My attempt at shooting 135 in RB67 so far

OP
OP
Joined
Jul 10, 2025
Messages
30
Location
Australia
Format
Multi Format

I've just used two teeny tiny drops of superglue spread with a toothpick and it seems to have made a very solid connection. It's held very strongly in place and spins nice and smoothly. Still need to run a roll through but things are looking good. I wonder why Mamiya had them as separate parts where previous models didn't do that? Anyway I've put in new light seals too so the whole thing should be set for a "real" run soon! The weather in Sydney's been a bit dreary lately—great for taking photos with a camera that I can keep out of the rain under an umbrella, not so much for the RB67 which is too heavy for me to carry for more than a few minutes
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,350
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
I wonder why Mamiya had them as separate parts where previous models didn't do that?

I don't know for certain, but I think the idea was to avoid issues that might arise if wear or aging caused a difference in diameter between the rubber coated wheel that drives the frame counter and the hard plastic on the other end. With 35 mm film that won't be a significant issue, and most of us will never use these enough with 220 film (in this day, when there's only one brand and many report QC issues with it) for that sort of wear to become an issue (in case you want to run GP3 220 through that back at some point).
 
OP
OP
Joined
Jul 10, 2025
Messages
30
Location
Australia
Format
Multi Format
I've just gotten the negatives back from the lab and finished scanning them. Don't have a way to scan the rebate area to get the full use of the image area, but here are a few of the shots I took scanned with normal Epson 135 holders. I also shot some portraits and portrait-adjacent photos (which I won't upload here) and I must say I really like the things you can do with the panoramic frame.
 

Attachments

  • 20250806_03_ex_rs.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 70
  • 20250806_04_ex_rs.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 59
  • 20250806_05_ex_rs.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 53
  • 20250806_06_ex_rs.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 53
  • 20250806_07_ex_rs.jpg
    1.8 MB · Views: 66

djdister

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
130
Location
Maryland USA
Format
Multi Format

I think they look great without the sprocket holes!
 

Donald Qualls

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
12,350
Location
North Carolina
Format
Multi Format
And this is why we do this. Good stuff!
 
OP
OP
Joined
Jul 10, 2025
Messages
30
Location
Australia
Format
Multi Format
Thanks everyone! I'm absolutely tickled that this worked out as well as it did—no light leaks at all, and with the frame counter now fixed I should be able to get a full 20 exposures from a roll. I looove panoramas... this technique is gonna pay dividends. Planning on running some Aerocolor next time and cross processing in E6. Should be good!
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,480
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

Good stuff. Go wild!
 
OP
OP
Joined
Jul 10, 2025
Messages
30
Location
Australia
Format
Multi Format
I just had a thought -- has anyone tried bulk loading and shooting 16 mm a medium format camera? I think you could get some crazy crazy wide panoramas at the cost of resolution
 

loccdor

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 12, 2024
Messages
1,743
Location
USA
Format
Multi Format
No, but I have a pseudo large format camera that does 6x14 on 120... which is already crazy wide at 2.something to 1. If I loaded that with 135, that would almost be 6 to 1. Practically, it would be really hard to find subjects for that.
 

blee1996

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
1,282
Location
SF Bay Area, California
Format
Multi Format
I find when you go beyond CinemaScope aspect ratio of 2.35:1 to 2.66:1, the suitable subject matter decreases exponentially. i already have trouble with 6x17, so currently i go no wider than 6x12.
 

xya

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
1,042
Location
Calais, Köln
Format
Multi Format
I find when you go beyond CinemaScope aspect ratio of 2.35:1 to 2.66:1, the suitable subject matter decreases exponentially. i already have trouble with 6x17, so currently i go no wider than 6x12.
+1. I agree completely.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…