Don't Sell Your RB67.

[flavio81]

Someone could put a f2.8 into 6x7 again.

f2.8 gives too narrow depth of field in 6x7 format, to be honest.

 

[paul ron]

you dont have to convince me not to sell.... but which other professional quality camera can you get this cheap?

besides... being built like a tank means you can leave it on the shelf for 100 years or use it for 100 years and still be able to get it running with just minor maintenance costs. the only perashable are those seals.

glass is top notch.
shutters are very tough to kill... except those after the C series. then mamiya scaled back to stay afloat in a sinking ship.

so much available n soooooo cheap. i love it!

 

[M. Axel Wikstrom]

Only reason mine isn't gone is that I won't get much for it. Good camera, great lenses, but very bulky and heavy. Mostly use a Hasselblad these days, and if I want to go bigger I'd rather use my 6x9 or 4x5 cameras.

 

[Larry the sailor]

Even having just acquired a Toyo 45AX I have absolutely no desire to part with my RB67. Two different tools for different uses (sort of).
In fact, once my "toy account" recovers some from my recent purchase I'll be looking for an extra 120 back or two for it.

 

[paul ron]

santa, i want a 37mm c lens this year if you have one real cheap?

 

[Trail Images]

santa, i want a 37mm c lens this year if you have one real cheap?

Hey Paul, I bought one a couple years back now and have used the heck out of mine. Although fisheye it works great as a wide angle too if shot straight on to subjects. I hope you can find one reasonable. Kind of hard at times to find one with full set of rear insert filters. But you must get at least the UV / Skylight one as a base standard usage. I was lucky and found one with the full set of filters.

 

[Ai Print]

I have been looking for a project camera that I can use specifically for double exposures in which the film does not move even a little bit, often left in place overnight.

Would the RB work for that?

 

[MattKing]

I have been looking for a project camera that I can use specifically for double exposures in which the film does not move even a little bit, often left in place overnight.

Would the RB work for that?

It would be a good one to try, due to the separate mechanisms for cocking the shutter and winding the film.
Mine have tended to give good film flatness, which I think may translate well into keeping the film very stationary.

 

[Steve Smith]

Too late. I sold mine five years ago... then wished I hadn't!


Steve.

 

[Larry the sailor]

I have been looking for a project camera that I can use specifically for double exposures in which the film does not move even a little bit, often left in place overnight.

Would the RB work for that?

you can sure enough get a double exposure with an RB67 sometimes whether you wanted to or not

 

[RattyMouse]

Indeed, it's all about that 80mm f2! At $3K I'm sure I'd move towards getting a Rolleiflex (2.8), Mamiya 6/7 or a GF670/Bessa III.

The set up I ended getting was the combo of the GF670 and GF670W. Those two cameras are very light and easily fit in a medium sized bag. I dont have the focal length expandability that the Contax would give me but that's a compromise that I'm willing to take on. I bought those years ago and to switch to a Contax system would cost a small fortune, which is better spend on film and travel.

 

[paul ron]

It would be a good one to try, due to the separate mechanisms for cocking the shutter and winding the film.
Mine have tended to give good film flatness, which I think may translate well into keeping the film very stationary.

this is the one! you can shoot all day in the same frame. many people do it accidently by forgetting to advance the film. just leave it in multi exp mode, tge little lever under the film advance crank.

 

[paul ron]

Hey Paul, I bought one a couple years back now and have used the heck out of mine. Although fisheye it works great as a wide angle too if shot straight on to subjects. I hope you can find one reasonable. Kind of hard at times to find one with full set of rear insert filters. But you must get at least the UV / Skylight one as a base standard usage. I was lucky and found one with the full set of filters.

ive had them, used them but never owned one. im shooting the huge old trees in a park by me using one n just gotta have it now. very impressive lens.

those filters do get lost for some reason. this one im using now is complete n looks brand new.

santa???

 

[tedr1]

I have been looking for a project camera that I can use specifically for double exposures in which the film does not move even a little bit, often left in place overnight.

Would the RB work for that?

As has been mentioned already film transport and shutter have separate levers, no need to touch the film lever for a double exposure, just cock the shutter.

The RB67 back system is illustrated here (Pro S version) http://www.cameramanuals.org/mamiya_pdf/mamiya_rb67_pro-s_roll_film_holder.pdf

There are interlocks to prevent accidental multiple exposure. There is a lever on the back that is dedicated to disabling the prevention interlock. The film will stay still in the holder. The holder is held to the camera back by a system of compression wedges (I think it is developed from the Graflok camera back) and will remain still. Probably the weakest link is the tripod?

$300 gets you a body, finder, film holder and lens, if you aren't satisfied sell it again for what you paid for it (chose a Pro S body and C series lens)

 

[flavio81]

I have been looking for a project camera that I can use specifically for double exposures in which the film does not move even a little bit, often left in place overnight.

Would the RB work for that?

Ai Print,

The film will not move at all. But for the 2nd exposure you need to move the main lever (to recock the shutter) and this requires considerable force in the 'down' direction, so it could potentially move the position of the camera. Unless your tripod is an Arnold Schawzenegger-type tripod.

 

[Chadinko]

f2.8 gives too narrow depth of field in 6x7 format, to be honest.

I dunno, my F/2 on my 6x6 is really, really cool. But then I like shallow DOF.

 

[pdeeh]

I definitely won't be selling my rb67 as I don't own one.
but reading this thread has given me a yen to buy an SQA.
or maybe an S2A

 

[mweintraub]

f2.8 gives too narrow depth of field in 6x7 format, to be honest.

Photography 101. Depends how close you are. Love the 2.4 Pentax lens.

 

[Prest_400]

The set up I ended getting was the combo of the GF670 and GF670W. Those two cameras are very light and easily fit in a medium sized bag. I dont have the focal length expandability that the Contax would give me but that's a compromise that I'm willing to take on. I bought those years ago and to switch to a Contax system would cost a small fortune, which is better spend on film and travel.

I agree on that. Film and Processing (and scanning) amounts to a nice heap. On MF I don't have interchangeable lenses as a Priority though and I lean towards lighter if possible (MF oxymoron)... Given the state of the market, I might as well pick another MF. TLRs seem very nice and the SLRs are cheap and have multiple lenses.

I dunno, my F/2 on my 6x6 is really, really cool. But then I like shallow DOF.

Photography 101. Depends how close you are. Love the 2.4 Pentax lens.

There are a few cameras that have those f2-2.8's and it's a factor. That's why I said it.
Frankly, I have an f3.5 –On RF though, which doesn't have the VF Oomph– and don't shoot wide open as much as I thought I'd do.
At middle apertures and some distances MF does draw a very different depth and layering due its FL and DoF properties, that I really love.

 

[mweintraub]

There are a few cameras that have those f2-2.8's and it's a factor. That's why I said it.
Frankly, I have an f3.5 –On RF though, which doesn't have the VF Oomph– and don't shoot wide open as much as I thought I'd do.
At middle apertures and some distances MF does draw a very different depth and layering due its FL and DoF properties, that I really love.

I don't know if I shoot wide open all the time at 2.4 or 2.8, but with bad light and dim finders on the P6x7, it's nice to have.

ETA: then at the same time, I have no problem using f4 or f4.5 lenses on the p6x7 when there's enough light or on the RZ (because, you know awesome finder).

 

[Chadinko]

I agree on that. Film and Processing (and scanning) amounts to a nice heap. On MF I don't have interchangeable lenses as a Priority though and I lean towards lighter if possible (MF oxymoron)... Given the state of the market, I might as well pick another MF. TLRs seem very nice and the SLRs are cheap and have multiple lenses.

There are a few cameras that have those f2-2.8's and it's a factor. That's why I said it.
Frankly, I have an f3.5 –On RF though, which doesn't have the VF Oomph– and don't shoot wide open as much as I thought I'd do.
At middle apertures and some distances MF does draw a very different depth and layering due its FL and DoF properties, that I really love.

The weight doesn't bother me for the versatility of lens choices. A few of my friends have the Fuji RF cameras and they're very nice but with a fixed lens, I would find them limited in usefulness because I prefer being able to swap out different length lenses. I have a couple of Mamiya C220s and a couple of lenses -- the 80mm f/2.8 Seikosha and a 65mm something-or-other that doesn't reliably work properly, but I almost never use them because my other bag is full of the 6x6 SLRs. Mine are fairly rare, though, so I while I love them dearly I can't recommend them to others because they're so difficult to come by. I just love having the 80mm f/2 and the 40mm f/4, on up to a 240mm f/4. That lens is huge and heavy but it's fast and the optics are lovely. I also like having the capability to swap between the prism and the waist-level finder.

I was playing around earlier this year with photographing the same scene with different cameras, notably the Norita and the Diana, but I think I'm going to expand that and start doing it with equivalent focal lengths and apertures from varying formats, as much as I can within the realm of being affordable. I'm guessing the 4x5 equivalent of a 240mm f/4 on a 6x6 would be not only prohibitively expensive but also about the size of the International Space Station. It's fun to learn about my equipment by conducting such experiments, though other people think I'm weird.

But then, yes, I am weird.

 

[Doc W]

The RB67 and any Hasselblad are two different things. If you don't see in squares - and I don't - then the Hasselblad is not an option. Period.

I love my RB and I am delighted that prices are good (i.e., low). I just upgraded two of my lenses for not a lot of money.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

Alas, I've finally decided to sell all my RB67 equipment.

Since I first began this thread, I think that I've taken about ten photos with this outfit. (I have a medium format view camera.) There is something really nice about an SLR, though. I'm sure that I will miss all the future photos that I could have taken with an RB67. (That probably won't be very many.)

I also have a Mamiya Press Universal kit that is lighter and simpler. While this system may not have the lens selection, I think that one can do a lot with a ground glass viewfinder attachment.

Whatever happens, I shall show no remorse.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

My RB67 SD is the best kit I have ever used, next to my LF gear. It's coming with me on a minnie road trip tomorrow.

 

[narsuitus]

Thanks to this thread I just purchased another RB67 accessory.

This thread inspired me to search for used RB67 prices. During my search, I found a Mamiya RB67 82mm extension tube #2 selling for a low price at KEH.com. I bought it.