Mamiya RB67 PRO SD Shopping Hints?

[OrientPoint]

I wouldn't consider the 180mm a heavy lens. The 500mm is heavy. The 360mm is pretty heavy. The 75mm shift lens is heavy (but it doesn't needs the adapter because it requires the full opening of the Pro-SD). I have a 180mm C lens and haven't had a problem using it adapter-less. Disclaimer: I don't use it that often.

 

[JWMster]

OrientPoint: Thanks! Are you a 50 and 90mm shooter?

 

[OrientPoint]

50mm, 90mm and 127mm. I also have a 180mm and got a 210mm K/L last year. It's a later lens and is really nice.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I wouldn't consider the 180mm a heavy lens. The 500mm is heavy. The 360mm is pretty heavy. The 75mm shift lens is heavy (but it doesn't needs the adapter because it requires the full opening of the Pro-SD). I have a 180mm C lens and haven't had a problem using it adapter-less. Disclaimer: I don't use it that often.

I have both 180 and 360 on a RB67 Pro. No problem.

 

[Hassasin]

To be fair, those are probably not that easy to find.

Both are in fact easy to find, one just needs to look them up.

As for KEH, the days of KEH being a reliable point of purchase are rather long gone. It's in last few years more of a hit and miss, compared to mostly worthy hit in majority of cases some time back. Times have changed, also at KEH.

 

[Hassasin]

... Do you think a 180mm is too heavy to mount without the adapter?

I would not call 180 lens heavy. But all you need is one SD adapter ring to deal with all K/L lenses, easy to move from one to another.

 

[JWMster]

Hassasin: Bingo. That's what I've been thinking. Thanks for the confirmation. And yes, I miss the good old KEH days before they sharpened their elbows to finagle a sharper deal. Result? I almost never buy from the anymore.

 

[Don_ih]

Both are in fact easy to find, one just needs to look them up.

I meant for a retailer to include them (body caps) when selling a body. You can find almost any old thing on ebay....

 

[Hassasin]

I meant for a retailer to include them (body caps) when selling a body. You can find almost any old thing on ebay....

But retailer ought to be open about what is included. No caps is fairly common affair in used gear market. Yes it would be nice to have all openings properly covered for shipping and storage, but cap market is like no checkin bags in ticket price, a great way to add-on revenues.

 

[JWMster]

So fairly, have you folks found a difference between the K/L lenses and the C lenses in 1) fit on the PRO SD body, or in 2) image quality?
The difference in price between C lenses and K/L for lenses without observable/noted defects isn't big for the most part, but it is something. My reading around hasn't been conclusive. There is mention that the C lenses are older and manufactured at lower quality control, but there are advocates that also suggest the C lenses are very good.

 

[MattKing]

The C lenses are very good.
In a couple of cases the K/L lenses reflect some improvements in coatings, and of course they may be substantially newer.

 

[JWMster]

The C lenses are very good.
In a couple of cases the K/L lenses reflect some improvements in coatings, and of course they may be substantially newer.

Matt: Thanks!

 

[MCB18]

Seems like you have got everything figured out, but I’ll still chime in with some hints for going forward:

• Get Pro SD backs. And get 220 versions. Great backs, and they almost never have issues. And the 220 backs are much cheaper than 120, but works just fine (despite what some will have you believe).
• Although the newer lenses are certainly better for some reasons, they are also much more expensive for not much gain, and also much harder to repair. IMO stick with C lenses, or even pre-c lenses that look like they have good glass (this is what I’ve done. Pictures still look amazing).
• If you are gonna shoot handheld, get a prism! Yes, they are stupidly heavy. Yes they look ridiculous. But they make shooting so much easier.
• Finally, GET A GOOD STRAP!! Everyone I know who has a good, thick, padded strap has said shooting on the move is great. Everyone I know who has the OEM Mamiya strap, or some trendy skinny strap, says it is a “terrible camera”. Do yourself a favor, GET A GOOD STRAP! My recommendation is the OpTech Super/Pro strap with B connectors. It’s an awesome strap, and ridiculously comfortable (Carrying the RB with that strap feels better than carrying my Nikon F with its strap).

Hope that helps!

 

[MattKing]

And the 220 backs are much cheaper than 120, but works just fine (despite what some will have you believe).

They give really consistent results on frames 11 through 20 when using 120 film
For me, that is the major reason to be leery.

 

[MCB18]

They give really consistent results on frames 11 through 20 when using 120 film
For me, that is the major reason to be leery.

I want to open mine up and put a red dot on the 10 mark as a reminder, but I’m too scared to try. And I also don’t use 120 enough that it would be worth it, lol.

 

[MattKing]

A piece of painter's tape with "10!!!" written on it helps

 

[JWMster]

MCB18: Ever use a left hand grip? Folks seem to sell a lot as RB67 grips but I'm not sure they're compatible... or whether that idea has more legs (my 2 legs) than just using the rather heavy duty monopod I already have.

 

[Arthurwg]

Try to find a GL701 grip. It's the proper one made for the Pro SD.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

They give really consistent results on frames 11 through 20 when using 120 film
For me, that is the major reason to be leery.

I own a few 220 ProSD backs but only use them for 220 film or 35mm panoramas.

I use my 120 backs for 120, as God intended.

That said, at the beginning of COVID 19 lockdowns I did some somewhat scientific testing in the back yard between 120 and 220 backs and there was no noticeable difference in sharpness between either when using 35mm film with no backing. At least not when stopped down a bit. There may be a difference in close-up images shot wide open, but most people don't shoot that way. So using the "wrong" back is probably fine for most.

Jeremy

 

[MattKing]

I own a few 220 ProSD backs but only use them for 220 film or 35mm panoramas.

I use my 120 backs for 120, as God intended.

That said, at the beginning of COVID 19 lockdowns I did some somewhat scientific testing in the back yard between 120 and 220 backs and there was no noticeable difference in sharpness between either when using 35mm film with no backing. At least not when stopped down a bit. There may be a difference in close-up images shot wide open, but most people don't shoot that way. So using the "wrong" back is probably fine for most.

Jeremy

FWIW, it probably isn't an issue with 35mm and sharpness, because the film rails are on the camera, not in the back.
It is wear of the back where there is concern.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

FWIW, it probably isn't an issue with 35mm and sharpness, because the film rails are on the camera, not in the back.
It is wear of the back where there is concern.

Hmm.

Last I checked, the film was held flat by the pressure plate against the film gate, which are both located in the backs. There are no film rails in an RB67 body that I know of.

Jeremy

 

[MattKing]

Hmm.

Last I checked, the film was held flat by the pressure plate against the film gate, which are both located in the backs. There are no film rails in an RB67 body that I know of.

Jeremy

Oops, I 'm one level removed from what I meant to say.
The rails are in the shell, which technically is the back. And the 120 and 220 shells/backs are identical.
The pressure plates differ between the 120 insert and the 220 insert. And it is the 220 inserts that will have increased wear if you use a lot of 35mm film or 120 film.
And yes, I know that almost no-one thinks of the inserts and the shells/backs being separate, but they actually are.
Everybody just refers to the combination as a "back", but they are actually intended to be swappable - as long as you stay within the same generation: Pro, Pro-S, or Pro-SD.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

And it is the 220 inserts that will have increased wear if you use a lot of 35mm film or 120 film.

Not trying to argue further here, but 35mm film and 220 film are similar thicknesses due to not having backing paper. It's the thicker combo of the backing paper and film in 120 that are detrimental to the 220 backs as it creates more drag and thus wear.

So I don't think the "35mm" belongs in your statement above.

Jeremy

 

[MattKing]

Not trying to argue further here, but 35mm film and 220 film are similar thicknesses due to not having backing paper. It's the thicker combo of the backing paper and film in 120 that are detrimental to the 220 backs as it creates more drag and thus wear.

So I don't think the "35mm" belongs in your statement above.

Jeremy

It is true that the backing paper is thicker than the difference between the thickness of 35mm film and 220 film, so any problem would be much more likely with 120 than with 35mm.
But 35mm was historically thicker than 220 - e.g. 220 Plus-X was on 3.6 mil acetate while 35mm Plus-X was on 5 mil acetate.
I'm not sure whether the sprocket holes in 35mm would create more of a risk for wear.

 

[Jeremy Mudd]

But 35mm was historically thicker than 220 - e.g. 220 Plus-X was on 3.6 mil acetate while 35mm Plus-X was on 5 mil acetate.
I'm not sure whether the sprocket holes in 35mm would create more of a risk for wear.

Fair enough!

Jeremy