Does the SL66 handle differently than the RZ67?

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 22, 2015

I've found that the 6x7 format in MF doesn't really fit me well. I was hoping to go smaller and lighter with a 501C/M but the lack of close focusing without a tube is a bit of a concern for me. I tend to shoot close and frame tight. That's one of the things that I love about the Mamiya's bellows focusing and the reason I started looking at the SL66 as a 6x6 alternative.

The Mamiyas are excellent optics but not the same as the Zeiss glass, so I'm moving to either the SL66 or the 501C/M. The thing that concerns me about the Rollei, though, is really just about the handling of it. Is it any lighter or smaller than the Mamiya RZ67? If not, that would be a big problem because one of the things I'm trying to get away from with the Mamiya is the size and weight of the thing. I have shot with it handheld but mostly on a tripod or monopod. I can do the same with the Rollei but I really wanted something more portable to make it more likely that I'd reach for the MF camera over the 4x5 Sinar (for which I have a 6x7 back, so my needs in that format are covered).

Has anyone with a Rollei dealt with an RZ67 and can give me an idea of what the difference in handling is between the two (if any)?

Jim Noel · Sep 22, 2015

To me the SL66 is the camera design to which all others aspire. It handles better on or off the tripod, and has features the others don't even attempt. I have owned, and still own Hassy equipment and the only thing going for it in this comparison is lighter in weight. The RZ67, as well as the RB67 are heavy and tripod only cameras for me.

Alan Gales · Sep 22, 2015

I've owned an RZ67 and a Hasselblad 500C/M. A good friend of mine owns a Rollei SL66. I've handled it a few times but have never shot it.

The RZ67 is bigger than the Rollei and from what I remember heavier. My friend hated my RZ saying it was way too big and heavy. Like Jim says a Hasselblad is lighter than the SL66.

My friend told me the downside to the SL66 is it's harder to get serviced and parts for.

Oh, my friend owns a Hasselblad too but like Jim, prefers the SL66.

Slixtiesix · Sep 22, 2015

The SL66 is hard to beat when you want to do close ups in 6x6. It is much easier than with a Hasselblad, which I also use, but fiddling around with the various tubes can be unnerving, much nicer with the SL. The 120/5,6 S-Planar ist the lens to go for tack sharp macros! However, these machines are 40-50 years old by now and you may want to buy from a dealer or have someone checked the camera. There are some issues that can occur: As with most old cameras, slow speeds. Easily cured with a CLA. The magazines can make problems at times (frame spacing may need adjustment, dark slide may not get in and the thing won´t unmount or mount, film start auto stop may need adjustment at times but the latter is rare). The good point is that these magazines are not prone to light leaking, as opposed to Hasselblad. I think Rollei did use some other solution instead of the foam Hasselblad uses. Also check for the focussing knob. The focus on the SL is nowhere as smooth as with the Rollei TLRs but it should go continuous and without issues from infinity to minimum focus, otherwise the mechanism may be damaged (which can be fixed under certain circumstances, but you never know). All in all, if in good shape, this is a v e r y pleasant camera to work with. Hand holding is possible but I prefer a solid tripod.

Alan9940 · Sep 22, 2015

I love the idea of the SL66, but it's a huge, heavy, unwieldy beast IMO. I own both a Hassy 500C/M and Pentax 67, and found that even the 67 was more manageable handheld than the SL66. I still, at times, longingly look at SL66 sale ads but I know that ultimately I wouldn't be happy with it. If used on a tripod, weight, etc, is not an issue; perhaps if one has large hands the SL66 could be used handheld without issue.

Good luck!

Best regards,
AlanH

DREW WILEY · Sep 22, 2015

My older brother once sold SL66's and owned several. It had front tilt and a remarkably smooth shutter. But every time we were out shooting
together, he'd borrow my P67. Guess he just like the ergonomics better. I'm mainly a view camera guy and never did care for square format.

Sirius Glass · Sep 22, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
I've found that the 6x7 format in MF doesn't really fit me well. I was hoping to go smaller and lighter with a 501C/M but the lack of close focusing without a tube is a bit of a concern for me. I tend to shoot close and frame tight. That's one of the things that I love about the Mamiya's bellows focusing and the reason I started looking at the SL66 as a 6x6 alternative.

The Hasselblad has four different size focusing tubes which can be stacked if necessary.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Has...X&ved=0CBwQsARqFQoTCKS4hueei8gCFRBGiAodDWwDtA

john_s · Sep 22, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
.....smaller and lighter....

The SL66 might not be the answer!

It's my favorite camera and I like everything about it, but it's not as neat as a Hasselblad. It sounds better, closeups are a breeze, and tilt is useful for landscapes. But its lenses are older and repairs to the body could be problematic. I bought two extra bodies as spares but have never needed them. Murphy's law, I suppose.

A previous poster mentioned not so smooth focusing. Mine are very smooth.

frank · Sep 22, 2015

The bronica sa2 focuses pretty close with just the normal lens.

Alan Gales · Sep 22, 2015

frank said:
The bronica sa2 focuses pretty close with just the normal lens.

I once had my RZ with 110mm lens at our table and focussed on the writing on a box. I got my Bronica EC with 75mm lens and focussed it on the same box. The RZ has a reputation for close focussing. The Bronica EC couldn't focus as close but wasn't far off. My EC was of course like the S2a that you mention. Both have helical focussing.

Good point, Frank!

Slixtiesix · Sep 23, 2015

A previous poster mentioned not so smooth focusing. Mine are very smooth.

When compared to the Rollei TLR! The focus on the SL goes nicely, but don´t you think it is even nicer with the TLRs? Now wonder though, regarding how much more mass is moved on the SL.

film_man · Sep 23, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
The Hasselblad has four different size focusing tubes which can be stacked if necessary.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Has...X&ved=0CBwQsARqFQoTCKS4hueei8gCFRBGiAodDWwDtA

Which compared to bellows focusing is inconvenient and impractical when you are focusing on the edge of the range the tube gives you. As an added bonus Hasselblad tubes must be taken on/off in the right order otherwise you jam them. Ok, no biggy you need a coin to sort them out but still makes an annoying process even more annoying.

naaldvoerder · Sep 23, 2015

The SL66 is a dream for macrowork. The bellows, the tillt feature, and above all the ability to reverse mount the lenses, without the need for adapters, makes it fit the Op's needs perfectly...

frank · Sep 23, 2015

Except for small size and light weight.

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 23, 2015

frank said:
Except for small size and light weight.

To be precise: I also shoot small format digital in the Fuji X-T1 which I use for all my professional portraiture. It's small and light and the image quality is very good. What I'm looking for in MF is something I can't get with either the X-T1 or the Sinar 4x5. I want something reasonably portable, which means more portable than the Sinar but lighter than the Mamiya.

I've actually not entirely ruled out a folding 4x5 like a Toyo or Wista 45. But I figured if I was going to shoot roll film, then I should have a camera dedicated to that role and since I can shoot 6x7 on the Sinar, it doesn't make sense to duplicate that in a MF camera. The square is drawing me in, as well.

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 23, 2015

naaldvoerder said:
The SL66 is a dream for macrowork. The bellows, the tillt feature, and above all the ability to reverse mount the lenses, without the need for adapters, makes it fit the Op's needs perfectly...

This is truly what's interested me about the SL66. I shoot close, even with portraiture, so mucking about with extension tubes is going to frustrate me. I have one for the RZ67 but haven't even had a chance to use it in anger because the 110/2.8 focuses so closely that I simply haven't needed it. But being able to quickly switch around the lens for macro work sounds like something I'll really enjoy. To me, that's worth a small price in size and weight over the Hassy.

flavio81 · Sep 23, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
The Mamiyas are excellent optics but not the same as the Zeiss glass

What makes you believe this? Not the best way to start such a thread. :confused:
You should not worry at all with the optics of either camera; they are superb, particularly the latest K/L Mamiya glass. All the cameras under discussion are 100% professional and expensive cameras, and the optics in all cases are state of the art for their era.

The SL66 is smaller than the RB and has perhaps the highest fit and finish of ANY medium format SLR. Better than the hasselblad 500-series for sure, and it has a smoother mirror action. The RZ and RB also have a smoother mirror action. The SL66 is smaller than the RZ. Last time i tried one i found the handling just fine.

Now, there are some people that have included the Pentax 6x7 in the comparison, but note that handholding at the Pentax at speeds below 1/125 will perhaps require using an additional grip or monopod or tripod to ensure best results. We have a thread on this topic.

I own the RB67 and the Pentax 67 and while the Pentax is more nimble, focusing is difficult because the viewfinder is smaller and dimmer.

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 23, 2015

flavio81 said:
What makes you believe this? Not the best way to start such a thread. :confused:

Notice that I said the Mamiya glass was "excellent". "Different" doesn't mean "worse" it simply means what it says: "different".

flavio81 said:
You should not worry at all with the optics of either camera; they are superb, particularly the latest K/L Mamiya glass. All the cameras under discussion are 100% professional and expensive cameras, and the optics in all cases are state of the art for their era.

This thread is about handling of the cameras, so I don't want to sidetrack it. That said, even considering the SL66 at all is in large part due to the Zeiss glass. The other part is the handling of the camera itself since I'll also be dipping back into the past and probably trying to adapt a Zeiss Tessar LF lens since I also shoot LF and will be able to get that look in an easier way than by using that lens on the Sinar. I'm not going to go down the rabbit hole of discussing the character of the Zeiss 80/2.8 vs the Mamiya 110/2.8 other than to say that I decided to move away from the RZ because the camera is a hindrance to my shooting rather than a help and the Mamiya 110 lens does not inspire me sufficiently to overlook the antagonistic relationship I seem to have developed with the camera.

flavio81 said:
The SL66 is smaller than the RB and has perhaps the highest fit and finish of ANY medium format SLR. Better than the hasselblad 500-series for sure, and it has a smoother mirror action. The RZ and RB also have a smoother mirror action. The SL66 is smaller than the RZ. Last time i tried one i found the handling just fine.

This is really good to know. I'm a little disheartened by the RB/RZ. I thought I would like it and we just never got on.

flavio81 · Sep 23, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
This is really good to know. I'm a little disheartened by the RB/RZ. I thought I would like it and we just never got on.

I am sad to know that the RZ was a dissapointment to you. But well, to each one his own; for me the RB67 (not the RZ) is the camera I like the most (i have about 20 cameras now) and gets close to my ideal of "perfect camera".

I would strongly suggest to try find someone who can lend you a SL66 so you can handle it. To me the SL66 is perhaps the best built MF SLR, the apex of this camera style. When I handled one, i found it just nice, no problem at all. But then, i do like the handling of the RB67, so what do I know.

I sincerely hope you like it and become a soldier of the ranks of the Rollei.

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 23, 2015

flavio81 said:
I sincerely hope you like it and become a soldier of the ranks of the Rollei.

If everything I've read proves out, then I suspect I'll be quite happy with the SL66 I bought today:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111778419092

This kit seems like everything I need to get started. I'll probably add a prism finder, grip, and 50/f4 at some point.

I'm also going to start tracking down an SL to Copal #0 adapter so I can try my Fujinon-W 180/5.6.

flavio81 · Sep 23, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
If everything I've read proves out, then I suspect I'll be quite happy with the SL66 I bought today:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111778419092

This kit seems like everything I need to get started. I'll probably add a prism finder, grip, and 50/f4 at some point.

I'm also going to start tracking down an SL to Copal #0 adapter so I can try my Fujinon-W 180/5.6.

Wow... I'm green, red, yellow with envy!! VERY nice!

Sirius Glass · Sep 23, 2015

A SL66, RZ67, Hasselblad and Bronica each behave in their own way. Which operates and feels good for one photography will be the worst camera in the world for another photographer. So I recommend that you borrow, rent, try in a camera store, try your friends ... cameras as much as you can to help you make a decision which is personal for you.

I did not like the Mamiya C330 system that I inherited. I shot several dozen rolls of film and I could never get beyond the fiddliness that I perceived. I found that the Hasselblad felt the best in my hands. Others I did not like the size, location of controls, weight, lack of quality feel, ... I am not saying that the other cameras were worse or bad, they just were not for me.

john_s · Sep 23, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
........I'm also going to start tracking down an SL to Copal #0 adapter so I can try my Fujinon-W 180/5.6.

One advantage of the SL66 is that it has its own focal plane shutter, so your lens that's mounted in a Copal_0 can be removed from the shutter and mounted on an adapter that's drilled and threaded to the same diameter and internal thread that the Copal_0 has. I had this done by SRB Griturn but depending where you are, there would be other firms offering such a service.

Some LF lenses might be too big at the rear to fit. The internal diameter of the rear section Rollei lens adapter is 58mm which limit extends maybe 14mm back from the lens mounting part. Further back, where the back of your lens would be in the bellows, there is a little more room, maybe 62mm diameter. I could do some more accurate measurements if you are interested.

jonbrisbincreative · Sep 24, 2015

john_s said:
One advantage of the SL66 is that it has its own focal plane shutter, so your lens that's mounted in a Copal_0 can be removed from the shutter and mounted on an adapter that's drilled and threaded to the same diameter and internal thread that the Copal_0 has. I had this done by SRB Griturn but depending where you are, there would be other firms offering such a service.

This is a great idea! I used SKGrimes' contact us form to check on how much it would cost to machine a Copal #0 to SL66 adapter.

I also have a broken 127/4.7 Ektar that I've been meaning to send to KEH to have worked on but just haven't yet. I might try that one as well.

naaldvoerder · Sep 25, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
If everything I've read proves out, then I suspect I'll be quite happy with the SL66 I bought today:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/111778419092

This kit seems like everything I need to get started. I'll probably add a prism finder, grip, and 50/f4 at some point.

I'm also going to start tracking down an SL to Copal #0 adapter so I can try my Fujinon-W 180/5.6.

Congratulations! Looks like a superb specimen. Much more "new" then mine. I'm sure you will like it. It is superbly build, down to the convenient bayonet for the bay VI filters..

Does the SL66 handle differently than the RZ67?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency