Are RZ67 lens as good as RB67 lenses?

stradibarrius · Jul 23, 2013

I have had an RB 67 for several years and really love it and fell the lenses are excellent. I am just curious if RZ lenses are as good optically as the RB?
I have an opportunity to pick up and RZ body for a steal.

StoneNYC · Jul 23, 2013

No, you can only go the other way. (RB lens on RZ bodies) sorry.

~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

stradibarrius · Jul 23, 2013

I don't understand your answer??? I didn't ask about putting an RZ lens on an RB bodie. I am wondering about the image quality comparison of the 2 lenses.

StoneNYC · Jul 23, 2013

stradibarrius said:
I don't understand your answer??? I didn't ask about putting an RZ lens on an RB bodie. I am wondering about the image quality comparison of the 2 lenses.

Sorry, fail, I don't know why I read it that you wanted to buy an RZ lens for an RB body...

Anyway yes RZ's with a W are like the late model RB's that were better quality.

If it has something other than W then it's even better than the RB's

~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Mainecoonmaniac · Jul 23, 2013

The good news is that if you buy an RZ body, you can use your old RB lenses. RZ bodies aren't that expensive. But in terms of lens quality, as far as I know, RB and RZ lenses are excellent. I highly suggest it. With RZ bodies, you don't have to cock the shutter and wind the film back. I've used them for over 30 years and my only regret is the size of the beasts.

stradibarrius · Jul 23, 2013

I absolutely love my RB and would keep it above any other of my film cameras if I had to choose. Will my RB lens connect directly to the RZ body?

Alan Gales · Jul 23, 2013

stradibarrius said:
I absolutely love my RB and would keep it above any other of my film cameras if I had to choose. Will my RB lens connect directly to the RZ body?

Yes, but you still have to cock the shutter. When using RZ lenses on an RZ you don't have to manually cock the shutter.

Alan Gales · Jul 23, 2013

If you want a sharp lens then pick up a 110mm for the RZ. Fantastic lens!

StoneNYC · Jul 23, 2013

stradibarrius said:
I absolutely love my RB and would keep it above any other of my film cameras if I had to choose. Will my RB lens connect directly to the RZ body?

I answered this in my first reply haha

~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

polyglot · Jul 23, 2013

That's... a bizarre question. The implication being that Mamiya decided it maybe wasn't going to do QC any more once it went to electronic bodies or something? Why would the quality be poorer in the newer, improved product?

Many of the designs are optically identical to the latest RB K/L versions (e.g. 65 M-LA, 180 W-N, 250 APO, etc); the only substantive change being the use of an electronic shutter instead of clockwork, which makes your exposures more accurate.

Going to the RZ gets you the 110/2.8 and 50 ULD, neither of which were physically possible on the RB due to (IIRC) the physical size of the throat in the mount. IMHO the 110 is wonderful (I use it 80% of the time) but it is certainly not the sharpest RZ lens by any stretch of the imagination.

Alan Gales · Jul 23, 2013

I owned the 50 ULD, the 110 and the older 180. I didn't have the 50 ULD long enough to appreciate it before I sold everything to get into large format.

The 110 I had was really sharp. I'm curious as to which RZ lenses are sharper?

polyglot · Jul 23, 2013

I find the 65 M-LA and the APO telephotos (I have the 250) to be noticeably sharper than my 110; the tradeoff is that the 65 has nasty bokeh which seems to be an unavoidable consequence of greatly corrected spherical aberration as per the floating element. The 180 W-N seems similar to the 110 in resolution. The 140 M-LA is also reputed to be extremely sharp but I haven't got my hands on one just yet.

I sold my non-floating 50mm after a couple of weeks because it was impossibly soft in the corners, visibly worse than shooting a decent lens on 35mm film. The 50 ULD is meant to be nearly as sharp as the 65 M-LA.

It's also possible that my 110 isn't the sharpest instance of that lens ever made...

Edit: of course I'm talking about the wider (f/2.8 to f/5.6) apertures here. They're all getting on for being diffraction-limited around f/11 or so.

Alan Gales · Jul 23, 2013

Thank you for replying.

I had the older 180 which was not as sharp but I liked it for close up portraiture. I took some group shots with the 110 that included my wife and she was ready to kill me. She said something to the effect that she didn't want every wrinkle and pore showing.

Dr Croubie · Jul 24, 2013

Alan Gales said:
Thank you for replying.

I had the older 180 which was not as sharp but I liked it for close up portraiture. I took some group shots with the 110 that included my wife and she was ready to kill me. She said something to the effect that she didn't want every wrinkle and pore showing.

Easy, spend a fortune on the best lenses, fine-grained film, the best scanner and/or enlarging lens, the finest printing paper ... and then just put a $5 soft-focus filter in front of the lens to reduce all the pores showing...

markbarendt · Jul 24, 2013

Alan Gales said:
Thank you for replying.

I had the older 180 which was not as sharp but I liked it for close up portraiture. I took some group shots with the 110 that included my wife and she was ready to kill me. She said something to the effect that she didn't want every wrinkle and pore showing.

Your wife is not alone in her preferences, her emotion is modern day demonstration of the problem that spawned the soft focus lens movement in the late 1800s.

Photographic materials made some technical leaps back then that greatly "improved" sharpness and resolution; the finished product became "too damn good at it's job" for portraitists.

polyglot · Jul 24, 2013

Alan Gales said:
Thank you for replying.

I had the older 180 which was not as sharp but I liked it for close up portraiture. I took some group shots with the 110 that included my wife and she was ready to kill me. She said something to the effect that she didn't want every wrinkle and pore showing.

Well, this is medium format... try her with side-lighting and a blue filter, see how she likes that!

PS please put me in your will first

Alan Gales · Jul 24, 2013

It was the first time that I used the lens and it was a group shoot so I didn't expect her to be upset. It wasn't like it was a close up. There were my wife, step-son, his wife and a new granddaughter in the photographs.

I think my wife is still pretty but when women hit a certain age a soft focus filter sure can be a good friend.

markbarendt · Jul 24, 2013

Alan Gales said:
It was the first time that I used the lens and it was a group shoot so I didn't expect her to be upset. It wasn't like it was a close up. There were my wife, step-son, his wife and a new granddaughter in the photographs.

I think my wife is still pretty but when women hit a certain age a soft focus filter sure can be a good friend.

150SF

tnabbott · Jul 31, 2013

I like my 110 lens, but also like the APOs. I have a 140 and hardly use it.

Regarding portraits, my wife says the same thing about sharp lenses. Oh well.

stradibarrius · Jul 31, 2013

Anne Leibovitz said the RZ 140 was her favorite lens and a reason she kept coming back to her RZ.
I think Clive Barker also use an RZ with a digital back???

StoneNYC · Jul 31, 2013

stradibarrius said:
Anne Leibovitz said the RZ 140 was her favorite lens and a reason she kept coming back to her RZ.
I think Clive Barker also use an RZ with a digital back???

Anne now uses digital also.

I can see liking the 140mm I only own the 90mm and 180mm and prefer the 180 when I can use it but sometimes the space won't allow for it, so I can see a 140 being a good "all around" lens for people shooting.

I've just stepped into LF shooting now, I'm thinking of selling my RZ, problem is I really only need the 6x7 backs to work, but I can only find adapter plates for 4x5 that work for the RB mini-graflock connection and not the RZ connection. And even still, the lenses won't work because the shutter is electronic, but if I switch to RB I think I could even use RB lenses on the 4x5 since I could release the shutter manually.

Hmmm food for thought for me I guess.

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Alan Gales · Jul 31, 2013

StoneNYC said:
Anne now uses digital also.

I can see liking the 140mm I only own the 90mm and 180mm and prefer the 180 when I can use it but sometimes the space won't allow for it, so I can see a 140 being a good "all around" lens for people shooting.

I've just stepped into LF shooting now, I'm thinking of selling my RZ, problem is I really only need the 6x7 backs to work, but I can only find adapter plates for 4x5 that work for the RB mini-graflock connection and not the RZ connection. And even still, the lenses won't work because the shutter is electronic, but if I switch to RB I think I could even use RB lenses on the 4x5 since I could release the shutter manually.

Hmmm food for thought for me I guess.

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Stone, I recommend trying out a medium format back on your Toyo before selling the RZ outfit to see if it works for you. You may prefer using the RZ for medium format and sorry you sold it. For example if you want to take the RZ off the tripod and use it there is no problem.

StoneNYC · Jul 31, 2013

Alan Gales said:
Stone, I recommend trying out a medium format back on your Toyo before selling the RZ outfit to see if it works for you. You may prefer using the RZ for medium format and sorry you sold it. For example if you want to take the RZ off the tripod and use it there is no problem.

I know, I've thought of that, I just have too much stuff and something has to go. Haha

Every time I have a shoot I have like 4 pelican cases to carry in and out along with all the lighting and it's exhausting but I can't stop myself from bringing everything since I never know what I'll want but if I don't have it I can't bring it

I was also just thinking of downgrading to the RB series instead to take advantage of the backs and adaptation if manual lenses on the 4x5 might actually make some money on the deal and not have to put money down for the adapter plate.

It does sound like too much work though so I'll probably just stick to it for now, but it's an option I've considered at least.

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Alan Gales · Jul 31, 2013

I'm a small time Ebay Seller. The problem with that is after testing everything I want to keep too much!

Some of my stuff is going to have to go too, so I do know the feeling.

StoneNYC · Jul 31, 2013

Alan Gales said:
I'm a small time Ebay Seller. The problem with that is after testing everything I want to keep too much!

Some of my stuff is going to have to go too, so I do know the feeling.

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Are RZ67 lens as good as RB67 lenses?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency