love to know how many studios still use RZ's). <br>

I just bought my first DSLR last year (I know, a little slow to catch on). After immersing myself for the last year in the digital workflow and neglegting my Medium format, I have emerged from the experience completely frustrated with the file sizes and quality of prints at the sizes that I am used to working with. I simply cannot match the quality of print that I achieve with my RZ. <br>

I don't care about pixel peeping, I don't care about file size, I don't care about the theory , I care about the pudding-in this case how the print looks on the wall. With the current quality of films, with the RZ I focus on the art of taking the picture. I know that if the shot turns out I can do anything I want with it. I am not talking digital backs, as I cannot afford them, I am comparing to DSLR. <br>

I also own a Mamiya 645 afd and am contemplating selling it to purchase a 24 mp dslr. For my serious work, Landscapes and portraits, I am back to using my RZ. I cannot imagine myself indulging in this craft without it.<br>

This however, is an indulgence I can afford myself as unlike you Geoffrey I do not pay the Mortgage with my photography. Perhaps you would be better served with an AFD and digital back. One of my other passions is woodworking and I have a radial arm saw sitting in the shop that never gets used. It is no longer part of my workflow. I hang onto it for nostalgia with the justification that it is paid for, and I may need it for a particular job. Deep inside though I know it is time for it to go. You alone know if this is the case with your RZ.</p>

<p>Brian, after rotating the back you have to make sure the back locks completely when rotating back. It is easy to rotate and not be completely locked into position, Even if ever so slightly off the camera will not advance.</p>

<p>Graham, the 3952 will work on both cameras. I have never used Quantum but I am sure they are at least as good as the Metz as long as you get the TTL compatible units. I have the 45cl-4, 60 CT-4, and the 54MZ-3. I use the 54MZ3 mostly and love how well it integrates with the Mamiya. A quick push of a button and scroll of the dial allows for quick flash adjustment. My best flash pictures have come from this combination, and has spoiled me to the point of frustration when using flash with digital. I also have a Mamiya RZ-67 and got the AFD for exactly the same reasons as you describe. The auto-focus is slower than new DSLR's, more akin to film SLR's of the late 80's and early 90's. However, The auto-focus is accurate and perfect for candid people shots. I will also use it for landscapes when the trekking becomes more vigorous and weight is an issue. I went from a Mamiya PRO-TL to the AFD because the lag time for focusing was costing me too many missed shots (aging eyes). I would highly recommend the AFD as the future allows for the possibility of a digital back. While the AF can be upgraded, the cost would prove uneconomical. </p>

<p>Richard, I cannot comment on the quality of this particular battery. However I once fried my daughters brand new Sony point and shoot with an after market battery. Using a third party battery will also void your warranty. I am sure this may not happen often but I will never use a third party battery again!</p>

<p>Thanks for the response's, right now it is cheaper to buy a 250mm than it is to buy a teleconverter. I am leaning towards the 250mm. I will take some test shots with my tubes first to see how they turn out as I have never used them for portraits. Thanks again all.</p>

<p>Thanks Jeff, I have a couple of tubes, but does this not require you get in closer to the subject? I have used the tubes only for Macro never thought to use them for portraits. The 250mm I hoped would allow me to keep a distance and still get a close crop.</p>

<p>I have been considering the Mamiya RZ 250mm for tight head shots(non APO). I have also considered the 1.4 to use with my 180mm. I know The teleconverter degrades the image quality to some degree, but is the degradation much worse than the 250 non Apo will be? I have the 360 non APO and it is my softest RZ lense by far. Any response from those who have used both would be appreciated.</p>

<div></div>

<p>If you are considering the RZ Pro II, The feature that is much more desirable is the 1/2 stop increments. This more than anything would lean me towards the II.</p>

Thanks Eugene, The tip about the bracket is what I was looking for. I plan to use it just for portraits. Given the

chance would you purchase this lense again?

I have been thinking about a Mamiya RZ 100-200 zoom lense for portraits. Does anyone have any experience with

this lense? I was thinking primarily for portraits as it would save the the back and forth shuffle. If anyone uses this

lense is the support bracket essential? I have a fairly extensive line-up of lenses and use the 180 most of the time for

portraits. but the back and forth or switching of lenses takes up time and sometimes means I miss the spontaneity

of a shot. I know the zoom may not have the resolution of a prime, but the 6x7 neg is so huge that I do not think this

is really an issue.Thanks for any input.

George, I can't imagine the frustration over such a loss in such a short time. I too have been tempted by these backs but have refrained because Kodak no longer supports them. However as the prices keep dropping, I keep thinking about them. After your post I will NEVER consider them again. Thanks for your post, "I owe you one".

I had some film from the 60's and 70's from my father that I sent to film rescue this year. They did an amazing job. Some of the negatives looked as if there was no way to retrieve a picture from, yet they were able to do so. They are not exactly cheap but for the work that is involved I thought they were fair. If any of the pictures turn out how do you put a price on them. If there is nothing retreivable their price is minimal since there is no post production work involved. Do not just get the negatives and try to scan them yourself, you will never get the same results they do.

WOW! Radio triggering and a swivelling head instead of the cumbersome flash brackets. I was going to pick up another 5600 hsd, but I will wait now. Sony is coming on strong, I hope the 900 will be equally well thought out.

I can appreciate your delima Butch. Unlike you my medium formats serve different purposes. My 645AFD for handheld and my RZ67 for tripod shots. I have been contemplating my FIRST DSLR. Should I sell the AFD? Will Digital backs come down in price in the next 3 years to wait? I simply cannot part with the RZ. I love the rhythm and the results. I think I will go back to convincing my wife to get a part time job and release her from the burden of managing finances.

Jean-Louis, Thank you very much. This is exactly what I was looking for. I did not even realize the older version was a floating lense. I thought only the L/A version was. When I saw the extra ring I began to wonder. It would have taken me a while to have figured out how to use it properly without the manual. Again, THANKS!

I have just picked up an Rz 140 Macro lens.Does anyone know where I can pick

up a manual? The lense has a blue plastic DOF ring, but it also has another ring

near the base. Does this do anything, or is it simply a guide for using the extension

tubes. P.S. this is the older 4.5W lens not the LA version. Thanks for any help!

All AF filmbacks work for all the AF models. They will probably work on Phase Ones new Camera which is a rebadged AFD III.

I have been playing with a trial download of CS3. The jpeg images in Bridge are

very soft compared to the same image in PSD. If I use the magnifier feature in

Bridge the image is sharp. The image is also sharp when opened in CS3, The

colours are consistent, its just the image is very soft. Is this normal or am I

missing something in a setting? Thanks!

Leo, Yes you can, but it is such a pain that I would not bother. I still have a couple of lenses left over from my pro TL and I almost never use them. If you are going to use MF lenses use a manual focus camera. The process is MUCH faster and easier. The only time that the MF lenses make the least bit of sense is when you are using a tripod and have LOTS of time to set up a shot.

If that worked for you, on behalf of Rich and I, Your welcome.

Slava, I think that lense has an outer ring that slides forward and back to switch from manual to auto focus.

Shelly,You are in over your head on this one! If someone is going to pay you that kind of money it is not unreasonable for them to expect results. I would say shoot digital, but if you do not already own one, then a paying job is not the place to learn. I say digital because of the instant viewing ability and correction on the fly. Having said all that, I have done some shooting for a local theatre group. I usually shoot with 3200 asa black and white film. When I used my 35mm I was dissapointed with the grain. With a medium format 645 system I got great results. I would shoot at around f3.5. The best metering technique that worked for me was to use the spot metre on the camera and look for a medium grey tone in clothing or in something close by, lock, and recompose. I also set the camera on a monopod with a manfrotto grip head to move back and forth from potrait to landscape, that I would control with my right hand. In my left hand I would use an electronic cable release which still allowed the use of my left hand for focusing.( have since moved to auto focus medium format so this is not as critical) I had a very high keeper rate with this technique with a lot of 8x10's ending up in peoples portfolios. The best time to shoot is during dress rehearsal as it allows you to move around in front of the stage. You can get some great shots, depending on the type of play or musical but there IS a LEARNIG curve. At least there was for me. Hope this helps. And yes, Flash is taboo as it distracts the performers which is why I used the 3200 asa.

Nathan,if your shooting landscapes with the 35 its not as big a deal since you have lots of time to set up your shot and for landscapes I use manual focus anyway. However if your intent is to use the manual focus for everyday shots I find it a pain. It is not as easy as using the manual series cameras. First, if you don't stop down the viewfinder it is to dark to see. That's even at f8. You must remember to put your switch to M, and keep your lense on the M setting as well. You also have to remember to set the camera to the 'Av' mode or your exposures may be incorrect. As you can see the process starts to get slow real fast. I currently use a 300mm and a 55mm manual focus with my AFD. (left over from my PRO TL). The 300 is always on a tripod so its not a big deal, but the 55 I still try and use for candids. It is very SLOW to use. I use the 80 and the 150 auto focus for now until I can afford some more lenses. If I were you I would look for a 150mm auto focus as they are reasonable to purchase and is a great lens.If you find a 55mm manual focus for real CHEAP then go ahead, until such time you decide to get more auto focus lenses.

Peter I have been able to find these batteries at my local drug store. The Mamiya site cautions against lithium batteries. I once knew the reason why but have forgotton.( Boy, getting old sucks). The silver oxides last the longest. You might want to look here for batteries, http://cgi.ebay.ca/4SR44-S1325-4SG13-V28PX-S28PX-Bronica-GS-1-6v-BATTERY_W0QQitemZ7569990846QQihZ017QQcategoryZ15241QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem