Annoyingly I don't appear to be able to upload any images at the moment, what's the upload limit as an image at 174kb was too large for the site! It'd really help to illustrate my point but I'll try to clear in the text.
My question is directed at all Mamiya RZ67 users, specifically with regards to the film backs. I've three backs, one is a pro 2 model in pretty much mint condition with leather case, boxed etc. I've another two pro only models that are decent but have been well used.
I noticed I was getting a line of light leak on one of the pro backs. My negatives had a very clear and distinctive line of overexposure in the same place each time. It was coming from one of the pro backs, not the pro 2.
I therefore cleaned the thing with alcohol, removed all old seal residue and added new seals to all areas that had seal on before.
However, as I was in the process of doing this I thought I'd inspect the pro 2 back, see if it needed doing and I made an odd discovery. The pro 2 doesn't appear to have any sealant running along the gaps as the pro does. I was of the understanding that the pro 2 back only differed from the pro in that it had an extra counter on the portrait side but it turns out it's mechanically quite different. Is this right?
My pro 2 back is very clean inside, with almost no examples of a seal anywhere. Where the pro model needed a rubber seal in place the pro 2 has extra lips, overhangs and valleys that appear to mechanically (for want of a better word) stop light entering the back when shut. There are extra screws covering the 'clam shell' ends and there isn't any sign of runner in the runners along the long edge. It works fine as it is but I find it very odd and was wondering if this is a recognised design improvement of if I've got a bit of a custom back?
Anyone got any knowledge on this?
Thanks
PS - sorry for the lack of images, it'd help!!
My question is directed at all Mamiya RZ67 users, specifically with regards to the film backs. I've three backs, one is a pro 2 model in pretty much mint condition with leather case, boxed etc. I've another two pro only models that are decent but have been well used.
I noticed I was getting a line of light leak on one of the pro backs. My negatives had a very clear and distinctive line of overexposure in the same place each time. It was coming from one of the pro backs, not the pro 2.
I therefore cleaned the thing with alcohol, removed all old seal residue and added new seals to all areas that had seal on before.
However, as I was in the process of doing this I thought I'd inspect the pro 2 back, see if it needed doing and I made an odd discovery. The pro 2 doesn't appear to have any sealant running along the gaps as the pro does. I was of the understanding that the pro 2 back only differed from the pro in that it had an extra counter on the portrait side but it turns out it's mechanically quite different. Is this right?
My pro 2 back is very clean inside, with almost no examples of a seal anywhere. Where the pro model needed a rubber seal in place the pro 2 has extra lips, overhangs and valleys that appear to mechanically (for want of a better word) stop light entering the back when shut. There are extra screws covering the 'clam shell' ends and there isn't any sign of runner in the runners along the long edge. It works fine as it is but I find it very odd and was wondering if this is a recognised design improvement of if I've got a bit of a custom back?
Anyone got any knowledge on this?
Thanks
PS - sorry for the lack of images, it'd help!!
