kyle_westwood

<p>Lovely shots as always. The weather in Blighty hasn't been all that favourable. These are both from the Brecon Beacons in Wales, taken using my first roll of Tri-X 400 developed in D76 1+1. Can understand why so many like this emulsion now.</p> <p>Mamiya RZ67 II + 75mm f4.5 Shift<img src="https://c6.staticflickr.com/1/479/31615343341_6a26dca889_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="825" /></p> <p>RZ67 II + 127mm f3.5 K/L<br /> <img src="https://c3.staticflickr.com/1/752/31733777626_c13a869875_b.jpg" alt="" width="824" height="1024" /></p>

<p>RZ67 + 65mm f4 on Portra 160<br> <a href=" src="https://c8.staticflickr.com/6/5507/29824063463_e64bee5524_b.jpg" alt="" width="824" height="1024" /></a></p> <p>RZ67 +127mm f3.5 on Ektar 100<br> <a href=" src="https://c3.staticflickr.com/6/5786/30439940146_eb37604d86_b.jpg" alt="" width="824" height="1024" /></a></p> <p>RZ67 + 65mm f4 on expired Agfa Optima 200 (dated 09/1997)<br> <a href=" src="https://c5.staticflickr.com/6/5816/29954071684_11e5c84378_b.jpg" alt="" width="826" height="1024" /></a></p>

<p>Some fantastic shots this month. Love the colours Giovanni, that first 617 shot is beautiful.</p> <p>Took my RZ out a couple of times this week.<br> Storm Imogen - Kodak Tmax 400, 127mm f3.5 + yellow filter (signs of bubbles on far edge, I've since decided to increase developer volume from 17fl.oz to 19fl.oz which has cured the problem.)<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1581/24274732494_1814e4804b_b.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Fuji Neopan 400, 127mm f3.5 + yellow filter<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1577/24809485511_68025aac69_b.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Rollei Retro 80s, 65mm f4 + orange filter<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1514/24588505129_6dddd60a09_b.jpg" alt="" width="822" height="1024" /></p> <p><img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1525/24660581320_c8a2ef393c_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="822" /></p>

<p>Testing out my replacement 645 AFD after the first went back due to a shutter fault. First signs of spring here in the UK. All shot on kodak Tmax 400 (TMY-2) and developed in D76 1+1 for 10:15 @ 20 degrees. Would have been nice to use colour film but alas didn't have any with me.</p> <p>210mm f4 ULD + yellow filter<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1483/24412242099_ab681b7cc4_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="768" /></p> <p>55mm f2.8 AF + orange filter<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1531/24779166795_14014b22f8_b.jpg" alt="" width="765" height="1024" /></p>

<p>I've had similar to this where I've released the lens shutter whilst it's off the camera in storage. It can be mounted without cocking but the lever on the camera doesn't always work, it merely lowers the mirror/light baffle. Take the lens off and rotate the cocking pins around past the green dots and then reattach it.</p>

<p>Caught the waterfall bug this month. More with the RZ67 and 65mm f4 + Y2 filter. These are along the Afon Nedd (or river Neath in Wales)<br> Rollei RPX 25<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1473/24565798185_303204fb12_b.jpg" alt="" width="824" height="1024" /></p> <p><img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1712/23938997393_98e0f3136f_b.jpg" alt="" width="823" height="1024" /></p> <p>Ilford PanF 50<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1464/23939115813_2f334c559f_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="822" /></p>

<p>I find my RZ67 perfectly hand holdable. I preferred the RZ as it is lighter, the film advance and shutter cocking is one action, it can use both RB & RZ lenses, it supports AE prisms and the pro II backs have no seals to go bad. It is without doubt my favourite camera, the revolving back is something that I really adore.</p>

<p>I've got both a 645 1000S and 645J and both have been reliable though they both needed light seals replacing as the foam breaks down and disintegrates. The prisms can also suffer from de-lamination causing a dark line in the viewfinder. My AE prism has this problem but my PD prism does not. There are a nice variety of lenses available for the m645 system, particularly the A and APO line. The, 80/1.9, 120/4 macro and 150/2.8 are especially nice.</p> <p>The Pro/Pro TL is newer with some improvements. I'd avoid the super as it's got sketchy reliability from all I've read. Surprised you have not considered the RB/RZ67 which is lovely to use IME. Had a pentax 67 long ago but sold it on after a few years to fund the first venture into digital. Personally liked the 6x7 format but prefer the mamiya.</p>

<p>Couple of photos from the Brecon Beacons in Wales. All taken using a Mamiya RZ67 Pro II + 65mm f4 L-A. All developed at standard times using D76 1+1 at 20 degrees. Full gallery <a href=" <p>Tmax 100 shot with a light red filter.<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1549/23632935483_4696e36499_b.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>Ilford PanF 50 + light red filter<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1533/24254417186_2ac72a3b6c_b.jpg" alt="" width="825" height="1024" /></p> <p>Ilford PanF 50 and light red again<br> <img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1552/23996052670_99fdbf67c7_b.jpg" alt="" width="821" height="1024" /></p>

<p>I tend to use my RZ with two lenses (65 L-A & 127 K/L or 210 APO) and only one back so I mange to get by with it in a lowepro toploader 75. I can wedge both hoods, gossen digipro F meter, cable releases and a stack of films. I can keep the second lens mounted using a pouch, but tend to just pocket it. Loosing the cable releases and one hood to my other pocket nets enough room for a second back.<br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5740/23322133886_3f014a153e_b.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>My slingshot 300AW will happily fit the whole kit with tons of spare room for more, but it's too heavy to be practical, other than for transporting everything in the back of the car.</p>

<p>I've spent some time this afternoon giving it a proper test using a matt fresnel on the film rails and there is definitely a discrepancy between focus screen and the film rail.</p> <p>At ~4m subject distance with the 127, focus via the screen was achieved at precisely 10mm of bellows extension. Checking this at the film plane reveals a slightly OOF image. Re-focusing using the piece of matt fresnel and an 8x loupe and I end up with the bellows extended to 11mm.</p> <p>What seems peculiar is that with a closer subject ~85cm, there is no detectable error at all.</p>

<p>Lovely pictures this month.</p> <p>Some shots from December using my RZ67 pro II. The weather has been plain awful in the UK so far but I've persevered.</p> <p>65mm f4 L-A + Yellow Filter using Kodak T-Max 100. <a href=" Link</a><br /> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5740/23543930256_9db7b47e41_h.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>127mm f3.5 K/L + Yellow Filter using Ilford Delta 400 <a href=" Link</a><br /> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5672/23567371316_99f21e4eab_h.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>127mm f3.5 K/L + Yellow Filter using Fuji Neopan 400 <a href=" Link</a><br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/669/23458244480_6c8db6a73e_h.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p><a href=" link</a><br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/601/23727489806_891f088cd8_h.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>AFAIK, there are no autofocus 6x6 or 6x7 cameras, only 645. Even then, AF is generally a single central point and is not particularly quick. These are the 645 models with AF that I know of, Contax 645, Hasselblad H series and Mamiya 645 AF/Phase One AF. Newer phase one/mamiya DF/XF bodies are digital only and cost a small fortune.</p> <p>To get a light meter on 6x6 or 6x7 you have to add an AE prism head which adds significant size and weight.</p> <p>Personally, I use a variety of mamiya 645 bodies and an RZ67. Of the lot I like the RZ67 the most even though it's significantly larger and a fair bit heavier, I find it's the nicest to use.</p>

<p>I just tried out a check using a second focus screen and a piece of roughened perspex on the film rails and without a loupe at least, I cannot see any error particularly at close focus distances. The second focus screen on the film plane showed focus to be spot on at close distances with both the 65 and 127 but infinity shows as out on the 65 both through the finder and at the film. (wide open at least) The shots I processed were in focus from about 10m on to infinity. (for the majority of landscapes)</p> <p><a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/39959182@N05/albums/72157659130418344">These</a> are all of the shots taken so far that I have scanned and uploaded.</p>

<p>Judging by the photos I've just processed, there is indeed a slight amount of backfocus evident with the 65. Seems like it is more so than the 127 which suggests there may be something amiss with the lens. I think I need to get another RZ lens to help diagnose whether this is a lens or body issue.</p>

<p>Don't think my screen has been disassembled. Top surface is flat and the icons look the correct way around. Bottom surface is the rough fresnel side. I'm going to try and develop the films from friday today and see how in or out of focus the results are.</p>

<p>I believe its the type E with horizontal rangefinder centre and microprsim collar. There were no shims that I noticed, just the 645 mask.</p>

<p>Yes, first thing I checked when I found it difficult to determine focus at far distance was to adjust the floating system to see if it had any effect. It did not seem to make any discernible difference on any setting, but I used it set at infinity for the shots I took today. I shot all the frames with the 65 at what should be infinity (bellows fully racked in) set at f8 - f11 so they should be ok if the lens is good.</p> <p>Glad the shutter release switch is normal then.</p>

<p>Picked up an RZ67 Pro II and an RB 127/3.5 K/L lens last month and all seemed fine. I've only shot two rolls with it so far and generally things seemed good enough that I was satisfied things were working correctly. I picked up a 65mm f4 L-A RZ lens just over a week ago and on using it today noticed that based on the viewfinder focusing aids, I am unable to hit infinity focus even though the bellows are fully retracted. (The problem is not evident with the 127 due to longer flange back distance) My guess is that most of my landscape shots had sufficient DOF to cover the error, though I shot one close up of a mushroom which came out focussed roughly where I remember which is confusing me a little.<br> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/758/22822895619_06f734627d_b.jpg" alt="" width="817" height="1024" /></p> <p>As far as I can tell, the bellows and the focusing rails are OK as the fine focus knob works perfectly smoothly. Only thing I noticed when I received the body was that there was a mask fitted in the viewfinder for either a 645 back or a digital back which I removed as I only intend to use 120 film. </p> <p>One other question, is the shutter release supposed to have detents on all of the positions? Mine has no clicks on the red or white dots, which is different to the 645 I was used to.</p>

<p>Mamiya RZ67 Pro II + 127mm f3.5 K/L with B+W 090 red filter. Fuji Neopan 400 developed in D76 1+1 for 9 minutes.<br> <br /> 1s f16 - <a href=" Taf Fawr</a><br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/580/22558441223_0524fd4d4a_b.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="821" /></p> <p>1/8s f11 - <a href=" Crew</a><br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/759/22817510299_a548d1424d_b.jpg" alt="" width="815" height="1024" /></p> <p>1/250s f8 - <a href=" Waxcap</a><br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/758/22822895619_06f734627d_b.jpg" alt="" width="817" height="1024" /></p>

<p>It's the scanner that caused the triple on the edges. It seems to suffer from that effect on very dense negatives only. The camera is being repaired/serviced by ffordes authorised repairer under warranty so it's out of my hands for the time being. I'm just hoping it doesn't take them several months to conduct the necessary work.</p>

<p>Got the colour films back from peak and as expected, anything north of 1/125s was fairly overexposed. The agfa neg films were salvageable but my last roll of fuji asita was complete toast.</p> <p>It's been posted today and should be back with ffordes tomorrow. I will wait and see what the outcome is.</p>

<p>My 1000S has always been remarkably accurate provided I remember to only cock the shutter when needed. If i leave it cocked for a day or two, the first shot is slow. All of the light seals and foam bits were shot like everyone elses on both bodies. The J seems even more resilient than the 1000S. My AE prism seems to have suffered the usual problems, making focusing a chore but my PD prism is still good, don't really get on well with the WLF as I shoot portrait too often.<br> I might try one final test where I shoot one image at several different shutter speeds on a tripod with mirror lock up. They should all be sharp and if the shutter is iffy at higher speeds, the exposure should skew. I'll get on to ffordes about it as I'm passed the 10 day approval but only 1 month into the 6 month warranty so I can hopefully get them to fix it. (particularly as I invested in 3 AF lenses and a 2nd back) A digital back would make this easier, but even renting one isn't cheaper than using several films.</p>

<p>I do still have the 1000S (and a 645J) used it today too as this AFD has knocked my confidence somewhat.<br> In some images I'd certainly agree with you as the subject matter is quite close and the aperture is more open. The worst of the lot are subjects that are at least 50m away or more. This one in particular shows it strongest. (and it was roughly 1/4 mile away) <br> <img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5736/22114242110_b89e9253c1_c.jpg" alt="" /></p> <p>The over exposure of most of these negs particularly when I was actually expecting mild under exposure definitely suggests a slow shutter to me. Comparing between the AFD @ 1/4000s & the 1000S at 1/1000s, the 1000S shutter seems faster. This is based on the duration of light from a light box through the mirror box. There seems to be little difference in the duration on the AFD from 1/125s up.</p>

<p>I recently upgraded from my trusty old M645 1000S to a used AFD that I bought from Ffordes in the UK and all seemed fine when it arrived. I ran one black and white film through as a test film without any issues. The results once processed were quite poor with only 3-4 reasonably sharp shots. The rest looked like they suffered from quite severe camera shake, which I obviously chalked up to me getting used to the camera. I ran another black and white film through taking more care regarding support and shutter speed and the results were virtually identical to the first film. This is using a variety of lenses both AF and MF. I bought another back (as the original had some lateral play) and have tried again, sticking to high shutter speeds (usually 1/500 or faster) and again same results a few acceptable shots and a lot of very blurry shots. Another point to note is that the higher the shutter speed, the more overexposed the images seem to get, suggesting the higher speeds are not accurate. The shutter seems to behave normally opening when the back is removed and closing when reattached. All the contacts on both the camera, lenses and backs have been</p> <p>I never had any issues like this with the 1000S which I've been using for the last decade so I'd assume given I've tried support and very fast shutter speeds that technique isn't the main issue here. I've uploaded some of the images that I've scanned from the 3 different films both the good and bad shots. Some images show banding from the scanner as it gets a bit cranky with dense negs. I've doubled checked the negs on a light box to make sure the scanner is not to blame here.</p> <p>Album of test shots here: <a href="https://flic.kr/s/aHsknsX95d">https://flic.kr/s/aHsknsX95d</a></p> <p>Is it me or is it the camera?</p>