Rb67 ProS or ProSD, that is the question......

[harlequin]

Dear Photorio analog medium format users.....

I have noticed that the prices of Mamiya ProS and ProSD cameras are getting closer in pricing
Than they used to be in the past, what are the main differences(if any) and is it worth the extra 50-60$ over a used ProS Body.....I guess since it’s newer, and can take the KL lenses which I hear are very good.

Any real life experiences with ProSD would be appreciated, I will be doing tabletop and portraits with 127mm C lens
To start off with, any photos taken with these please post away.....seems like the 67 ProS bodies are way more plentiful
Will the pros film backs work on ProSD and vice versa?

Many thanks for your input!

Harlequin

 

[Lanline]

The main reason that I remember why I bought the SD was the Depth of Field scale on the SD has lense(s) that the Pro-S doesn't. I know the 140mm wasn't listed on earlier model RBs

 

[cramej]

They can all use KL lenses (except 75mm tilt/shift?), you just need the spacer ring for the Pro-SD body whereas you don't with the Pro-S. There will not be any difference in photos taken with a Pro-S vs SD.

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

Go with the Pro SD, because it is newer and can handle the large throat "L" lenses, all two of them, the 75 f/4.5 shift and the 500 f/6 APO L.

Pro SD film backs do not use foam seals, but rather a labyrinth light trap. This means no foam seals need replacing. Pro SD film backs are useable on Pro S and Pro bodies.

It is true that the KL lenses can be used on Pro S and Pro bodies, when the rubber/metal ring is removed.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

The main reason that I remember why I bought the SD was the Depth of Field scale on the SD has lense(s) that the Pro-S doesn't. I know the 140mm wasn't listed on earlier model RBs

The depth of field scale does exist on lenses used by the Pro S, see photo. The scale is at the front of the lens - some people may think it's a focusing ring, but it's not since focus is done by the bellows and body.

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

The depth of field scale does exist on lenses used by the Pro S, see photo. The scale is at the front of the lens - some people may think it's a focusing ring, but it's not since focus is done by the bellows and body.

I Believe Lanline was improperly referring to the focusing scale / correction factors plate on the right side of the camera body (which is not a Depth Of Field table).

However, to illustrate your point you picked up possibly the only lens that you shouldn't pick up, as in the 50mm the front "focusing" ring is not only a slide rule for DOF but it actually moves a floating element in order to get maximum resolution according to the focused distance.

 

[Andy3002]

Hi
I have both a RB67 Pro S and a Pro SD and put a few rolls in both of them. The Pro SD is more lightweight and as mentioned earlier in this thread, a larger 'throat' in the camera body, if you were to use older lenses on the Pro SD you would need a metal ring that sits on the second ring surrounding the lens element (Image should help provide insight). With the modern RB67 KL lenses the will come with a detachable ring that sits in this position. The Pro SD film backs also have no light seals either, which is surprising. This is because of how the film back is made of a strong plastic that ('m assuming) overlaps and prevents any light from getting in. The Pro S model is heavier and the film backs have light seals in them. The film backs for both of these cameras can be used on a different body (Pro S film back on a Pro SD). Each body will also accept the same finders and focusing screens so you could swap them around if you want to. Both of these cameras function exactly the same, just for these minor differences such as less weight and needing a lens adapter ring. I hope this information can help you in any way. Attached are some images of where the lens adapter ring needs to sit and the ring its self.
Sorry if these aren't the best images.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

If for only one reason, the Pro-SD is preferred, and that would be the fact that it's newer and therefore less likely to be worn out beyond economical repair. RB and Pro-S bodies are so old and so cheap that just about anything that goes wrong with them that you can't fix yourself (ie replacing a winding knob or a focusing screen) is beyond economical repair. And a lot of camera repair services won't work on the older bodies either, for that very reason.

 

[Lanline]

I Believe Lanline was improperly referring to the focusing scale / correction factors plate on the right side of the camera body (which is not a Depth Of Field table).

However, to illustrate your point you picked up possibly the only lens that you shouldn't pick up, as in the 50mm the front "focusing" ring is not only a slide rule for DOF but it actually moves a floating element in order to get maximum resolution according to the focused distance.

Yes. Correct. Also the 140mm also has the floating element.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

...
However, to illustrate your point you picked up possibly the only lens that you shouldn't pick up, as in the 50mm the front "focusing" ring is not only a slide rule for DOF but it actually moves a floating element in order to get maximum resolution according to the focused distance.

Yes. Correct. Also the 140mm also has the floating element.

Good point. Here's the 140mm lens, showing floating element ring at the back and DOF scale at the front:

 

[WilmarcoImaging]

These KL lenses all have floating elements: 65, 75 non-shift, 90 and 140. In addition to the floating element C lenses: 50, 65 and 140.

 

[Neil Poulsen]

This thread has convinced me that I'm better off with my Pro-S RB67. I would hate to have to come up with one of those ring thingies for each of the older "C" lenses that I might want to use. No thank you.

From what I've read, the "C" lenses are very fine optics, and have better build quality than "KL" lenses. As for floating elements; again . . . "No thank you."

The SD is indeed the later model; but, reliability and longevity will depend on the particular example. I had a CLA performed on my Pro-S, and the technician remarked about the excellent condition of the camera. I'm sure that my particular Pro-S is in far better condition than many Pro-SD examples that might be available.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

This thread has convinced me that I'm better off with my Pro-S RB67. I would hate to have to come up with one of those ring thingies for each of the older "C" lenses that I might want to use. No thank you.

From what I've read, the "C" lenses are very fine optics, and have better build quality than "KL" lenses. As for floating elements; again . . . "No thank you."

The SD is indeed the later model; but, reliability and longevity will depend on the particular example. I had a CLA performed on my Pro-S, and the technician remarked about the excellent condition of the camera. I'm sure that my particular Pro-S is in far better condition than many Pro-SD examples that might be available.

Not really. First, the ring is NOT critical, lens can be mounted without it. I would not recommend mounting 180 + lenses without it as it helps spread load in the mount. However, it SHOULD be used on any lens in SD body. Having said that, you really only need ONE ring as it comes off without a problem and slips onto next lens jus as easily.

As for durability, RBs needed some major abuse by careless handler to get to the state of major repair needs. Many look so rough yet mechanically almost as sound as new, so that particular "newer will last longer" argument is probably not well placed in RB's case.

 

[foveon_m]

Not really. First, the ring is NOT critical, lens can be mounted without it. I would not recommend mounting 180 + lenses without it as it helps spread load in the mount. However, it SHOULD be used on any lens in SD body. Having said that, you really only need ONE ring as it comes off without a problem and slips onto next lens jus as easily.

As for durability, RBs needed some major abuse by careless handler to get to the state of major repair needs. Many look so rough yet mechanically almost as sound as new, so that particular "newer will last longer" argument is probably not well placed in RB's case.

+1, and the SD is less heavy because of the use of plastic instead ot metal, so some say its worn out quicker, the only "advantage" is that you can place the darklslide on the back of your back^^

PS: this CRC thing is more theoratically, just meant to use in close-up shots, otherwise set to infinity and forget it. IMO the C 65 also has it, C 50 I dont remember it has.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

+1, and the SD is less heavy because of the use of plastic instead ot metal, so some say its worn out quicker, the only "advantage" is that you can place the darklslide on the back of your back^^

PS: this CRC thing is more theoratically, just meant to use in close-up shots, otherwise set to infinity and forget it. IMO the C 65 also has it, C 50 I dont remember it has.

SD backs' biggest advantage is light trap instead of foam seals. Dark slide "garage" is nice and convenient. I enjoy my SDs as that is how I got into RB67 with a one sweet deal and am not considering older bodies, just as I only have KL lenses and none of the C versions. SD bodies still fetch a higher price.

One thing I am not sure of are the red lines that move with rotating back for on screen correct orientation of framing. Pro did not have them, SD does and I think it is the only one of the three. If so I consider a big plus too, as there is essentially no way to mess up framing on SD.

 

[MattKing]

While the RB lacks a dark slide garage, it does offer a dark slide "carport"
From the manual for the original RB:

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I've been using the SD since '93. She and I will never part.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

While the RB lacks a dark slide garage, it does offer a dark slide "carport"
From the manual for the original RB:
View attachment 222711

Just that "carport" sometimes gets in the way with dark slide in it. Could be just me being an old fart used to feeling the body "stripper style" then suddenly there is a "thing" touching my fingers. Tried it on SD and luckily I only own SD backs.

 

[M Carter]

One thing I am not sure of are the red lines that move with rotating back for on screen correct orientation of framing. Pro did not have them, SD does and I think it is the only one of the three. If so I consider a big plus too, as there is essentially no way to mess up framing on SD.

The Pro-S does have the red frame lines (and many other advantages over the original Pro). Unless you are a very methodical shooter, the extras in the Pro-S and SD models are really worth it; they help to make sure you get the shot you want, that you don't shoot an empty frame or accidentally double-expose your film.

Also, a side not on floating elements - the non-C 65mm doesn't have one, but it's a hell of a lens - can't imagine my copy being any better than it is (at least with B&W, it just has stunning IQ).

 

[Deleted member 88956]

The Pro-S does have the red frame lines (and many other advantages over the original Pro). Unless you are a very methodical shooter, the extras in the Pro-S and SD models are really worth it; they help to make sure you get the shot you want, that you don't shoot an empty frame or accidentally double-expose your film.

Also, a side not on floating elements - the non-C 65mm doesn't have one, but it's a hell of a lens - can't imagine my copy being any better than it is (at least with B&W, it just has stunning IQ).

The 65 KL is on my list, got 75 first as it was even harder to find. Speaking of lenses am wondering about the KL 150 (not the SF). Not sure how many there were, but I've seen one thus far and with internal moisture I was not going into that territory.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Maybe it's just me, but I like having an extra focusing ring on a lens to adjust floating elements (even in preference to the lens doing it automatically). It provides just that little extra bit of personal involvement in the process.

Mamiya has several such lenses for the RB; the only one I have for the Hasselblad is the 50/4 CF FLE.

 

[M Carter]

Maybe it's just me, but I like having an extra focusing ring on a lens to adjust floating elements (even in preference to the lens doing it automatically). It provides just that little extra bit of personal involvement in the process.

Mamiya has several such lenses for the RB; the only one I have for the Hasselblad is the 50/4 CF FLE.

I have the 65-non-c, so no floater; I just purchased a 50mm C with the floating element but have yet to try it, taking it on a trip in a few weeks for a workout. My 65 is really an impressive lens without the element, so curious to try the 50's IQ - I'll have both with me so I can do some A/B tests.