Praising the RB67 Pro S -- Hail the Emperor of Medium Format

[MattKing]

You could search for the incredibly rare 6x6 back for the RB67.

Can you develop a habit where you hold the camera in a way that you can tell by feel how the back is oriented?

With my Pro-S, I tend to wait until I am just about ready to release the shutter before I wind the film. That gives me the necessary reminder.

But with my older Pro, that would cause double exposure problems.

 

[Wayne]

Hold the camera? Who do you think I am, Hercules?

I think I just have to suffer through more explosures till I can scrape up the scratch for a Pro-S or SD. Unfortunately that will have to wait until I have a job again.

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, I won't. I need a visual reminder when I'm looking through the finder. 30 years of looking through finders that tells me the film orientation is not overcome merely by willing myself to remember. Every 110, 35mm, Brownie 120, rangefinder and field 4x5 and 8x10 camera I've ever owned tells me the orientation when I look through the finder/GG. Very strange that they somehow overlooked that detail on the RB.

The Hasselblad SWCs are not sirs and therefore it is important to remember to take off the lens cap before taking the photograph. What I have done is put yellow gaffers tape on the top of the lens hood and on the lens cap. When I look through the viewfinder I can see the yellow tape and that reminds me to take of the lens cap. One of the big PITA with the Mamiya C330 is that all the lenses are recocked when the film is wound except the 250mm lens. When I used the 250mm lens I missed taking the photograph because I had not manually recocked the lens. So RBs are not alone in the world of quirkiness.

 

[DREW WILEY]

The Emperor of MF cameras, or the sumo wrestler?

 

[markbarendt]

You could search for the incredibly rare 6x6 back for the RB67.

I keep looking.

One thing that I find easy, fun, with the RB is framing my shots inside the 6x6 square the lines on the ground glass form.

Another is putting the back in the general position that I want and leaving it their. So if people are the general subject of the moment I may put it in portrait and leave it regardless. If I'm at the beach with a wide horizon I want to show off, landscape even for portraits.

 

[paul ron]

No, I won't. I need a visual reminder when I'm looking through the finder. 30 years of looking through finders that tells me the film orientation is not overcome merely by willing myself to remember. Every 110, 35mm, Brownie 120, rangefinder and field 4x5 and 8x10 camera I've ever owned tells me the orientation when I look through the finder/GG. Very strange that they somehow overlooked that detail on the RB.

ooooohhhh you want an auto viewfinder mask as a reminder. the red bars arent enough?


well then, RBs arent for you. get a Brownie.

for 6x6 on an RB... i wonder if a graphic 22 would fit?

btw... im currently working on an RB pinhole camera using the front body cap to mount my pinhole lens.

woooo haaaaaa!

love this thing!

 

[Wayne]

ooooohhhh you want an auto viewfinder mask as a reminder. the red bars arent enough?


well then, RBs arent for you. get a Brownie.

btw... im currently working on an RB pinhole camera using the front body cap to mount my pinhole lens.

woooo haaaaaa!

love this thing!

there are no "red bars". And I have a Brownie

 

[paul ron]

no red bars?... on a pro-s? you have the wrong revolving back then.

the pro had no bars but the view screen had the lines drawn on.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

For a Pro S body, be sure to get a Pro S back (it is marked). Pro SD bodies also have Pro SD backs.

 

[Roger Cole]

If the red bars aren't enough I think you need an RZ.

Never having actually shot with either I'm trying to talk myself into the extra money for an RZ anyway.

 

[MattKing]

no red bars?... on a pro-s? you have the wrong revolving back then.

the pro had no bars but the view screen had the lines drawn on.

Wayne already corrected himself on that - he actually has a Pro, not a Pro-S.

 

[markbarendt]

no red bars?... on a pro-s? you have the wrong revolving back then.

the pro had no bars but the view screen had the lines drawn on.

It's a Pro not pro S

 

[Wayne]

no red bars?... on a pro-s? you have the wrong revolving back then.

the pro had no bars but the view screen had the lines drawn on.

The lines are part of the problem

 

[paul ron]

The lines are part of the problem

the simple solution is upgrade. sell your pro body, buy a pro-s. this stuff is practically dirt cheap these days.

but even without the bars... if you are winding your film horizontally, you use the top lines n vsa vrs.

no lines on your screen? draw them in yourself. want the dimensions?

 

[flavio81]

Why would you want to shoot 6x4.5 on an RB67? Maybe if that's your only medium format camera and you want to extend your film supply, maybe..

Because vertical 6x4.5 shots are a breeze with the RB67 compared to a typical 6x4.5 SLR.

 

[markbarendt]

Because vertical 6x4.5 shots are a breeze with the RB67 compared to a typical 6x4.5 SLR.

I agree.

 

[Roger Cole]

Ok so I've got a decent income tax refund coming, a friend who owed me some money paid up when they got their income tax refund, and a couple of other things are coming together.

I'm not going to buy this week or anything but the next question becomes - KEH or one of the many eBay sales, mostly from Japan or Korea? Better prices and better selection from the 'bay, but I can easily and fairly inexpensively return a problem camera or lens or accessory to KEH. (Of course forum Classifieds to but that's a "when and if" kind of thing, though I have plenty enough cameras that I can wait. But this seems to be the right time to get into the RB/RZ 67 system.)

 

[Theo Sulphate]

KEH gets my vote. They've checked it out and probably CLA'd it. You've got a warranty and can return it.

Also, they're local.

 

[Sirius Glass]

KEH gets my vote and my money.

 

[Roger Cole]

Well "sorta local." Thing is it's an hour drive from me over to them assuming I can avoid rush hour, which is hard enough, so two hour round trip, probably 80+ miles, two and a half gallons of gas in my car (granted that doesn't cost what it did.) So it's a minor advantage in shipping costs in practice, but also means I have to pay sales tax.

 

[Roger Cole]

Yep. I'm fond of my M645 Pro, though one of my backs seems to have developed an occasional light leak. At least I hope and assume it's one of the backs. I need to burn a roll of the cheapest film I can find through each back I have one day, develop them all, and see if I can pin it down.

 

[Roger Cole]

Well it's not an RB but an RZ. Thanks to APUG's Parker, today I picked up an RZ 67 Pro II, 110 and 180mm lenses, WLF, RB67 prism, two backs and a couple of extension tubes (plus manual, an extra focusing screen and various caps and a lens hood for the 180.)

Woohoo, G.A.S. continues!

 

[macgreg]

Wow, this looks like the ultimate RB thread. Glad I found it !!

So .... I was recently gifted an RB67 with an 127 lens. The problem is that the lens is stuck, the previous owner had told me about it, asked if I wanted the camera and try to fix the lens and of course I agreed !!!

Should I try and have the lens fixed, is it worth the effort or should I get one from eBay may be ? I don't know if that's the lens I will be using. I have no idea how this beast will work for me ... I am thinking of some portraits, at first and may be some landscapes. So, should I stick to that or try another lens ?

Well, it's a whole new world for me right now so any help would be appreciated. I think I will love that camera, my only concern is that I cannot print 6x7 with my enlarger but hell .... I cannot wait to see the scans from that babe !!!

 

[Roger Cole]

Get a new enlarger. It'll be worth it.

While we're reviving the thread I have another question myself - I bought ten boxes of Fuji FP-100c when the discontinuation was announced, and I had a couple of boxes already, plus two or three of FP-3000b. I have backs for my view camera and my M645 Pro, though the later is kind of a shame to waste this now discontinued film making 6x4.5 cm images on a little chip of a whole sheet. I'd like to use some, maybe most, of the film I've bought up on my new-to-me RZ 67. Leaving aside the wisdom of spending ANY money on a back for film that's totally discontinued at present (anyone want to sell a back cheap?) I see two Polaroid backs at KEH. One is a Polaroid MDl 3 in EX for $99, which seems more than a bit much for, again, a back for only discontinued film of which I have a limited supply. The other says "Mamiya RZ POLAROID RZ (MTL CLIP) ORIGINAL CHR FINISH" and clearly looks to be an older design, $43 in BGN.

What are the differences between these? Any reason to pay more for a back I will only use for my ten remaining packs of film? (Until and unless more comes out from someone else, yes I know CatLabs is working on it, or I pay the NOS prices.)

 

[Roger Cole]

Also mine doesn't seem to have strap lugs. Do the ones for the RB also fit the RZ? KEH lists those and they aren't terribly expensive.