Mamiya Press versus RB67

[Bipin]

Hello everyone,

I'd like to start by saying that this is my first thread here. I've "lurked" around the forums for a good few months and am quite impressed by how helpful and knowledgeable the members are.

I've recently garnered an interest in the Mamiya Press system, coming from the RB67. Focus with the RB67 has become a bit problematic, as I have poor eyesight and have trouble determining focus. My photography instructor had recommended using a rangefinder for those who wear glasses and/or have poor eyesight. I've given rangefinders a try and after a few experiences with them, I can't see myself going back to the RB67, which is my main camera. Besides eyesight, there have been other reasons why I've considered switching systems; selective focus and perspective control have both interested me. Currently, the only system I have that allows for scheimpflug movements is a 4x5 monorail. I'd like to have the option to use movements in a portable package that fits my shooting style; I typically use the RB67 for street and landscape, or a mix thereof (not sure what call it) and often while traveling. For what it's worth mentioning, weight has never really been an issue with the RB67. I use it with a prism and grip handheld down to 1/30 just fine.

This is where the Mamiya Press comes in. I've been looking at various medium format cameras which satisfy my needs of having (at least some) movements, having a rangefinder and being hand-holdable (I consider the RB67 viable for handheld use). The Mamiya Super 23 and the older, original Press seem to have what I want. I also had looked at press cameras such as the 2x3 Graphic and Horseman 980 systems, but I've been told focus is too slow for the type of photography I'd do. As well, I'm not sure how to cam for non-native lenses (e.g. a 90mm Angulon on a Horseman 980). I've also looked at the SL66, but I'm not sure if I want to go back to SLRs. The price doesn't help sway me towards that decision either; it seems everything points towards the Mamiya press system. There are a few reasons why I've held off on buying one though. Looking elsewhere, it seems people can't agree on what lenses are good and bad, besides the 100mm f/2.8 being a unanimous favourite. Furthermore, I'm not sure how viable it is to use movements, focus with the ground glass and shoot handheld (speed isn't the concern so much as it is stability and retaining focus). I have a friend who does this successfully with a Speed Graphic, but I'm not sure if the same can be said for the Super 23/Press.

All things considered would the Mamiya Press or Super 23 be a viable choice, let alone as a replacement/trade for a RB67? Is this system even feasible for me, given what I hope to accomplish with it, or am I asking for too much from a single camera? Some insight would be much appreciated. Thank you!

 

[TareqPhoto]

Welcome to the site/forums!!!

 

[TareqPhoto]

I forgot to ask you about if you used/tested that RB with WLF?

 

[Bipin]

Thanks for the welcome! I've used the RB67 with a chimney, pop-up WLF and prism. Looking at my results, it seems whenever I miss focus it always seems to be by focusing too closely. Might a split-prism ground glass help with this?

 

[MDR]

A split-prism ground glass might help if your eyesight is getting worse due to higher dioptrine I would also try a diopter with the prism. if your dioptrine is to high for available diopter an optician might be able to help. If you eyesight is bad an RF is not always the best choice, if you can compromise loss of qality vs better focus I would go for an AF camera Rollei made one for 6x6 the Rollei 6008AF in 6x4.5 there is quiet a choice of AF cameras the Mamiya 645AF, Contax AF, the lowest cost AF Slr is the Pentax 645N which can be found quiet cheap, the higher cost option is the Hasselblad H series the earlier models can sometimes be found at quiet reasonable cost. The Fuji AF RF cameras are no slouches either and the GA645Zi is really a good camera imo it has a zoom so you don't have to buy a lot of lenses and the IQ is great, the fixed focal length Fuji Afs aren't bad either. The Fujis and Pentax will be cheapest option the Fujis can be found for around 300 - 400$ the Pentax is a bit more 500 to 700$. Don't forget the important thing is the image not the focussing method. Quiet a few well known fashion guys and gals use 6x4.5 Af cameras.

Welcome to Apug

 

[Xmas]

Thanks for the welcome! I've used the RB67 with a chimney, pop-up WLF and prism. Looking at my results, it seems whenever I miss focus it always seems to be by focusing too closely. Might a split-prism ground glass help with this?

Yes and you should be able to get one reasonable $ for the RB worth the financial risk.

AF is normally a cruel joke.

 

[gone]

The Fujis do very well w/ the AF thing. There's a learning curve, and it isn't 100%, but I was surprised how well it worked on my old one. The downsides are that you have to live w/ 6x4.5 vs 6x6, and it's awkward holding the cameras for horizontal shots. You just end up taking more verticals than you might normally take w/ 6x6.

They're basically a big old medium format P&S. The op might consider scale focus folders too. After some practice you can nail every shot, and you can't beat them for the price and convenience (except for the red window, knob wind thing). I have an enlargement from a $50, late 1930's era 521 Ikonta hanging on the wall here that had an uncoated Tessar, and it is amazingly sharp and clean.

 

[Bipin]

Thank you for the replies everyone! I tend to not like AF cameras; they just don't "click" with me. The problem isn't getting in to focus, even quickly for street with the RB. I've been able to do that with what appears to be good accuracy (and I say "appears" because the viewfinder shows what I want to be in focus, to indeed be in focus, but the negatives tell a different story). I also don't want to be stuck with a 645 or 6x6 format. I have an Autocord for the latter, which works quite well for me. Besides that, as a fairly young student I just don't have the money for many of those systems. I sustain my film hobby by volunteering as a darkroom technician and receiving 120 as a "thanks, keep up the good work". The SL66 has always intrigued me, though its price, not so much. The RB and the Press are both choices for me because the cost is not prohibitive.

The idea of just getting a split prism is growing on me; I've found a few for thirty-some dollars. That said, I was fortunate enough to give my instructor's M9 a try briefly, and I find focusing with a rangefinder to work for me. At least, with the M9. Now, I realize it's not a Leica, but could I expect a similar experience with a Mamiya Press or Super 23, in terms of ease and accuracy of focusing?

 

[Xmas]

Yes a rangefinder is the 35mm camera for available darkness with a /1.2 normal lens.
The Mamiya will only be different cause of the narrower depth of field of the longer focus lens.
But you still may need a diopter if your eye sight is really bad.

My optician says that if my good eye was as bad as the bad eye I could have a free dog and a stick but I still prefer the bad eye for focus cause I keep both open most times.

 

[MDR]

Bipin if the image appears to be sharp in the finder and is unsharp on the film it sound like your groundglass is not properly mounted or out of alignment check if you groundglass is proberly mounted. Another reason for this discrepancy could be the filmback check the back as well. No reason to buy anything unless you have tested both.

 

[Paul Howell]

If you have used a Mamiya and found that you see the yellow split image a Mamiya is a nice system. I have friend with best corrected vision 20/50 in both eyes and he could not see the contrast in the yellow split image. He saw a low vision specialist and was told that in addition to reduced acuities he has poor contrast sensitivity but that tinted contact lens might help. He decided to stick with auto focus and bought a Pentax 645 AF.

I have a Universal Kit with 2 bodies and 4 lens, 3 backs. I just found a almost new black body to add to my rather battered chrome body which I bought used 35 years ago. The press type cameras were designed to used hand held, I use the pistol grip, other prefer to shoot without a grip. It is easy to shoot on a monopod or tripod with a ball head, Mamiya made a bracket for use with a tripod. The range of lens is fair, 50 and 65 for wides, a 90 or 100 for normal, the Universal uses the 100 with a 3.5 and 2.8 a 150 and 250 in noncoupled and coupled version. There are also a couple of lens that were made for the Polaroid version of the Universal, with a 75, and 127 lens to cover the larger Polaroid negative size. The 23 Super and Universal comes with frame finders for the 100, 150 and 250 the wides needs a viewfinder. Over the years I have been told that the lens made for the Polaroid version needs an adaptor or need to be modified, others have said that the mount is identical. Mamiya made 6X7 and 6X9 backs and a mulitback that could be used in 6X9 6X6 and 6X4.5. The Press and 23 could be fitted with a ground glass back for close up work.

The press is a pro level camera, rugged build, not much to go wrong, the rangefinder is easy to calibrate.

The only con is that you will need to cock the shutter.

The other press camera you might want to look into is the Konica Rapid. It used a sort of plunger to advance the film and cock the shutter. Only came is 6X7 version, three lens kit, a 55 wide, 90 normal, and 180 tele. I used on in the Air Force, very good system. I bought the Mamiya as it has a larger lens system, but as it turned out I could never afford the 250 and don't really need the 50mm wide. l

 

[flavio81]

Thanks for the welcome! I've used the RB67 with a chimney, pop-up WLF and prism. Looking at my results, it seems whenever I miss focus it always seems to be by focusing too closely. Might a split-prism ground glass help with this?

I find the RB67 remarkably easy to focus. I have the normal screen and also a split-image screen and prefer the normal screen.

I'd suggest to take your RB to a technician for a focus-check, just to confirm that everything is right.

Regarding the Mamiya Press lenses, in general Mamiya-Sekor lenses are always good and i've taken a look at the lens designs of some of the Press lenses and they are classic designs (i.e. Tessar, topogon, etc). There's no reason they couldn't perform well.

EDIT: Take a look at this thread regarding lenses

http://photo.net/medium-format-photography-forum/00VZXt

 

[Bipin]

Bipin if the image appears to be sharp in the finder and is unsharp on the film it sound like your groundglass is not properly mounted or out of alignment check if you groundglass is proberly mounted. Another reason for this discrepancy could be the filmback check the back as well. No reason to buy anything unless you have tested both.

For a while that is what I had thought too, but the ground glass is pushed down firmly in place as it should be, the mirror is in the correct position and as far as I can tell the back's registration is correct. Although, I have not checked the pressure plate. Recently I got some negatives back where the focus was a bit wonky, suggesting film flatness issues. In a quick test, running some 120 and backing paper through it didn't demonstrate any noticeable problems with the film's flatness. Might there be a more precise way to test this?

EDIT: Thank you everyone for the responses, they've all been quite helpful! Earlier, I neglected to add that the focus issues occur with my NPC Polaroid back as well, which I suppose goes against the notion of the 120 back being the problem for me. This also brings me back to the issue of determining focus with poor eyesight. I should mention that I do use eyeglasses, but there comes a point when the image will still appear in focus even if I rack the lens backwards or forwards a little bit; the change in focus is imperceptible. Even while using eyeglasses (new ones, which have the correct prescription) I do use a diopter on my DSLR and mirrorless. The difference is slight but noticeable. So on that note, should I just buy a split prism screen and a diopter (if they are compatible with the old prism)?

 

[MattKing]

Does the chimney finder you tried on your RB have the variable diopter? The most recent, PD (IIRC) version does, and it has the advantage of using a silicon metering cell in the meter.

I find it really good to use for viewing. I just wish it would fold into a more compact form for carrying.

At least it is light!

 

[Bipin]

Does the chimney finder you tried on your RB have the variable diopter? The most recent, PD (IIRC) version does, and it has the advantage of using a silicon metering cell in the meter.

I find it really good to use for viewing. I just wish it would fold into a more compact form for carrying.

At least it is light!

I agree, the chimney is quite nice! I have the non-metered chimney (got it for $13, no complaints with that price). The lens on the chimney is attached to a helicoid, but I've never been able to figure out what it does. No magnification, a diopter perhaps, but the ground glass only gets blurrier from twisting the helicoid. Would you say the upgrade to the silicon cell version would be warranted? Based upon the suggestions here and those of others elsewhere, it seems the best thing to do for now is buy a split prism finder and see if that helps. Help or hinder, I'm only out 30-some dollars.

Two asides; does anyone know much about the sports finder? Information on it seems to be few and far between, although I've heard it has a small prism at the back which magnifies the center of the ground glass quite a bit? Also, looking at the focusing screen, the fresnel is on the inside, closest to the mirror, and the ground glass is above that. Is this the correct configuration?

EDIT: I just took a shot on FP100C to test test out the focus. Using a ruler as the subject, I mounted the RB67 on a tripod, used a double cable release for MLU, locked down both the tripod and the RB67's rack/pinion system and sure enough the focus was too close. From a 60cm distance, the focus was 4cm closer than what I saw in the viewfinder. Might the fresnel position in relation to the ground glass be the cause of this? I also noticed four set screws which the ground glass rests on. Currently they are slightly raised, should that be the case?

 

[gordrob]

Welcome to APUG

I have both the Mamiya Universal and the Super 23 bodies and they become my favorites mainly because of the the lenses. I primarily use the 50mm, the 100 f2.8 or the 250mm f.5, all of them give sharp negatives. The camera is rugged and with the 50mm there is great depth of field - the equivalent lens in 35mm would be around a 24mm. The 100mm f2.8 is fast and sharp and the 250mm is heavy but fun to use. I like the ability to be able to change film backs and usually have 4 or 5 backs in my bag. Like most press cameras you have to keep in mind the dark slide and cocking the shutter. There is no protection against double exposure either. But it is a great camera for hand held medium format work.

I am a big fan of the 6x9 negative especially with the 50mm. I have a a 6x7 back that has never been out the box. I just can't seem to get away from the bigger neg.

If you are able to focus with the split image in the finder than I don't think that you could go wrong with the Mamiya. Accessories and lenses aren't hard to come by and the prices seem to be dropping lately. I am currently on the hunt for a G style back to round out the kit.

Regards
Gord

 

[Bipin]

That Press/Super 23 sounds quite appealing. I've seen the 90mm f/3.5 listed for cheap; is it a poor performer? That would be a shame since it seems like a focal length I'd like.

Meanwhile, I've been playing with the set screws that hold the ground glass in place on the RB67. From 40cm away using my 75mm f/3.5 K/L, it seems one counter-clockwise rotation shits focus in the viewfinder 5mm closer to the camera.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG

 

[MattKing]

The helicoid on my RB chimney finder definitely adjusts the variable diopter. With my eye(s) the image goes from blurred, to clear, to blurred again as I rotate the helicoid through its travel.

If I set it to the least blurred position, the subject snaps clearly into focus as I adjust the camera.

 

[Bipin]

That's interesting, as the variable diopter in mine is only sharpest when the helicoid is turned downwards all the way; glasses or no glasses. I guess it comes down to my own prescription. Regardless, I figured out what the problem was with my focus. The set screws were too low. So much so that the ground glass even had a bit of a wobble to it. I have since raised the set screw up a few millimeters, leveled the ground glass, and taken a couple shots on FP-100C. Everything fits nice and snugly. Judging by the results on film, everything seems to work perfectly! That said, I think I still might go for that split prism finder. Does anyone have a personal preference over the horizontal, diagonal or vertical split screens?

 

[MattKing]

I assume you are referring to a split prism viewing screen

I like the diagonal ones, because there are very few scenes where all the details are diagonal.

With respect to the viewing system itself, I would suggest that having it serviced by someone with the specialized tools designed for that purpose would be worth it. You could have them look at the chimney finder as well, in case the diopter n it has been modified.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I agree with Matt about the diagonal split screen but I would also recommend a focusing collar around the diagonal split screen.

 

[Paul Howell]

That Press/Super 23 sounds quite appealing. I've seen the 90mm f/3.5 listed for cheap; is it a poor performer? That would be a shame since it seems like a focal length I'd like.

If in good repair all of the Mamiya presses are good performers, the lens are very good, the 90mm is Tessor style and although somewhat slow at 3.5 very sharp. I also have a Kowa Super 66 SLR and 2 Mamiya Universals, I don't find that one replaces the other, there are times that a SLR is the best camera, others time a press camera.

 

[Bipin]

That's good to hear, with regards to the 90mm Tessar. I myself own a Minolta Autocord (my first camera actually, generously donated to me by my uncle) and of course a RB67. Likewise, I also find two different medium format systems can complement each other quite well.

I assume you are referring to a split prism viewing screen

I like the diagonal ones, because there are very few scenes where all the details are diagonal.

With respect to the viewing system itself, I would suggest that having it serviced by someone with the specialized tools designed for that purpose would be worth it. You could have them look at the chimney finder as well, in case the diopter n it has been modified.

I do perform camera repairs on occasion, so I do have a few tools; fortunately the right ones for the job regarding the focusing screen. As for the chimney, that is something I am not sure about and should indeed send in to be examined. For all intents and purposes though, my prism, chimney, pop-up WLF and a loupe on the bare ground glass display each focus properly, coinciding with the results on FP-100C. I'll give it a go with a roll of 120 and see what happens.