priceless RZ67!

Lightproof · Jun 26, 2009

Something distracting happened to me today.

I was shopping around at some photo dealers and came across three of the big mamiyas, sitting on a shelf and waiting for ME.

I went in and asked how much that RZ67 would be.

Well what can I say... the answer was "We don't sell these, they're just for decoration until the digi backs are becoming cheaper".

I was everything but not prepared for a situation like this. I walked in a camera store and found myself in front of a capital investor, refusing to sell me things he has in his store.

mikebarger · Jun 26, 2009

Probably bring him more money with a digi back than a film back.

Mike

PhotoJim · Jun 26, 2009

Presumably he can get more. Why wouldn't he want to sell them?

bdial · Jun 26, 2009

This reminds me of a situation a friend of ours found himself in. He was hired to manage and turn-around a shopping mall news stand and tobaco store that had a bad sales record.

On one of his first days, he noticed that the cigar display wasn't stocked. He asked one of his employees why, and the response was "if we keep it stocked, we'll sell them, and then we have to stock it again".

Q.G. · Jun 26, 2009

Strange, but not something to spend too much energy figuring out how or why over.
RZs are not particularly rare. He can get more. So can you.

Christopher Walrath · Jun 26, 2009

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

That would be like my telling a customer that I can't sell him and oil filter for his Crown Victoria because someone might come in and need it for his Mustang and pay more. What the H E double hockey sticks are people thinking? And with times as they are? NEVER TURN AWAY MONEY IN HAND! GEEZ!

paul ron · Jun 26, 2009

Priceless doesn't have to mean rare n expensive ya know, it means they are junk and have absolutely no price... decoration is the tip off here.

Digital backs for MF will never be cheap enough for "us" to afford. You are all forgetting, MF pro film equipement just 15 years ago was a major investment. A lens was the price of a car. Today a digi back is a down payment on a house and will not get much cheaper because pros make money with their systems so it is worth th einvestment for em.

Besides if you did slap a digital back on it, you wouldn't have all the features of a purely digital camera like VR, auto focus, smart flash...etc, so why put an expensive back on a a dead horse when you will be able to buy an updated digital system?

Make the guy an offer of a couple hundred bucks n see his attitude change when he sees the green in your hand.

Now, I have a few older RBs n a Bronica ETR or 2 in the closet, what are you looking for?

GJA · Jun 26, 2009

His loss. By the time digital backs for those cameras have come down to a price where a stupid camera store salesperson can rip off an average consumer, there will be entry level cameras that have the same resolution, fullframe etc. I know little about digital, but I do know that the speed at which it goes extinct from a profitable point of view is faster than light.

Christopher Walrath · Jun 26, 2009

I'm trying to sell my RB setup, such as it is. It is (there was a url link here which no longer exists).

Greg_E · Jun 27, 2009

It is already really hard to justify the cost of medium format backs when you can get a 22mp Canon for only several thousand and a comparable back is going to be at last twice the cost.

Q.G. · Jun 27, 2009

Greg_E said:
It is already really hard to justify the cost of medium format backs when you can get a 22mp Canon for only several thousand and a comparable back is going to be at last twice the cost.

Even with digital (technology still downgrades what you could get if only ... ), size does matter.
22 MP from a MF back are better than 22 MP from a miniature format camera. The ony comparable thing is the pixelcount (which, alas, is the only thing many people look at/for).

So though the MF thingies are disproportionately expensive, the extra you have to pay will give a return on investment in image quality.

Greg_E · Jun 27, 2009

That is true, but it is really hard to tell the difference in the images between the two until you get into the situations where the larger sensor really matters. (assuming lenses of the same image quality)

DanielStone · Jul 2, 2009

Greg_E said:
That is true, but it is really hard to tell the difference in the images between the two until you get into the situations where the larger sensor really matters. (assuming lenses of the same image quality)

Its also about the look too... Many people that I've assisted for use the digi backs because it makes them look better to the art directors. But being that anyone with a couple grand in hand can get one of these backs today, its becoming a more regular thing. Heck, I just watched a 33mp Leaf back go up on the 'bay for about 8 grand. Small potatoes compared to what it was selling for(notice i don't mention worth ) new. To me, buying one of these backs new is somewhat of a waste. Especially since the depreciation on them is tremendous: 30,000------->8,000 in the course of a year or so. To me, that's not an investment, that is putting your money down the toilet IMO.

but when you're paying off the equipment after 3 or 4 shoots(what most pros pay their backs off in in my experience), its kind of a moot point, because it will get written off on their taxes anyhow.

Digi backs are great tools though, don't get me wrong, but in some cases pros are coming back to using film on some jobs, especially ones that involve people and skintones(banana republic, etc....)

just my 2cents though

Greg_E · Jul 2, 2009

I embrace both technologies so I understand the differences and the importance of both types of media.

I still tend to use film more because of the tendency to just blast off a bunch of exposures without thinking when using digital. That is not where I want to go to try and improve my skills, I want to have to think about what I am doing to make sure I get the best possible image and think about why it went wrong when I look at the film later. I also don't have the kind of money kicking around for a really good digital back, I'll have to keep making due with my ancient 6MP Megavision back. At least I have a choice between the capture media I stick on the back of my camera, and mostly that is film still.

Ian Grant · Jul 2, 2009

If that camera store really believed in what they said they'd be buying up RZ67's and have more than 2. Both the RB67 & RZ67 are selling for ridiculously low prices, and that's often with 2 03 three lenses, spare backs etc.

Ian

Moopheus · Jul 2, 2009

DanielStone said:
To me, buying one of these backs new is somewhat of a waste. Especially since the depreciation on them is tremendous: 30,000------->8,000 in the course of a year or so. To me, that's not an investment, that is putting your money down the toilet IMO.

I would presume that the people who do that are in a position to take a write-off of the expense on their taxes. And somebody has to do it in order for there to be a used-equipment market for the rest of us.

Lightproof · Jul 2, 2009

All the "big ones" are dead cheap at the moment.

That is just why I walked in and asked for the price...
Now I will test one of these first, a friend of mine retired and has an RZ that he isnt using regularly.

Ian Grant · Jul 2, 2009

Where I live here in Turkey the only film camera I've seen in our town in a photo shop is an RB67. Another professional photographer with a minilab used to have some old tatty film cameras as a display.

I think the problem with the Mamiya & Bronica 6x7's is size, they weigh more than any of my 5x4's, and I much prefer 645's & 6x6 cameras for hand-held work, or a Speed/Crown Graphic (& equivalent).

Having said that the RB/RZ's are sperb work-horses and for someone not wanting to move up to LF a greatb alternative.

Ian

Ken N · Jul 2, 2009

Reminds me of the old GTE Yellow Pages television advertisement.

Reporter pretending to perform investigation: "Today, we're visiting 'Arnold's Rug' to see why he doesn't advertise in the GTE Yellow Pages. Arnold, please tell us why you don't advertise in the GTE Yellow Pages?"

Arnold (classic geeky old storekeeper) responds: "You see, this is 'Arnold's Rug' and this is my rug." (pointing to one single rug spread out on the floor--the rest of the store is empty). "If I advertised in the GTE Yellow Pages, somebody might see the ad and they might come into my store to see the rug and they might actually buy my rug."

"There would no longer BE an 'Arnold's Rug!"

keithwms · Jul 2, 2009

It's a buyer's market. You can pick up whatever gear you want for almost any price you want. Why waste a millisecond on someone who doesn't realize that....

priceless RZ67!

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency