Mamiya RZ IS NOT A PROFESSIONAL camera

[fschifano]

Expected responses. Professional camera must be ROBUST. What robust mens: not sensitive on outside errors. It is now known in industry as Six Sigma...

Before industry came up with "Six Sigma," we in the IT business used to call it writing idiot proof code. Well guess what; there is no such thing.

 

[keithwms]

The use of a darkslide on the RBs and RZs is a major strength and it is one of many features that makes them pro grade. You can interchange the backs very quickly. Many professionals proof with polaroid and then go to film, and nowadays may even go to digital. Why not get some practice before a big shoot?

Anyway, in any one session I use 2 or 3 backs on my RB and I go through them very quickly. The design is wonderful. The RZ is too automated and electronics-reliant for my own taste, but I like it as well.

If there was a spurious darkslide error then that is a shame, but it would be a very, very uncommon flaw, and certainly no reason to grudge one of the most respected tools in the industry. Look, you can drive a Lamborghini and get a flat tire. Shit happens. Any camera can have a flaw or quirk. Before working with a hassie I had the wisdom to ask another owner what the pitfalls are, and thus I avoided the common jamming issue. Every system has some issue now and then.

If you hate the RZ, then sell it, and let a more meticulous user get decades of enjoyment from it.

 

[Daniel-OB]

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,...

 

[rpsawin]

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,...

LOLOLOLOLOLOL....you can't be serious. If I understand your logic if you spend enough money, pay a big enough price you can rest assured.

Best luck to you.

Bob

 

[JBrunner]

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,...

As soon as you find the camera that never breaks, let me know. There's a bridge over here that I'll trade you for one

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I'd be interested in the camera that never breaks too! I would say that every single camera that I've owned have broken down at one point or another. That includes Pentax 35mm equipment, Mamiya 645, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, and various rangefinder and 4x5 equipment. They all got repaired.

I still think the distinction is that the word professional lies with the photographer, not the camera. I may not tell you what you want to hear, but just bring a back-up camera or back. I don't ever believe that my camera equipment will NOT break, so I try to come prepared for when it does. Like Jason said, when you find the camera that never breaks, to match your description of a professional camera, let us know - and I will be all over it.

Thank you for an interesting thread,

- Thomas

 

[Eric Rose]

What's the old adage, measure twice and cut once.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

I sympathize with Daniel but agree with other posters - everything breaks sometime or another. As regards "professional cameras", the choice right now in MF SLRS is Hasselblad or Mamiya, so be grateful for small mercies!

For what it's worth, here are 2 more dumb things about Mamiya interlocks (experienced with my RB67):
1) With a C lens, if you leave this set to mirror lockup, the camera makes normal noises when fired but does not expose the film.
2) I found when carrying my RB67 on a neckstrap that the magazine could get pushed round so that it was JUST not in a detent position (for horizontal or vertical pictures), causing the camera to refuse to fire. Even if the interlocks are working correctly, they can still make you mad on occasion!

Regards,

David

 

[CLAPhoto]

Sorry Daniel, you screwed up plain and simple. Yes the cam is designed to not fire with the DS in but hey shit happens and you didn't do what a professional would.. check everything. Don't blame the equipment for your failure.

 

[nick mulder]

Why were you even shooting with it ? Shouldn't you have sorted out all the interlock and/or other design faults before going on a shoot and not even checking if the slide was in before taking your first exposure ? Was your excuse to the client "I'd rather have had a Leica..." ?

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

No matter how much one spends on anything, sh*t happens. That is why there are warranties. Also, any professional should carry back-up gear, because you never know when something might go wrong.


If anyone designed a camera that was idiot proof, then it would only be good for idiots. Oh wait . . . there are those one-time-use disposable cameras . . . not much to go wrong there.


I would suggest getting the RZ67 repaired. That way, the same problem is less likely to occur again. Also, always, always, always test gear on a non-paid shoot prior to use it on a paid shoot . . . you'll be glad to have this habit.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Dead Link Removed

 

[MattKing]

I would agree with both sides of this discussion.

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.

Some non-professional cameras are erratic in their performance, and regular maintenance, inspections and tests are unreliable. To the best of my knowledge, the Mamiya RB/RZ cameras do not normally fall into this category.

I use Mamiya 645 equipment that is used, but reasonably new to me. I have three bodies and several film magazines and inserts (in both 120 and 220). Some times, the dark slide interlock doesn't work. In all other ways they work fine. I could have all three bodies and all the magazines and interlocks checked and where required either serviced or marked as defective, but I have decided instead to just practice making the dark slide removal technique and dark slide check automatic. The odd time I forget, but usually the interlock saves me.

Sorry about the frustration Daniel.

Matt

 

[Bill Mitchell]

What a jerk!

 

[MattKing]

What a jerk!

Bill:

Not me, I hope.

Matt

 

[Ole]

My three ETRS backs all have an interlock, but it has been known to fail.

But as far as I know the only cameras that won't let you do stupid mistakes are the auto-everything "amateur" cameras!

 

[amorteguy]

uh... just say oops and move on

I've got a Leica, an RZ, and an EOS-1D. All pro cameras (in the opinions of many). I've forgotten the dark slide when using the Polaroid back on the RZ, but it won't fire with the dark slide in with the 120 backs. I've not made any major blunders with the Leica yet, and it has never let me down.

The EOS has let me down a number of times. Not at all because it is an amateur camera, but because it is a highly complex piece of electronics and it has been put through pro-level abuse. When it fails I get it fixed. Canon is fast and repair prices are more than fair. It is still a great camera.

All are great cameras meant for different purposes. I vote with those who say take your lumps, everyone makes mistakes and every device made by man will fail at some point. Pros make the shoot happen redardless. A pro camera won't make the shooter a pro, but a pro shooter will make any camera work like a pro.

 

[Vaughn]

Making something "Fool proof" only encourages nature to come up with a better fool...

Vaughn

 

[Ian Leake]

Daniel – Everyone screws up in front of clients now and then (not just photographers). When one of my team does this (or I do it for that matter) my advice is always the same: first fix the problem so the client is happy, and then learn from it. And learning means asking yourself what went wrong, what you could do in the future to prevent the mistake, and then making sure that you do those things.

It’s an entirely natural response to want to blame someone or something else. But unless you acknowledge your responsibility for your mistakes you can’t learn, so you won’t get better, and hence you condemn yourself to continue making the same mistakes in the future.

 

[Dave Miller]

I suggest that by definition a professional camera is a camera a professional uses. So go pack a Holga.

 

[Steve Smith]

I have taken pictures of the dark slide in my RB. If the slide is pulled out about 1/4" to 3/8" that is enough to disconnect the interlock so the shutter will fire. My mistake, not the camera's

It is the photographer who is professional or amateur, not the camera.


Steve.

 

[MenacingTourist]

I think it's the amateur who blames the tools. Suck it up dude, nobody likes a whiner.

 

[MP_Wayne]

I have 2 RB67s and an RZ67ii and have used them fairly extensively in the great outdoors. If any measure of being "professional" equipment is durability and reliability, I can only sing the praises of the RB67s. They are TANKS in more than just weight and heft, but they just keep going and going and going.

I have not had the RZ67ii as long but I have had it extensively in the field too. Any so-called "failures" have not been the fault of the camera at all, but rather the have been the fault of ME, the operator! A quick check of the manual discovered that the various interlocks and safeguards were working to prevent me from making mistakes. It was MY LACK of training that was the problem - something I continue to work to remedy.

For both the RB67 and the RZ67ii, if you take care of them (i.e. adjustment, maintenance, cleaning), they will return more than care for you.

As for the Sigma Six design hoo-haw, let's put this in perspective. These cameras were designed some time ago before Sigma Six was the buzz word du jour or the silver bullet of the month. They were well thought through then, and thousands of "pros" used them extensively - even if they were not Sigma Six approved! So, according to the logic previously stated, all of these "pros" got it wrong, or Mamiya got it wrong? I think not.

My opinion - if a user wants the camera to think for him - buy a digital point and shoot and fill your boots! Heck, one can even get Photoshop Elements to do that thinking too.

However, if a user wants to be a pro and continue to learn and use highly capable tools like an RB67/RZ67/Hassie/Large Format camera to express his/her art, then "quit yer snivlin' and get out there to excite some silver".

Enuff said!

 

[frugal]

Personally, I think that it's as much the practices of the "pro" that makes them a "pro" as much as the gear, quite possibly more so.

I think a lot comes down to working deliberately. Establish a set of steps you take to setup and take the shot, always perform them, always do them in the same order, if you're interrupted start over at the beginning.

Now yes, gear will break or fail and that's unfortunate. I'm not a pro but whenever I pack my gear for any serious shooting I'm in the habit of doing a "gear check" before hand. I'll check my bodies at all shutter speeds to see if they "sound" right (not perfect but a rough guide), I'll put the camera on B and check for any obstructions in the shutter. I check all my lenses to make sure the aperture is snappy (I use mechanical cameras so I can easily stop down the lenses to test this). Twice now I've found that there was oil deposits on the aperture blades and they just weren't as snappy. So what did I do? I shipped the lens off for repairs and packed something else. That simple check has saved my ass at least twice now, and as I said, I'm not a pro. If I were a pro and knew I had an important shoot coming up I'd do all of this further in advance, I'd repeat it on the day of the shoot, and I'd deal with any of the problems as found and go with equipment that I knew was functioning properly. It won't eliminate all problems but it'll catch a lot and at least make sure that the gear was working properly up to that point. It won't eliminate all failures in the field but gets you a lot closer.

And guess what, if you didn't check your equipment before going to a major shoot and didn't catch this problem with the interlock because of that then it's no one's fault but your own and the only thing not "pro" was your preparations for the shoot.

The other thing I'd ask is how old is this camera? If it's new then I'd say you shouldn't have relied on it without testing it out before hand and fully familiarizing yourself with it (and caught a manufacturing defect, which does happen). If it's old then again, shame on you for not testing it and catching that it needed maintenance.

 

[jstraw]

Wow.

 

[ben-s]

Daniel; Just out of interest, may I enquire whether any camera system or manufacturer meets your evidently high standards?
A couple of weeks ago I seem to recall it was Leica getting a good old bashing - something to do with inadequate lenses.

It sounds like your RZ had a minor fault on the interlock. Why not be glad you found the fault right there on the shoot, and were able to rescue the situation? - at least you now know of the fault, and you can either live with it or have it fixed.
If you can get into the habit of removing the DS immediately after you install a back, it will soon become an automatic part of that action.

All systems will occasionally go wrong. I had a 2 month old Sigma lens go wacky on a shoot a while ago. Yes, I lost part of the shoot, which was a pain, but I got over it. The lens was repaired under warranty, and has been perfectly behaved since. I think you would find the same with your RZ.
Unless you have other reasons to dislike the RZ, I really think you should give it another chance.

Whatever you decide, good luck.