Light Leaks on RZ67

[braxus]

I purchased a RZ67 a month ago and a few backs to go with it. When I was using my 645 back, I noticed some light leaks on two of the 15 images. It was in the top center portion of the frame and more on one side. I came to the conclusion it seemed to happen when I was removing the lens from the camera with the film back still on and open. Is it necessary to put the dark slide in when changing lenses, or do I have another issue that causes light leaks on certain occasions? I didn't notice this issue when using the 6x7 back, but then again, I don't think I removed the lens when shooting those rolls. Can anyone comment?

 

[narsuitus]

Image 107 looks more like a double exposure.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Those are 6x4.5 frames, so the film was moving top to bottom, not left to right, based on the images, correct? The hard line look reminds me of a leak that is happening outside of the exposure area. As if the film is wound tight to the takeup or feed spool and the leak is happening as the film comes off of the spool; the line is where the film is hitting the backing paper.

Put the negatives back in the camera as shoot and look at the areas where the film goes onto/off of the spools, with the leak happening on the frame before or after actual exposure (I don't know the Mamiya film backs well enough to be able to tell if the leak is on feed or takeup, but you'll see right away when you put the film in an insert which side would have the exposed area actually out in the open).

 

[MattKing]

May we see a backlit image of the negatives themselves please, including the rebates and the space between frames?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Out of habit, I always put the slide in when I change lenses...but it should still be light tight if you don't. To me, the leak looks like it's coming from the right side of the holder (image is upside down, and flipped upon exposure).

 

[braxus]

Sure. Im wondering if the lab did this now, as it extends beyond the frame of the film holder.

 

[MattKing]

It might be the back.
I can't think of any way that this particular leak could be a problem with the processing or how the lab handled your film - not with the problem being limited to where you see it on the roll.

 

[Dan Daniel]

Sure. Im wondering if the lab did this now, as it extends beyond the frame of the film holder.

Another it can tell you is that the leak happened when the film was not in the gate for exposure and/or the leak is not from the lens/shutter area.

As I said above, have you put the film in the back as it was shot to see where the leak happened? Good money that it is right as the film either comes onto the takeup spool or comes off of the supply spool. Given the drop off, the leak will be either top or bottom; again I do not know how film travels through these backs. Put it in the back and the leak location should be clear.

 

[braxus]

If it is the seals in the back that need replacing, is this something that can still be done? Who should I send this to?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are there actually seals for the RZed? I know the older RB backs have seals but the SD ones have baffles.

 

[braxus]

Good question Andy. I really dont know. All I know is light is getting in somewhere somehow.

 

[MattKing]

The rotating adapter is another source of light leaks, as is the dark slide slot.
While the backs may have done away with the need for foam by using baffles, you need to check that there isn't either damage to the back or dirt or some other obstruction preventing the baffle from performing properly.

 

[braxus]

Matt. Are you sure the RZ backs dont use foam seals? I see them listed for sale for the RZ backs. I messaged the seller of my 645 back about the light leak, and he kindly told me to F off. His response: "Hello. It seems that the cause is deterioration of the light seal. The light seal is a consumable item. Please replace it yourself. thank you." He sold me the item as listed as working normally, and not leaking as such. Not impressed this seller wouldn't own up to his sale not working 100% as listed. The seals are only a 12 dollar item in the US, but its the principle of the situation.

Mamiya RZ67 Back Seals | USCamera Light Seals | Foam Sheets | KitsUSCamera

Edit: Found this online- "The original RZ67 film backs had foam light seals. They redesigned the backs with the Pro ll to not need this material. Check the foam to see if it is gummy. You may need to replace the seal material."

 

[MattKing]

Reach out to Jon Goodman to see if he has any RZ67 light seals for the specific back you have - he is great to deal with.
JGood21967@aol.com
and
jon_goodman@yahoo.com
I believe that the RZ67 Pro II and the RB67 Pro-SD were contemporaries - both came out around the same time, offering the baffels instead of seals.

 

[braxus]

I inspected the back and looked at the link posted in my last message. It shows where the seals are. Looking at the back I have, it seems the seals are missing in most spots, or severely compressed. So this could be the issue.

 

[braxus]

The seller allowed a $15 refund, which should cover getting new seals for this back. At least he owned up to it at this point.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Glad you sorted out the issue!