Giving up RZ67 for TLR

benjiboy · Jul 12, 2014

If I ever bought a a RB 67 it would be used as a studio camera for portraiture and never leave my studio, because, schlepping one of those about is strictly for the birds.

Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk

John Wiegerink · Jul 12, 2014

benjiboy said:
If I ever bought a a RB 67 it would be used as a studio camera for portraiture and never leave my studio, because, schlepping one of those about is strictly for the birds.

Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk

I'm with you 100% except I might venture out on occasion with it, but not very far. Of course there are folks on this forum that say they use RB and RZ67's for street work, travel and weddings. I have shot many weddings and the RB/RZ67 would be about my last pick. Great cameras and format, but not for everything. JW

John Wiegerink · Jul 12, 2014

TheFlyingCamera said:
Another vote for the Rollei 2.8 E. I have two E's. They are just fantastic cameras. Easy to hand-hold, focus, and shoot with. Both of mine have the Planar lens. I don't know if there is any meaningful difference between the Planar and the Xenotar, but the Planars are held in higher value overall .

Yes, the Zeiss Planar is more sought after and usually has higher resale value, but I have never complained about my Xenotars image quality. My main reason for preferring the Schneider glass is the coating. Many years ago I was a dealer at a camera show in Indianapolis and ran into a Rollei expert who was setup at a table next to me. Well, we had plenty of time to talk and I had plenty of questions. The first was the difference between the 5 element Planar and the 6 element Planar. His answer to it was not much and he said the sixth element in the later lens was more of a UV filter and not really a correction element. The next question was which is better Planar or Xenotar and he said he preferred the Schneider Xenotar, but not because it was optically superior to the Planar, but because the lens coatings were harder and held up better. He said and I've seen it for myself, that the coatings are softer on the Zeiss glass and more susceptible to blemishes that look like sand pitting/blasting. About four years later I was riding to a show in Chicago with an employee of Rollei in Germany and passed on those questions and answers to him. He pretty much verified what the old Rollei expert had said a few years before that. So, that's how I form my opinion and it has worked for me. JW

TheFlyingCamera · Jul 12, 2014

Another thought on Rolleis specifically and TLRs in general - whatever you do decide on, do yourself a huge favor and get a lens shade. They are absolutely critical.

brian steinberger · Jul 13, 2014

baachitraka said:
There is some test some where in the internet in which Mamiya 7 outperforms the rest of MF bunch. If you are concern about film flatness Mamiya 7 is the one you want.

+1. I was going to recommend this however the OP seems interested in a TLR. But I agree for ultimate sharpness in MF the mamiya 6 or 7 is the way to go.

time4d · Jul 13, 2014

Thanks for all the constructive comments. Where would I be without all of you??

To be honest, I've always lusted after a Mamiya 7. I've also heard about its excellent high-resolution lenses and sharpness. However, I really can't afford one at this point. If you can tell me where I can grab one that is within my stated budget (US$700-750) I will be eternally grateful.

I'm not actually hell-bent on a TLR. I'm open to other suggestions as well. However, I am aware that MF SLRs are generally large, heavy and clunky. Just to clarify, I also own a Fuji GW690II and it kinda works for non-close-up portraits (check out the work of Frederic Dargelas if you disagree). However, I am a greedy person and I would like another MF camera that works better for portraits. The main thing that I want is portability and image quality. I have shot in deserts, mountains and the Arctic and my cameras go everywhere with me.

rince · Jul 13, 2014

I was facing the exact same issue a few months back. I got tired of hauling around my RZ and was looking for an alternative. I ended up buying a 2.8F Planar. I got it CLA'd and it is in great shape. There are no issues with film flatness or the like. The image quality is good, but I have to say, that some of the modern Mamiya lenses are just sharper and have much better contrast. Maybe I need a few more months to get in the groove with the Rollei, but transition for me was not as smooth.
Another issue is that for me the tripod is the main issue when lugging around camera gear. Handholding a Rolleiflex for me does show in the images. It is better than with the RZ, but still an issue. Also if you go the Rolleiflex route consider spending quite some money on close-up lenses, a brighter focusing screen ...
Don't get me wrong. I still love the Rollei and I take it out often, but if I want more than a snapshot, it goes on a tripod.
The RZ is a great camera and the lenses are just amazing. If you are going for image quality, I am not sure you can do much better. If you are lusting after a TLR, I would chose a Rollei. If the M7 is really what you want, you could consider the M6 as a more affordable alternative. I used the M7II for a while, but at the time wanted to be able to do headshots and close up work and for this type of photography a range finder is not really suited, so I sold it again.
Just my thoughts and experiences.

MattKing · Jul 13, 2014

When I first started shooting weddings we had a family friend who owned a studio. He had shot weddings and portraits for decades.

He had recently transitioned to smaller equipment for his wedding and most of his studio portraits - an RB 67 for the formals and in the studio, and a Koni-Omega for casual shots at the receptions, etc.

They were a bit more flexible than the Speed Graphic and studio view cameras he used previously.

"Kids these days just don't know how good they have it"

I find the RB67 to be eminently usable out in the field - frequently with a tripod, but not always.

Xmas · Jul 13, 2014

TheFlyingCamera said:
I don't know where this foolishness about film plane flatness is coming from - I haven't seen any particular evidence of it with my Rolleis. I know Rollei made a glass plate accessory for the Tele-Rollei to assure complete film plane flatness, but that's more an issue for the longer tele lens where depth of field is shallow to begin with.

I think you will find that Rollei offered the glass plate as an accessory on several models not just the tele.

If you want to use your camera at the edge of the performance limit you need to understand depth of focus and film flatness. Depth of field is something else.

The OP needs to understand it as another thing to consider operating on a tripod out of the studio on a cold day wide open.

The problem is just as annoying with a 4x5 and some of the roll film backs.

time4d · Jul 13, 2014

MattKing said:
"Kids these days just don't know how good they have it"

Ok ok I get it......... I'm a weakling...

polyglot · Jul 13, 2014

I don't think any TLR can substitute for an RZ67, unless you were totally not using the RZ to its full potential. If you want to keep the flexibility of lens choice and therefore buy a Mamiya TLR, you're back to the space+weight problems again; and the lenses, while decent, are still not nearly as good as the better RZ lenses (I own both systems). If you buy a Rollei, it's nice and small but quite inflexible.

If you can't afford a Mamiya 7, I would strongly suggest instead that a 6x6 or 645 SLR might be a better option. You can even get autofocus, lenses as fast as f/2, real closeups with no parallax crap, and some are smaller and lighter than a TLR. While 645 is less negative area, that doesn't matter if you habitually crop to a rectangle, e.g. for 8x10 or 16x20 prints, and there are some very small, modern, light and fast 645 cameras around, up to and including digital.

A 645 SLR could be smaller than a Rollei TLR and retain most of the flexibility you had with the RZ67, but with 60% of the negative area. If you were not shooting the finest-possible-grain film (Acros, TMX, Efke-25, etc) in your RZ, then you weren't getting the most out of it anyway. Shoot film in the 645 that's a stop slower and finer-grain (TMX instead of TMY, FP4 instead of HP5, etc) than you did in the RZ, open the aperture up a stop and you'll get the same exposure speed, similar DOF and just as good print quality as you were getting before.

brian steinberger · Jul 13, 2014

I also agree that a 6x4.5 SLR would be great for your situation. Much lighter than 6x7 SLRs and great for all types of photography. I highly recommend the mamiya 645. $700 could buy a really nice kit with multiple lenses.

DannL. · Jul 13, 2014

If you are using a prism finder on the RZ67, you can reduce the cameras footprint and weight by replacing the prism finder with just the focusing hood. The PD prism finder I'm using weighs 2 lbs. When I want the camera to be lighter and more portable I revert back to using the focusing hood.

baachitraka · Jul 13, 2014

Its always difficult to have an optimum gear in MF.

BrianShaw · Jul 13, 2014

baachitraka said:
Later Rolleicords...

+1. Humble cameras but great performers. Light, which makes travel with them a breeze. I traveled world-wide with a Vb for more than a decade, and wouldn't hesitate to do it all over again. Valuable accessories include monopod, lens shade, and quick-release. Not too much else is really needed... except plenty of film.

BrianShaw · Jul 13, 2014

time4d said:
Thanks. Should I even be considering a Rolleicord Vb? How much "better" is a Rolleiflex Xenotar/Planar than a Rolleicord Vb, in practical terms?

It depends upon who you ask. I would say, "no, not enough to matter."

baachitraka · Jul 13, 2014

BrianShaw said:
+1. Humble cameras but great performers. Light, which makes travel with them a breeze. I traveled world-wide with a Vb for more than a decade, and wouldn't hesitate to do it all over again. Valuable accessories include monopod, lens shade, and quick-release. Not too much else is really needed... except plenty of film.

True. They are very good art making machines.
I may ask to shift focus on printing...and there will be a day that you will appreciate the negatives even from Holga 120(not pinhole).

time4d · Jul 15, 2014

I'm not quite sure if 645 is something I ought to consider. Considering that the size and weight will be more than any TLR (bear in mind that prisms/viewfinders are a definite MUST all the time), as well as the smaller negative size, I'm not sure if it is worth investing in a 645 system.

Paul in Arizona · Jul 15, 2014

In that size and weight class you could look at Bronica. I bought an EC-TL in like new condition recently for $225. The Nikon 75/2.8 lens is killer sharp.

jspillane · Jul 15, 2014

I think, if you use multiple lenses on the RZ, you'll quickly become frustrated with a non-Mamiya TLR. Rollei's are amazing, but they are fixed lens with mediocre close focusing abilities.
I would strongly suggest one of the popular 6x6 SLRs (Hasselblad or Bronica); I find them substantially easier to manage than the 6x7 cameras. A Hasselblad with the 80mm planar isn't that much bigger than a TLR, but it offers excellent alternative lens options when needed (I like the 250mm Planar + a short extension tube for portraits). They aren't tiny once you strap a tele or ultra-wide lens on to them, but the versatility of the design is why SLRs came to dominate both medium format and 35mm over time.

For $700 you could get a pretty sweet, good condition three-lens set up in Bronica SQ land.

time4d · Jul 15, 2014

Thanks, jspillane. I was actually gravitating towards a Hasselblad 6x6 and reading your post just confirmed it! It is a little over my budget but I don't think I will regret getting one.

BrianShaw · Jul 15, 2014

You'd never regret buying a Hassy, but for travelling they are a lot heavier than a TLR overall. It's a trade that depends on what your needs/desires are. I travel with a TLR a lot more than I travel with a Hassy. But when I travel with Hassy I do so specifically because I value the ability to change lenses. With Hassy I find I always benefit from a tripod (or monopod). With TLR I can get away with hand hold (or monopod). It's the total weight/bulk of the entire collection of gear... not just the weight/bulk of the camera!

baachitraka · Jul 15, 2014

I do not know how far Hassy will be compare to RZ...

BrianShaw · Jul 15, 2014

baachitraka said:
I do not know how far Hassy will be compare to RZ...

That is a great question. I don't know for sure since I've only used one of the two systems, but I doubt that they are significantly different.

baachitraka · Jul 15, 2014

In regard to OP's requirement, Hassy may not bring any significant advantage compare to RZ except the name and the looks of Hassy

Giving up RZ67 for TLR

benjiboy

John Wiegerink

John Wiegerink

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

brian steinberger

time4d

rince

MattKing

Moderator

Xmas

time4d

polyglot

brian steinberger

DannL.

baachitraka

BrianShaw

BrianShaw

baachitraka

time4d

Paul in Arizona

jspillane

time4d

BrianShaw

baachitraka

BrianShaw

baachitraka

Giving up RZ67 for TLR

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency