heavy rz lens with 2ext.tubes on rz67 safe?

[chris77]

hello apug.
is it safe to use a bigger lens, like the 210apo with tube nr 1 and 2 and fully extended bellows?
is the mechanism likely to suffer from the weight?
anything to take care of??
cheers
chris

 

[Neil Grant]

... sounds extremely dodgy. The lens may not perform all that well as such as close range anyway - and you could damage your camera. Why don't you try it with the No 2 tube and just a few mm of bellows extension? (for starters)
or use a shorter focal length. Ideally you should support the lens with a suitable bracket. The 500mm is always used this way - but you may have to improvise something with your proposed setup.

 

[M Carter]

The 360 and 500 both came with support brackets, so Mamiya felt weight was a danger.

I do a ton of video work, so I have a bunch of 15mm rod system gear. it's a cinema setup, where you camera is mounted to a block, and 2 rods extend out; there are various accessories that hook onto the rods to keep everything stable - the accessories can slide fore and aft to align with lenses and so on. One of those accessories is a lens support; I use my rod setup with the RB from time to time, it's perfect with the revolving back.

This stuff used to be a fortune, but the DSLR video craze has democratized it - here's an under $50 setup that should work fine, the pics should show you how it works. (try to find an RB/RZ lens bracket for under a hundred bucks these days!)

 

[AgX]

Good hint!

Those rollers to carry the lens barrel are a nice idea.

 

[chris77]

The 360 and 500 both came with support brackets, so Mamiya felt weight was a danger.

I do a ton of video work, so I have a bunch of 15mm rod system gear. it's a cinema setup, where you camera is mounted to a block, and 2 rods extend out; there are various accessories that hook onto the rods to keep everything stable - the accessories can slide fore and aft to align with lenses and so on. One of those accessories is a lens support; I use my rod setup with the RB from time to time, it's perfect with the revolving back.

This stuff used to be a fortune, but the DSLR video craze has democratized it - here's an under $50 setup that should work fine, the pics should show you how it works. (try to find an RB/RZ lens bracket for under a hundred bucks these days!)

i like it! tx.. i will take a closer look.

 

[xtolsniffer]

I use the 140mm macro on an RB67 with number 1 and 2 tubes and full bellows extension and never had a problem. It doesn't seem to sag. It is pretty unwieldy though and is best with a very good tripod head. I use one of the big geared manfrotto ones.

 

[chris77]

thanks everybody..
chris

 

[trendland]

Well - Chris77, as I know the RZ 67 as
a very stable, solide camera I would trust this system from it's weight - you discribed.

I personaly use a P67 and this camera is also quite stabile.
We have 2 bajonet systems with Pentax
(if you may also know) - one to smal lenses and the other system is used with
big lenses.
I have a 300mm/4 ( not so heavy )...?
I always thought - the camera is build to this!
Mounted on a tripod I often have it used.
Now I bought a 2x extender and I wonder a bit about the weight.
I is also a case of lever forces.
So I tapped at the tripod mounted system with my fingers.
Yes it is stable enough - but I will never
mount this system on a tripod again because I can broke the camera bottom very easy
with not so much power.
The 300/4 with extender is like a crowbar to the P67.
Pentax 400/4 has only a little much more weight but the lens has extentions in the middle to mount the system on a tripod.
Very late I realised : The second bajonet system from Pentax to heavy lenses is more
stable (of cause it is so) but this is just
to manage the weight of the camera.
It is not in concern of the much more lens weight.
In short - beware of with heavy lens systems on a tripod.
Some told me Rz67 is heavy as a tank.
Perhaps I mixed it up ( they may mentioned this in concern to RB67 ).
But in reality it is NO TANK ...
It is just a Mamiya.......

with regards