Does the SL66 handle differently than the RZ67?

john_s · Sep 26, 2015

jonbrisbincreative said:
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.

Off the shelf, the adapters have a small pilot hole, and the plate is then drilled and threaded. They are available from time to time on ebay (include world wide in your search). You probably have to be patient. You might even be lucky enough to find one that's been threaded to the size you want. There are various other SL66 adapters, rings etc that might be usable with a bit of work.

Xmas · Sep 27, 2015

The limit with 120/220 is the flatness of the film only a few cameras have reasonable film runs so bragging about lenses is just bragging unless your usage is loading and shooting series in warm studio...

Pentax 67 OK
Mamiya c series OK
...

flavio81 · Sep 28, 2015

Xmas said:
The limit with 120/220 is the flatness of the film only a few cameras have reasonable film runs so bragging about lenses is just bragging unless your usage is loading and shooting series in warm studio...

Pentax 67 OK
Mamiya c series OK
...

Not really. If you see this test, for example:

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html

You will see that a Rolleiflex, with a "L-film-path" is able to put more resolution on film than a Mamiya C220 with its straight, "ideal" path.

Also, the RZ67, with an ultra convoluted film path, can get as good or better results than the Pentax 6x7.

I understand your point about "loading and shooting series", but you can also choose to advance film immediately after shooting, should you intend to let the camera wait a lot between shots.

Sirius Glass · Sep 28, 2015

Xmas said:
The limit with 120/220 is the flatness of the film only a few cameras have reasonable film runs so bragging about lenses is just bragging unless your usage is loading and shooting series in warm studio...

Pentax 67 OK
Mamiya c series OK
...

There is not a flatness problem with the Hasselblad. The film backs even have a flat plate to hold one edge down.

film_man · Sep 29, 2015

Xmas said:
The limit with 120/220 is the flatness of the film only a few cameras have reasonable film runs so bragging about lenses is just bragging unless your usage is loading and shooting series in warm studio...

Pentax 67 OK
Mamiya c series OK
...

Having used a RB67, Hasselblad V and H, Bronica SQ and ETR bodies I have never seen a photo with film flatness issues. In fact from all the people I know who among them use anything and everything (Mamiya, Pentax, Bronica, Hassy, you name it) the only ones that ever had film flatness issues where those with a Contax 645 and that vaccum insert thing. Looks like if you leave a Contax lying around with film loaded for a while the tension slacks off. Or the vacuum seals don't work or whatever.

Then again noone of these people and myself included took a microscope to the film to check so you never know but the prints came out just fine.

Neil Poulsen · Oct 13, 2015

The focal plane shutter also has a downside. As I understand, the SL66 has a flash sync of 1/40th of a second. This is about the amount of time that it takes the "slit" to travel across the format. Regardless of the shutter speed, which determines the width of the slit, moving objects can be distorted.

I had an S2a that I liked with many of the same features as the SL66. I replaced it with an RB67 system that has between the lens shutters and a true flash sync that's much faster.

john_s · Oct 13, 2015

Neil Poulsen said:
The focal plane shutter also has a downside. As I understand, the SL66 has a flash sync of 1/40th of a second. This is about the amount of time that it takes the "slit" to travel across the format. Regardless of the shutter speed, which determines the width of the slit, moving objects can be distorted.

I had an S2a that I liked with many of the same features as the SL66. I replaced it with an RB67 system that has between the lens shutters and a true flash sync that's much faster.

Rollei/Zeiss made two in-shutter lenses for the SL66 for flash use (80mm and 150mm). The camera shutter was set on 1/15sec and the lens shutter set to whatever was required for the flash utilization. Whether it's important for the OP I don't know.

I think the focal plane shutter speed for flash was 1/30.

Sirius Glass · Oct 14, 2015

Neil Poulsen said:
Regardless of the shutter speed, which determines the width of the slit, moving objects can be distorted.

I have tired many times to get elliptical wheels on moving cars with my Graflex Model D.

flavio81 · Oct 16, 2015

Neil Poulsen said:
The focal plane shutter also has a downside. As I understand, the SL66 has a flash sync of 1/40th of a second. This is about the amount of time that it takes the "slit" to travel across the format. Regardless of the shutter speed, which determines the width of the slit, moving objects can be distorted.

I had an S2a that I liked with many of the same features as the SL66. I replaced it with an RB67 system that has between the lens shutters and a true flash sync that's much faster.

The Nikon F has a sync speed of 1/60, as many other successful SLRs and nobody has complained of experiencing focal plane shutter distortion yet, AFAIK.

The pentacon Six has sync of about 1/25 and the Kiev 60 about 1/30, my Pentax 67 has 1/30 as well, I've yet to experience any trouble.

Mind you, I love my RB67 like a fanboy and I prefer leaf shutters, but I don't think the FP shutter on the Rollei is any problem. In the same way that if I own a Rolls Royce Silver Shadow I wouldn't complain that the engine is a pushrod instead of an overhead cam type...

frank · Oct 16, 2015

Oddly, even high tech corvettes feature pushrod engines.

flavio81 · Oct 16, 2015

frank said:
Oddly, even high tech corvettes feature pushrod engines.

Becaue the technology is just fine for its purpose and there are tradeoffs involved. An OHC engine is taller and has more complexity.

Alan Gales · Oct 16, 2015

flavio81 said:
Becaue the technology is just fine for its purpose and there are tradeoffs involved. An OHC engine is taller and has more complexity.

Automobile engines are like cameras. Each has it's advantages and disadvantages!

Does the SL66 handle differently than the RZ67?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency