RB67 Information

Marvin · Feb 14, 2010

I have Bronica Etrsi cameras now but was considering a RB67 and just wasn't sure how it works or fits together. Is the revolving back on all RB67 or does it have to have that added. Do you have to wind the film and cock the shutter separately. I have noticed that KEH has BGN RB67s at very good prices and I have read other threads that other people were happy with them.
Marvin

keithwms · Feb 14, 2010

Most rb67 kits will have the revolving back on them already, it is such an integral part of the camera that most people don't realize that it can be taken off!

The rb is a very fine piece. Very durable, completely mechanical. Virtually indestructible. Try one, but bear in mind that it takes a bit of adjustment in overall shooting style, coming from a smaller camera like the bronnie. Be patient and you will come to appreciate its capability.

The rb requires you to cock the shutter and wind the film in two separate actions, unless you use a powered back. The rz67 has a united cock/advance lever.

A tip: the rz can take all the rb lenses. So you can build up a set on the cheap, and then migrate to an rz body later on if you wish. But there are two rz lenses not found in the rb line, and they are significant: the 50 uld and the 110/2.8. On the flip side, the rb has the 6x8 back; the rz does not. And the rb lenses are generally far less expensive than the rz ones.

whlogan · Feb 14, 2010

Over the years I have had and used well 3 RB67 and a variety of lenses and backs and have loved each of them. The backs all rotate which is one of its big features. The lenses are superb. Enlarging a 6x7 negative is a joy.... you will love doing that. They are sturdy ; need no batteries and little care, but treat them like a Leica and they will last you for years and serve your very well. start with a 127mm and then get a 50mm then a 250mm. You may find that will be all the lenses you will need or ever want. Bellows will answer your close up desires to a "t". Do it and have the time of your life. KEH forever!
Logan

Jeff Kubach · Feb 15, 2010

I have a RB67 which I love very much. It takes a little time to get used to it. I usually use a tripod with it.

Jeff

A_M_Johnson · Feb 15, 2010

There are three versions of the RB67. The Pro, Pro S and the Pro SD. Make sure you know which one you are going for so you can buy the appropriate accessories. I use a Pro S and it is great.

Steve Smith · Feb 15, 2010

A useful chart of compatibility: http://www.reznitsky.info/Mamiya/Comchart.htm

Steve.

keithwms · Feb 15, 2010

The pro SD basically has more interlocks and a wider throat, which accommodates the newest KL lenses. Given the small price differences, I'd say go for the pro SD for sure, bearing in mind that the older RBs will have been used for years and years as they were intended.

Marvin · Feb 15, 2010

I may look a trying one and I think the 6x7 might be an improvement over the 6x4.5. I like the fact that the RB is all manual that means that years down the road it will probably still be serviceable. I just use the manual prism finder on the Bronica ETRSi but it still has some electronics. I like the Bronica very much but just thought I would like to try 6x7 and may be later 4x5.
Thanks Marvin

Screwdriver · Feb 16, 2010

The RB67 is one of those classic cameras that will go down in history as one of the best. I love my Pro-SD that I bought from KEH, they have great service.

The RB67 is the most satisfying camera that I have ever shot. Every time the shutter makes that "shrooomp" noise...an angel gets their wings.

illumiquest · Feb 16, 2010

It's a great camera but if you're used to an ETRS system you're in for a surprise at how much bigger the RB is. It's kinda like hauling a 4x5 camera around.

olleorama · Feb 16, 2010

My 4x5 sure is a lot larger and heavier than my RB-S. And the appropriate tripod+head is heavier too.

The only thing is miss with the RB is the faster shutter times. The best thing about it is the prices of used glass.

keithwms · Feb 16, 2010

olleorama said:
My 4x5 sure is a lot larger and heavier than my RB-S. And the appropriate tripod+head is heavier too.

True but consider what happens when you pack a 3 lens kit. Then the RB kit is typically way heavier just because of the lenses. Nice thing about LF, the typical lenses are quite compact, a typical 90+150+210 kit, including my crown graphic or another 4x5, packs far better than an rb with lenses of the equivalent field of view.

Not that I am complaining about the rb, just saying....

olleorama · Feb 16, 2010

keithwms said:
True but consider what happens when you pack a 3 lens kit. Then the RB kit is typically way heavier just because of the lenses. Nice thing about LF, the typical lenses are quite compact, a typical 90+150+210 kit, including my crown graphic or another 4x5, packs far better than an rb with lenses of the equivalent field of view.

Not that I am complaining about the rb, just saying....

Note that I said my 4x5"... Which happens to be a cambo sc...

2F/2F · Feb 16, 2010

The camera technically does not have a revolving back until a revolving adapter is mounted. (The RZ does, however.) However, 99% of them come with a revolving back adapter in place.

On the RB, you have to cock the shutter/lower the mirror and advance the film separately. On the RZ, the same motion used on the RB to do the former also does the latter via a rotating linkage.

RZs are so cheap now that they are an option too, if you are looking at later model RBs. They will mount RB lenses or RZ lenses (but an RB will only mount RB lenses).

RZs will not accept a 6x8 back, and as I mentioned already, the revolving part is built in to the camera body, not a separate adapter. Therefore, they won't take all the cool stuff other than Mamiya RB/RZ rollfilm backs, such as sheet film holders, plate holders, Graflok accessories, Mamiya Press accessories, etc. (though it will take a Polaroid back).

The RZ is a mildly simpler and smoother camera in use, but it lacks certain benefits of the RB.

Personally, I think the killer kit is one RZ and one RB, with all RB lenses.

If I had to go for just one, I'd go for the RB first...because it takes a 6x8 back.

keithwms · Feb 16, 2010

Oh, haha, well let me suggest you treat yourself to a lovely wooden model, e.g. a poco, with a teeny-tiny convertible lens

I have considered the rb/rz zoom lens just as a travel option, but alas it is quite slow.

2F/2F said:
Personally, I think the killer kit is one RZ and one RB, with all RB lenses.

I agree, and that's what I have. Well, I do strongly favour the rz 110/2.8 as mentioned before.

2F/2F · Feb 16, 2010

Yes, the 110 is the one RZ lens that I would have in the kit....and maybe the 210 APO as well (though the same lens is probably available as a K/L RB lens, and probably for a bit less money).

keithwms · Feb 16, 2010

I have the rb 210 apo KL. You want this lens. It is IMHO the absolute pinnacle of the entire collection. And I guess I've had 'em all by now except the 140 macro and the 500.

2F/2F · Feb 16, 2010

I did some extensive shooting with the RZ 210 APO, and fell in love. I am trying to convince my friend to sell it to me, since he never uses it (or his entire kit, for that matter).

stradibarrius · Feb 16, 2010

keithwms said:
I have the rb 210 apo KL. You want this lens. It is IMHO the absolute pinnacle of the entire collection. And I guess I've had 'em all by now except the 140 macro and the 500.

Do you have in sample shots with this lens in you gallery? If not post some please!!!

xtolsniffer · Feb 17, 2010

Steve Smith said:
A useful chart of compatibility: http://www.reznitsky.info/Mamiya/Comchart.htm

Steve.

Interesting that the chart suggests that the Pro/Pro S extension tubes are NOT compatible with KL lenses. I can see no reason why that would be the case and happily use my Pro S extension tubes with a 140 mm KL macro.

keithwms · Feb 17, 2010

xtolsniffer said:
Interesting that the chart suggests that the Pro/Pro S extension tubes are NOT compatible with KL lenses. I can see no reason why that would be the case and happily use my Pro S extension tubes with a 140 mm KL macro.

Hmm, odd. Maybe it's because you may need the (optional) adapter ring? As I recall, the pro SD has a wider throat to accommodate the KLs, which have a bigger inner bore on the camera side. So if you use a non KL lens on the SD, you are supposed to put a little donut-shaped doodad on the rear of the lens so that it fits the throat more snugly. Hence the note "Lens Mounting Ring recommended"...

Something like that. All my lenses are KLs so I don't remember any more. Please correct my recollection if necessary....

RB67 Information

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency