Square back for mamiya rb67

[thisismyname09]

That must be a mistake. There never were 6x6 backs made for the RB67. You can even see in the picture that the opening isn't square.

 

[Kevin Kehler]

I have a 6x6 for my RZ, which is nice since it takes 120 and 220 rolls (nicer when TXP 220 was still available). I don't use it too often since I like the 6x7 more than the 6x6 but it is nice when you need 12 shots instead of 10.

 

[epatsellis]

I shoot 7x7 d#*($ with my RB, or you could use a 4x5 sheet film holder to shoot 7x7 as well.

 

[timk]

4x5 sheet film is an expensive way to get 7x7

 

[epatsellis]

Not necessarily, shoot cut down 8x10 ultrafine continuous tone dupe film (iso 3 or so) and it comes out to around .25 per sheet. Shoot arista II from freestyle for around .334 per sheet. The only downside is ortho response, but you can DBI easily.

 

[underbyte]

Using an RH12 with the RB67 Pro-S

Hi All,
I'll chime in with my experience with the RH12. After thinking about getting a square back for my RB for a few years, looking at hasselblads, back at my RB and 3 lenses, I decided to look for a square back. It took months, but I finally found a lever model RH12 and ordered it. I got it a few weeks ago and have only put a couple rolls through it. One roll was Delta 3200 that I had sitting around so that didn't really count as a test. But, the second roll was Acros and the results were very good. One frame was a portrait by window light and the detail was fantastic.

Like everyone else considering 6x6 on an RB, my intention is to shoot native 6x6 because I like it, and I often print full frame because I like the look of it. The downsides are that the double exposure lock doesn't function on my RB67 Pro S, and the back isn't as easy to use as the Pro-S or SD backs. But, it works. Framing is easy as the square is already in the viewfinder. Focus seems to be right on. I'll shoot some more soon and confirm it, but it looks pretty good.

In conclusion, it can be done with the RH12, is it a Hasselblad? No, but I already have a medium format system with 3 lenses and an extension tube, and pinhole cap for that matter. I wanted to make use of the system and shoot native squares, mostly for portraits. Now, I can. I still want a 500 C/M though This will definitely work for now.

 

[cee_med]

I know this thread is 10 years old, but if anyone on here owns an RH12 6x6 back that they're not using, I'd happily buy it from you.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'll confirm from my own experience, a Graflex 22 back will work as well -- it's knob wind, and you want to reinsert the dark slide before advancing (lest your fingers on the knob wedge the back away from the camera mount and cause light leaks), and as noted most of the interlocks don't work, but it does work...

Sekor C 250mm at f/8, 1/125; .EDU Ultra 400 in Xtol replenished

 

[cee_med]

I'll confirm from my own experience, a Graflex 22 back will work as well -- it's knob wind, and you want to reinsert the dark slide before advancing (lest your fingers on the knob wedge the back away from the camera mount and cause light leaks), and as noted most of the interlocks don't work, but it does work...

Interesting... there's one listed on Ebay right now.
https://www.ebay.ca/itm/Graflex-4x5...533328?hash=item548a2e2710:g:~yoAAOSwHUhaID9y

Forgive my ignorance, but this wouldn't work on an RB67 as it is, with the 4x5 board attached... I wonder if it could easily be modified.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Correct, @cee_med you need one on the 2x3 Graflok plate to work on an RB67 without much more work. These are common enough I'd just pass on the 4x5 version (unless you've got a 4x5 Graflok begging for a 6x6 roll holder) and set up a search that will find a 2x3 back version of the 22 or RH12.

BTW, these Graflex roll film backs all use a turns-counting advance system (unlike the actual RB67 roll holders, which are length-counting), so an RH24 (if such a thing exists) will result in excess spacing, expanding near end of roll, and might result in frame 12 going off the tail of the film, due to the backing paper thickness.

 

[cee_med]

Right, I think I understand, except for the part about the RH24...
I found this guided to be quite handy in wrapping my head around this. I've been using my RB67 for about 6 years, can't believe it's only now that I've discovered it can use all these other backs.
http://mercurycamera.com/backs/comp...cks-graflex-mamiya-rb67-horseman-and-mercury/

 

[Donald Qualls]

The RH24, if it exists, would be a 220 back. Since the Graflex 120 and 220 roll film holders all use turns-counting (that is, they have an internal cam that "knows" how far to turn the takeup spool for each frame, which depends on the thickness of film already wound on the spool), using 120 film in a 220 back will result in rolling too much film, and more so as the film + backing (roundly twice the thickness of film-only 220) builds up.

But yes, any back that will mount on a 2x3 Graflok and won't interfere with other parts of the camera (say, an eye level prism finder) can be used with the RB67. Grafmatics seem like a really fun option -- if only 2x3 sheet film had more emulsion choices, like it did when this camera was new...

 

[cee_med]

Ah, I see. When I bought my RB67 it came with a Mamiya 220 back, I seem to recall shooting with it at least once and perhaps having some issues with spacing, enough that I have never shot with that back since.

I'll keep my eyes peeled for 2x3 Graflok backs, either the 22 or the RH12.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The thing the 220 6x7 back is really good for is shooting 35mm panoramic. Don't let that Mercury advertisement disguised as a history article fool you -- it's easy to do with an unmodified 220 back. If you want to get fancy, you can get some 3D printed adapters to hold the 135 cassette centered, take up into a cassette as well, add a (paper or film) leader to the 35mm film to avoid wasting a foot at loading, and even make a frame mask/film guide to cover the sprocket holes and keep the film against the pressure plate. It's also easy to make the frame counter work correctly -- takes a couple inches of electrical tape.

 

[cee_med]

Do you think this would work with my RB67?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Do you think this would work with my RB67?

I have one just like that and it works with my RB67. There's no double exposure interlock, but I have Pro backs (not ProS or ProSD), so I don't have that anyway. Also no dark slide interlock; you just have to remember to pull it, and I recommend reinserting the dark slide before advancing, since I find my thumb on the knob tends to pull the roll film holder away from the camera back during advance.

 

[cee_med]

I have one just like that and it works with my RB67. There's no double exposure interlock, but I have Pro backs (not ProS or ProSD), so I don't have that anyway. Also no dark slide interlock; you just have to remember to pull it, and I recommend reinserting the dark slide before advancing, since I find my thumb on the knob tends to pull the roll film holder away from the camera back during advance.

Cool! There's one for sale, it's advertised as 6x6. In these photos I can't tell, when it's opened it looks like it could be square, but from the back it looks 6x7?

 

[Donald Qualls]

A 22 or later RH12 is 6x6. The frame mask is behind the dark slide, so the shell can be a larger opening and won't cause problems. A 23 or RH8 would be 6x9. An RH10 (newer version, not made until they were lever advance) or RH20 is 6x7 (on 120 or 220 resepctively). Then you have to be sure it's on a 2x3 Graflok plate; they were also sold in 3x4 and 4x5 plate sizes (don't think they went to 5x7, but I could be wrong).

 

[cee_med]

Yeah, it's advertised as "Graflex 22 6x6 120 Roll Film Back For 2x3 Speed Crown Graphic Camera" so it sounds like it'll work.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Mamiya never made 6x6 back for RB67, they did for RZ67.

 

[cee_med]

Well soon I will know if this Graflex back works. The previous owner was just a camera collector and never tested it. I will report back when I've received it and put a roll through it.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Well soon I will know if this Graflex back works. The previous owner was just a camera collector and never tested it. I will report back when I've received it and put a roll through it.

Can't wait on this. I'm actually awaiting the same but 23, so not enough girth in RB to make it all work for 6x9, but geometrically speaking would be the same shell, so it should at least fit on RB to get that part out of the way. I just wonder if focus plane registration is really the same on these.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Using an RH12 with the RB67 Pro-S

Hi All,
I'll chime in with my experience with the RH12. After thinking about getting a square back for my RB for a few years, looking at hasselblads, back at my RB and 3 lenses, I decided to look for a square back. It took months, but I finally found a lever model RH12 and ordered it. I got it a few weeks ago and have only put a couple rolls through it. One roll was Delta 3200 that I had sitting around so that didn't really count as a test. But, the second roll was Acros and the results were very good. One frame was a portrait by window light and the detail was fantastic.

Like everyone else considering 6x6 on an RB, my intention is to shoot native 6x6 because I like it, and I often print full frame because I like the look of it. The downsides are that the double exposure lock doesn't function on my RB67 Pro S, and the back isn't as easy to use as the Pro-S or SD backs. But, it works. Framing is easy as the square is already in the viewfinder. Focus seems to be right on. I'll shoot some more soon and confirm it, but it looks pretty good.

In conclusion, it can be done with the RH12, is it a Hasselblad? No, but I already have a medium format system with 3 lenses and an extension tube, and pinhole cap for that matter. I wanted to make use of the system and shoot native squares, mostly for portraits. Now, I can. I still want a 500 C/M though This will definitely work for now.

OK, so this appears to put my focus plain worries to the rest.

 

[Donald Qualls]

@Witold Graflex created the Graflok standard. And I can report from recent experience that my 22 back that looks just like that one focuses perfectly in agreement with the ground glass on my RB67, as do the 6x4.5, 6x7, and 220 6x7 backs I have.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

@Witold Graflex created the Graflok standard. And I can report from recent experience that my 22 back that looks just like that one focuses perfectly in agreement with the ground glass on my RB67, as do the 6x4.5, 6x7, and 220 6x7 backs I have.

Great, so I can no longer be totally pissed off at Mamiya for not thinking of one for RB