Mamiya RZ IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL camera

Peter De Smidt · Aug 27, 2007

I suggest that we don't give in to this trolling.

MP_Wayne · Aug 27, 2007

Further to frugal's great comments...some additional thoughts...

In addition to checking equipment when packing (great idea), both the RB67 and RZ67 easily permit you to remove the back and dry fire the camera whilst looking through the hole left by the missing film back. Not only do you get to check that the mirror moved out of the way properly, but you can check both the aperature and the shutter speed.

Both the RB67 and RZ67 have Polaroid backs available, used, on eBay for a very very cheap price...

I never go an important photography holiday without running a test roll through the equipment. It costs under $10 to get a 12 shot roll of color neg film developed and printed in a couple of hours... pretty cheap insurance...

Finally, nothing covers a photog's rear-end better than having more than one body or camera at a shoot.

"if one does not learn from one's mistakes, one is doomed to repeat them"

BradS · Aug 27, 2007

Don't feed the trolls.

naturephoto1 · Aug 27, 2007

Daniel,

Sorry to hear about your problems with your RZ. I have news for you, Pro Quality Cameras including Mamiya, Hasselblad, Rollei, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Sinar, Linhof, Arca Swiss, Toyo... all can and do fail. Even some that are brand new that supposedly passed QC have been know to fail right out of the box. Get the camera/back fixed and move on. Nothing is perfect or infalable including people.

Rich

max_ebb · Aug 27, 2007

David H. Bebbington said:
As regards "professional cameras", the choice right now in MF SLRS is Hasselblad or Mamiya, so be grateful for small mercies!

So you don't feel that Rollei SLR, Bronica GS1, or Pentax 67/67II are professional level cameras?

Peter De Smidt · Aug 27, 2007

Look, the guy who started this thread thinks that some of the most widely used professional cameras aren't professional cameras. There's no point arguing about such a statement. He'll not admit he's wrong, no one will convince him he is wrong, and he won't convince anyone else. The more we feed the trolls, the more trolling, time wasting posts they'll make.

donbga · Aug 27, 2007

Daniel-OB said:
fschifano
I think Six Sigma Design exists but it is so rare to notice. There are a lot examples of good design that will eliminate production and use errors from functionality. One example in photography, that just touches it but not fully implemented, is design of VR lenses. In industry there are a lot of examples, e.g. recent Toyota development and their suppliers (which is totally opposite direction of American car industry which relly on low paid people and software).

I think also that medium format cameras are not so large market and not enough money to pay for top engineers and long time research. Idea of mamiya ZF is good and comply with Six Sigma, but the it fails so it is just not done well as an idea. Is it good? No. In the best case, as I undestand you guys, ZF is least bad camera, not the best MF camera.

I REPEAT AGAIN: ZF is made not to fire if the slide is in. It fails. I have another back and with that one all is fine. So it works, it does not... It cannot works with a pro camera OR zf is bad pro camera. If I am amateur I will repear it. BUT CUSTOMERS ARE BEHIND, no sorry, period. A pro camera must be made to repear after not during the sesion. AGAIN, WE PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR THEM. Might I am the only guy for who that money is a lot.

you can drive a Lamborghini and get a flat tire... Yes it happens but with some cars it will kill you but with Lamb, I beleive you will land safely.

It is the way for many companies. They lost one customer another will come,...

Sounds like to me you should go digital. You can see your shots as you go along thus eliminating nasty little surprises like you had.

tim_walls · Aug 27, 2007

MattKing said:
A professional camera should be predictable. If the photographer ensures that the cameras are regularly checked and serviced, and does a series of basic inspections and function tests before a shoot, than short of the camera being dropped or otherwise damaged, it should either function correctly through both the tests and the shoot, or reveal problems through the tests. The professional photographer should, of course, be capable and willing and diligent about performing the inspections and tests.

I believe that is how pilots of small planes approach the problem.

Nail on the head, in my opinion. I used to fly gliders, a long time ago... On the one hand, you want the thing that's going to keep you in the air to be in full working order (obviously.) On the other, it's your responsibility to check before you go up that it is.

Before every launch you go through a series of checks. Doesn't matter if it's the 6th time you've launched in that plane all day, you still do the checks. If you get up there and have problems, and you didn't bother with preflight checks - well, you can scream at the equipment all the way until you hit the ground, but at the end of the day it's your own responsibility.

It seems to me that having that kind of professional attitude is what makes a professional, not the camera that they own.

(Oh, it's over 10 years since I flew in a glider; but I can still remember the preflight checks off by heart: Controls, Ballast, Straps, Instruments, Flaps, Trim, Canopy, Brakes.)

Eric Rose · Aug 27, 2007

reference this : (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

This is getting very tiresome.

paul ron · Aug 27, 2007

Sounds like user error, not mechanical at all. Not familiar with your equipment yet?

You are absolutely correct saying the RZ is not a pro camera. It's a plastic, electronic, last ditch effort by a company going under to stay in the market in the hope someone will buy that junker. I'd give you $50 for that piece of crap!

Seriously, the RB is the workhorse of the Mamiyas and are built like Russian tanks.

The problem with Pro equipment is that when you use it alot, it needs service. If you don't use it, it still needs service. Only a pro can afford to keep his equipment serviced and in top condition because he earns a living form his tools unlike amatures that expect a 35 year old camera to operate as if it were still new. It could, just have it serviced!

Now back to your RZ... where did you buy it? Did you get it new? Is it a Flea-Bay treasure?

roteague · Aug 27, 2007

Daniel-OB said:
I had an important even to shoot, many people in a group. Distributing people, selecting background, thinking about exposure time for waterfall in background, use 50 mm ULD lens, scanning everybodys face like a snake through a viewfinder, make everybody in good mood and to smile,... puf.

Of course it is a professional camera. Your mistake was not trying the camera before using it for something critical. There is no mechanical piece of equipment that doesn't fail at sometime or other. You should have been prepared for it.

benjiboy · Aug 28, 2007

Eric Rose said:
What's the old adage, measure twice and cut once.

Another old adage Eric is " A poor workman always blames his tools"

philm · Aug 28, 2007

I think the point here has been missed. The photographer is the professional, and can utilize most equipment presented to them. Certain cameras lend themselves to a knowledgable photographer. In this generation of instant gratification, digital cameras have replaced the need to think. Professional photography is not just a point and shoot. Professional photography does require you to think about your euqipment as much as your shot. Some cameras lend themselves to studio shooting and some for field shooting. I happen to own two RZ Pro II cameras and love them!!!!

roteague · Aug 28, 2007

philm said:
I think the point here has been missed. The photographer is the professional, and can utilize most equipment presented to them. Certain cameras lend themselves to a knowledgable photographer.

I understand your point, however, and I might have agreed with you had this been a new camera. You don't buy any used camera and immediately take it for a professional shoot. The OP gambled that he could do the work without a trial shot first, then lost. His only complaint shouldn't be directed towards the camera; it is his own fault for not checking his equipment first.

Daniel-OB · Aug 28, 2007

Even RZ was checked and all were fine
Even I had a spare body
Even it worked with no sign of anythink is going wrong, as long as I asked myself "where is my slide". Well it was not nice a moment.

I thanks to everybody for the time and nice advices. Now I am sure I should to do something else prior to shooting, and I blame myself. Will think what to say to customers. Fortunately two shoots are not blank.

Thanks again

k_jupiter · Aug 28, 2007

I read the first page yesterday, I read the last page today.
I didn't jump in, I am not a professional photographer. Seems I have company.

I have a rb67 ProS that doesn't interlock the slide, I have a rb67 Professional that does! Do I understand? Nope. I don't care. I know my equipment and figured out early what is what with it.

What I am is a robotics engineer. Would I go into a Fab with a dead Digital Volt Meter? Or even one that is out of calibration? Would I try and monitor a serial line without checking the hardware and making sure I have the correct cables for what I am doing? Would I blame a Textronic scope for not getting the correct data?

Of course, not. I pride myself in what I do.

I feel for you Daniel. You need to face up to a customer and tell them you screwed up big time, not the camera, you. You forgot to pull a darkslide (many times obviously) and the camera didn't tell you. Know your equipment, but use it as a last resource to confirm you have worked to your own idiotproof work flow. That would include checking every time, every shot that the darkslide is in your pocket.

tim in san jose

Paul Howell · Aug 28, 2007

[I thanks to everybody for the time and nice advices. Now I am sure I should to do something else prior to shooting, and I blame myself. Will think what to say to customers. Fortunately two shoots are not blank.

Thanks again[/QUOTE]

You might want rent before you buy.

Kim Catton · Aug 28, 2007

Been following this thread... not gonna comment on it too much either. BUT ... the darkslide part. What does one use the darkslide for? is it used when changing backs or/and in between frames? I might be asking stupid questions here, but im new to "medium" and the cameras ive been using has been without slides and interchangeble backs.

Jerry Basierbe · Aug 28, 2007

Kim,
Since the backs are interchangable and you switch backs in the middle of a roll of film, you have to be able cover the film when taking the back off. You re-insert the darkslide to cover the film.Just like using film holders on large format.

Jerry

JBrunner · Aug 28, 2007

Kim Catton said:
Been following this thread... not gonna comment on it too much either. BUT ... the darkslide part. What does one use the darkslide for? is it used when changing backs or/and in between frames? I might be asking stupid questions here, but im new to "medium" and the cameras ive been using has been without slides and interchangeble backs.

Yes, the darkslide lets you change backs in the middle of a roll, and also protects the film/film path/pressure plate whenever the back is off the camera.

Nick Zentena · Aug 28, 2007

It also lets you preload a bunch of backs so if you need it you can switch quickly.

Toffle · Aug 28, 2007

JBrunner said:
Yes, the darkslide lets you change backs in the middle of a roll, and also protects the film/film path/pressure plate whenever the back is off the camera.

As in today... taking some shots in a nature preserve. I go to change backs and realize that I've left my slide in the car. Only a hundred yards or so... just enough of a walk to kick myself several times over.
(But I'm not a professional )

Cheers,

Jerry Basierbe · Aug 28, 2007

Toffle said:
As in today... taking some shots in a nature preserve. I go to change backs and realize that I've left my slide in the car. Only a hundred yards or so... just enough of a walk to kick myself several times over.
(But I'm not a professional )

Cheers,

I've also found it in my back pocket after changing lenses.

Jerry

k_jupiter · Aug 28, 2007

jbasierb said:
I've also found it in my back pocket after changing lenses.

Jerry

I HATE when that happens. *L*

The mirror should cover your butt on a rb67, but it's not fool proof. Especially if you haven't checked all your cloth seals lately.

tim in san jose

max_ebb · Aug 28, 2007

jbasierb said:
I've also found it in my back pocket after changing lenses.

Jerry

I don't see what difference that makes. Why would you need the dark slide in for changing lenses? Pentax 67's don't even have dark slides, but it doesn't keep you from changing lenses with film in the camera.

Mamiya RZ IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL camera

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency