william_markey

<p>If I remember correctly, the RZ needs to have film in it to work correctly. The multiple exposure being enabled is an exception.</p>

<p>That was my first 35mm that I purchased new way back in the early 80s. It took wonderful photos...the lenses were great. The only problem I had with it was that there is no full manual option to it, so I upgraded to the Mamiya ZE-X. Used them for about a decade until I just plain wore them out.</p>

<p>If you do landscape, I'd stick with the 645 size...the 6X7 Mamiyas (I have both the RB and RZ set ups) are too large and heavy to carry for long...and your camera case would have to be HUGE if you have all the lenses I do. I use my Mamiya 645 Super if I know I'm going to be far from the car.</p>

<p>Mamiya construction is very durable...don't let anyone convince you otherwise. Sure, the 645s are made of plastic...but so are most cameras. And I've NEVER seen OR heard of anyone "breaking" a Mamiya camera because it was of "poor quality". They are WELL built and do a fantastic job.</p>

<p>I've never used a Pentax but the only difference there is that you cannot switch out film backs like you can on the Mamiyas. I have shot with my friend's Bronica ETRS (645 format) and the advantage there is that you can flash sync at all shutter speeds (up to 1/500)...not so on the Mamiya 645s unless you use their leaf-shutter lenses. The Mamiya lenses focus smoother and faster than the Bronica.</p>

<p>Frankly I don't see anything in that particular photo (love the photo though) that cannot be duplicated with your RB. Your 180mm will give you that shallow depth of field, but there's not any intricate detail in the photo that would be picked up better by a 4X5 than what you already have.</p>

<p>But I am fighting that same "bigger is better" battle myself in wanting a 4X5 over my RB and RZ...so I can't judge you!</p>

<p>Careful. We just did this on one of the Minolta Yahoo groups. Sure enough...on the last person, the camera never showed back up to it's owner and that last person has never been heard from again.<br>

It was a fun experience though...even though no one got to see their photos since the camera was stolen.</p>

<p>I just recently purchased mine. A friend had bought one new when his children were small, but he traveled so much that it didn't get used. He estimated that he only put about 10 rolls through it. I was SO excited to be able to purchase a mint version of my boyhood dream camera! I've only put one roll through it so far, but the experience was incredible! I kept remarking that it felt like a Mercedes of cameras. I use mine with the MD4 as well.</p>

<p>Here is a direct link to where you can buy the film. It currently only comes in 100 speed color or 3000 speed black and white (yes, that is NOT a misprint - 3000 speed - made for scientific purposes). Freestyle supports all things film and is a great company to purchase from.</p>

<p>http://www.freestylephoto.biz/66910-Fujicolor-FP-100C-3.25-x-4.25-Polaroid-T669-690-Compatible?cat_id=2401</p>

<p>Remember though, on your 645 camera, the actual photograph you will see on the Fuji instant film will only be the size of a 645 negative...the rest of the photo will be a black border.</p>

<p>http://www.paramountcords.com/</p>

<p>The only place you'll ever need for pro-level, very hardy sync cords...</p>

<p>Brian Quinn - I've used Northcoast Photo for their develop & scan services....and they do an EXCELLENT job! This is my "go to" lab for great scans at the time of developing now.</p>

<p>Amen to that! 85mm 1.8 - can't beat it!</p>

<p>I'll have to check them out. If it truly is the former Mystic lab, they were great!! I used them for my 35mm print stuff and they always did an excellent job. The negatives were even attached to a plastic strip on one side (with label sticking off of it) in order to prevent scratches to the negatives. I would use them again in a second!</p>

<p>I shoot with a 10D as my digital camera and see no reason to upgrade. I've made "grainless" enlargements up to 20"X30". If you want good noise reduction at higher ISOs, why not check out Lightroom 3...it supposedly has terrific noise reduction. LR3 would be a LOT cheaper to check out than buying another DSLR. Just my two cents...</p>

<p>Adam - have you thought of joining one of military services as a photographer?? I know the Air Force has a terrific program (I think it's still based out of Charleston, SC - great place to live). This way you would be earning a living at what you love, get to travel the world photographing almost everything, serve your country, and if you get out later--get some nice benefits (GI Bill for college, VA home loan, etc). Also, I believe that the military is paying 100% college tuition nowadays (they paid 75% when I was in).</p>

<p>I really think this might be a valid choice for you - it gets you out of where you're currently living, allows you to go to college paid for (makes your parents proud), and they will train you to be a great photographer. Of all the services, the Air Force is the most "civilian-like" - so don't let it scare you. I really enjoyed my time in the Air Force.</p>

<p>I can't believe that photo was selected by the National Portrait Gallery! Why on earth are they impressed with a driver license photo like that??? (sarcasm) Just goes to show that if you have a "name" as a photographer you can output crap and it still gets published and/or recognized.</p>

<p>Blah, blah, blah...how about we just go ahead and get this forum started with some postings instead of trying to figure out definitions and meanings. C'mon...this is going to be a great place for film shooters to hang our hats!</p>

<p>Now saying all that....I don't have anything to post!! <sheepish grin></p>

<p>I understand Brian M.'s (OP) intent -- you guys are blowing this way out of proportion. </p>

<p>I agree with Brian...I'd like to see more "film" shots too...where little-to-no PSing is done. Something that shows the skill of a photographer "getting it in the camera". You all have valid points about what "can" be done in the darkroom...but rare is the person in the world now that can do what Ansel Adams did. I too am sick of "plastic" people and scenes that were never "there" - i.e. photos made with PS filters and actions mashed on top of them. Look at what Galen Rowell could do with a cheap Nikon camera and some slide film - THAT is what Brian M. is talking about!</p>

<p>RB67 and 180mm lens for portraiture...trust me!</p>

<p>Lab: any film that I shoot will now go to North Coast Photographic Services (http://www.northcoastphoto.com/) because they've done such a wonderful job on my latest developing and what they call "enhanced" scans. My "regular" lab was a HUGE disappointment when I sent them film...seems they no longer have anyone who knows anything about film...too digital now.</p>

<p>Although I have not used them yet, I hear constant raves about Richards Photo Lab in California too. They are a bit more expensive, but they customize their developing and scanning to your tastes....so after you get something you really like, they do that for you every time.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for their input!!</p>

<p>I was hoping to just push the shutter button with a finger or use a single cable release on the shutter button. I don't want to have to use MLU during a portrait session unless I absolutely have to.</p>

<p>Thanks Gregory...that's what I was thinking (or hoping). I've only used this new-to-me camera outdoors so far.</p>

<p>I have recently purchased an almost-new-in-the-box Nikon F3HP (10 rolls or less put through it) and a 105mm 2.8 Micro lens. I am normally a portrait guy and have used this lens for a session and loved it. I have almost no experience in macro photography and have yet to use this lens for macro photography - maybe this coming spring when the flowers and bugs return.</p>

<p>My question is this: there is a 55mm 2.8 Micro AIS lens that I can buy for a decent price. If I already have the 105 Micro lens...is there any reason to buy the 55mm version?? If so, what good will it do me? Again...I have little to no macro experience...</p>

<p>BTW...I have a 50mm 1.4 lens and a 50mm 2.0 lens...so I'm really just trying to find out about the usefulness of the macro capabilities of the 55mm vs 105mm.</p>

<p>Thanks for your help!</p>

<p>Just want to see if I'm guessing right before I try it and waste film/money. I tried looking this up in the instruction manual, but it is not covered.</p>

<p>To use the RZ with studio lighting and radio transmitter (instead of sync cord), would I simply just put the radio transmitter in the RZ body hot shoe and fire away? Or does the radio transmitter (while in the hot shoe) have to be connected via sync cord to the lens in order for everything to work correctly?</p>

<p>Thanks for your help!</p>

 

<p>I've started using http://www.northcoastphoto.com/ and have been VERY happy with their processing and large scans. I live in Birmingham, Alabama and have to ship my film out too - North Coast Photo will process and scan color negative, color slide, and B&W...try them out.</p>

<p>I use a 10D as my sole digital camera and it gives fantastic results...so much so that I have yet to have a reason to "upgrade". I've had photos printed up to 20X30" so far with zero noise/grain.</p>

<p>What a refreshing way to photograph a cemetary! Great photos! Now I'm going to have to go out and try this...thanks for the inspiration.</p>