tell me about the RB67

$12.66

A
$12.66

  • 5
  • 3
  • 83
A street portrait

A
A street portrait

  • 0
  • 0
  • 125
A street portrait

A
A street portrait

  • 1
  • 2
  • 105
img746.jpg

img746.jpg

  • 6
  • 0
  • 95
No Hall

No Hall

  • 1
  • 3
  • 101

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,795
Messages
2,780,997
Members
99,707
Latest member
lakeside
Recent bookmarks
0

MamiyaJen

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
56
Location
Doncaster, U
Format
Medium Format
I'm a photo student and until last year had used mostly 35mm (and the odd dabble with large format thanks to my tutor). Once we were in 2nd year we were given access to the MF Bronica ETRSi and a Mamiya RB67. I instantly fell in love with both and a last October i bought an RB. The difference blows me away and the ability to do so much more creatively is hard to resist.

I couldn't rate it highly enough, honestly if you have the chance to buy one, do it. You won't be disappointed. My only problem with it is it's weight. But then i'm little and a wimp so... :wink:
 

homeiss

Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
100
Location
Vancouver, B
Format
Medium Format
Heresy but you can get digital backs for the RB67. I prefer the Polaroid backs but I was laughed out of the room last time I suggested it so I must be a glutton for punishment...

You can indeed. I picked up a Mamiya ZD digital back for $3100. However, the adapter to use it on an RB67 is $1400... I wound up getting a great deal on a Mamiya 645 AFD and have been using the ZD on that system. I will probably get the RB67 adapter one day, but $1400 for an adapter is a pretty hard pill to swallow.

I love the versatility of these systems, the ability to switch between film and digital is (almost) priceless. :whistling:
 

philosomatographer

Subscriber
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
241
Location
Johannesburg
Format
4x5 Format
I have to disagree with the utility of a digital back on the RB67. The RB67 is a truly giant camera, since it's in actual fact an 8x8cm camera (supports a rotating 6x8cm back). The lenses have giant image circles, several of them cover 4x5in!

To stick a teensy less-than-645 digital sensor on this beast has a certain kind of retro cool (kinda like putting a modern high-performance motor in a 1930s Ford hot rod) but really doesn't make much sense. Stick with the big 6x7cm or 6x8cm images, I'd use a smaller MF SLR camera (Hasselblad, Rollei, or any 645 camera) for digital. You'd want proper wide-angle lenses on digital anyway, 50mm won't cut it.

I am taking my RB67 on a three-week road trip tomorrow through the less-inhabited parts of South Africa (damn, the kit is heavy! - packed in a backpack including a serious Gitzo Systematic GT5541 tripod) and I am so looking forward to all the use it'll get. Leaving my 4x5in at home this time, and packing about 20 rolls of 120 film - half of it Pan F.

If I survive carrying the beast, I'll post some results here on APUG when I get around to printing them.
 

Jeff Kubach

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond VA.
Format
Multi Format
I forgot to mention that I like the short rolls on the 120 back. Now I don't even like 24 on the 35mm film!

Jeff
 

philosomatographer

Subscriber
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
241
Location
Johannesburg
Format
4x5 Format
Breakdown of RB lens series

To the OP: The lenses were made in three series:

Original series (Mamiya-Sekor)
All lenses have chromed noses, and nice thick knurling on the lens locking ring on the rear. All of the are single-coated (amber/yellow reflections off lens) as per 1970 technology. Nothing to write home about, though - as with any decently-designed lenses of any area for MF cameras, can yield excellent image quality. More prone to flare, etc.

C-Series (Mamiya-Sekor C)
Green-colourd "C" suffix. All lenses except the fisheye have chromed noses. Finer beveled knurling on lens locking ring on rear. All of the lenses feature multicoating (purple/blue/green reflections off lens) - and what an amazing multicoating this was. You'll go blind trying to make most of these flare. Greatly improved performance. Top level of build quality for RB lenses, with best size/performance ratio also.

K/L-Series (Mamiya-Sekor K/L [L-A])
Quite uncommon on the mechanical RB system, as these lens formulations are more commonly used with electronic shutters on the RZ system. These represent the top level of performance. None feature the silver ring on the front. These lenses are really massive (particularly the 65 and the 140 Macro are a couple of centimeters bigger than their C-series predecessors, but it seems "wasted" space, i.e. the glass itself is not much bigger. Uses more modern materials (e.g. some plastic on the shutter sped ring, etc) and generally not as nice-feeling as the C-series, IMHO.


There are a couple of unusual, faster K/L lenses, like f/3.5 lenses in 75mm and 150mm. I myself prefer the C-series lenses on my RB - I compared one or two, but could not, for my purposes, see any difference, and the C-series lenses are smaller, prettier, and cheaper. If you use a digital back, though, I'd suspect you'd want all-K/L.
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
I have a non-C 90 and a 150sf C, both do great work.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,906
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
There are also a couple of other oddities - lenses which are labelled NB. This stands for new barrel and was used on lenses in between the earliest series and the C series.

And there are floating element rings on some of the C lenses. The two step focussing isn't too bad once you get used to it.
 

philosomatographer

Subscriber
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
241
Location
Johannesburg
Format
4x5 Format
The floating element ring is annoying on the KL lenses. It does make it sharper but makes focusing a two step process.

Well, about half of the C-series lenses have the floating elements as well. And nobody is forcing you to use it! (just ignore it if you don't need laboratory-perfect flat-field imaging at closer-than-infinity distances) - it's your choice. More than half of the time, I ignore mine - only using it when I am taking serious close-ups.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,906
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Well, about half of the C-series lenses have the floating elements as well. And nobody is forcing you to use it! (just ignore it if you don't need laboratory-perfect flat-field imaging at closer-than-infinity distances) - it's your choice. More than half of the time, I ignore mine - only using it when I am taking serious close-ups.

I usually either:

a) first set the ring to either infinity or the closest distance (as seems appropriate) and then focus using the bellows; or
b) if there is time, guestimate and set the distance on the ring first, and then focus using the bellows.

I've wondered if the floating element has more effect on flat field performance/field curvature than it does on centre sharpness.
 

hpulley

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
2,207
Location
Guelph, Onta
Format
Multi Format
OK, I just know on the original 65mm and the 'C' 90mm there is no ring. I bought a 90mm KL because they're cheap as paperweights these days and while it is sharper the KL version now has the ring. I think the 'C' 65mm may have the ring too but my original Sekor (non-C) does not.

I've forgotten to use it at all on my 90mm for a whole roll and the shots still looked OK to me for shots which are not that close. For close-ups it does seem to make a difference.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,906
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
OK, I just know on the original 65mm and the 'C' 90mm there is no ring. I bought a 90mm KL because they're cheap as paperweights these days and while it is sharper the KL version now has the ring. I think the 'C' 65mm may have the ring too but my original Sekor (non-C) does not.

I've forgotten to use it at all on my 90mm for a whole roll and the shots still looked OK to me for shots which are not that close. For close-ups it does seem to make a difference.

I don't know if you've seen Mamiya's instructions for use of these floating element lenses. Here is a link to a useful if slightly older manual, courtesy of Mike Butkus' site:

http://www.cameramanuals.org/mamiya_pdf/mamiya_rb67_interchange_lenses.pdf

The applicable info is on page 7 of the manual which is the 9th page of the pdf.

Essentially it recommends for "spur-of-the-moment snapshots" that the infinity mark be used for everything from 7 feet to infinity, and the 3.3 foot mark be set for everything closer than 7 feet.

It also confirms that the purpose of the floating element is to "obtain sharp resolution down to (sic) the picture circumference".

And finally, it confirms that when turning the floating ring "no variations can be observed on the ground glass focusing screen".
 

snegron

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
806
Location
Hot, Muggy,
Format
35mm
My RB67 with metered CDS prism weighs 7 pounds. While I like my RB, I use my 645 much more. The images I get with my 645 lenses are richer in color and contrast than what I get from my RB.
 
OP
OP

Wayne

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
3,584
Location
USA
Format
Large Format
I cant believe I'm going to ask this but...what is a "metered CDS prism"????
 

Roger Cole

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
I cant believe I'm going to ask this but...what is a "metered CDS prism"????

A prism with a built in meter, using a CdS (Cadmium Sulfide) light sensitive cell. CdS cells were a next generation after selenium cells, much more sensitive but requiring a battery. Silicon cells came after CdS cells and are better - for one thing, Cds cells tend to have considerably slower response and can take a second or two to completely respond to changing light. Cds cells still pretty much work fine for meters though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photoresistor
 
OP
OP

Wayne

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
3,584
Location
USA
Format
Large Format
So this a built in or add on internal metering system?
 

Roger Cole

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
It's a metering system built in to the prism. So in this case the prism and metering system come together as a unit. Many medium format cameras have these available. You can get metering prisms or non-metering prisms.
 

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
So this a built in or add on internal metering system?

Both.

Built in, in the sense that it was made by Mamiya specifically for the RB as part of the "system".

Add on in the sense that the RB is truly modular. Just like interchangeable lenses, the finders and prisms interchange ever so easily. Same with the backs, want to shoot 645 for one frame, 6x7 on the next, just switch backs.
 

Roger Cole

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
Whoa. Nobody told me that. I don't want to, but that's cool.

Eh, why? You could always just shoot it 6x7 and then crop to 6x4.5 when you print it. You'd waste film but otherwise it works fine. If you need a 6x4.5 camera the RB is going to be about the biggest, heaviest one you're likely to find.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

markbarendt

Member
Joined
May 18, 2008
Messages
9,422
Location
Beaverton, OR
Format
Multi Format
I wasnt suggesting that you should Wayne, just making a point.

Adding a 645 back is a lot lighter and cheaper than carrying or buying a second system, ehh Roger. :wink:
 

Roger Cole

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
6,069
Location
Atlanta GA
Format
Multi Format
I wasnt suggesting that you should Wayne, just making a point.

Adding a 645 back is a lot lighter and cheaper than carrying or buying a second system, ehh Roger. :wink:

Sure it is, but...

The purpose, as I see it, for having a 645 camera is having something relatively small and light that takes larger images than 35mm on roll film. If you're going to take the RB anyway (bigger and heavier and all) why would you shoot smaller? It isn't like using a rollfilm back on a view camera where you have a much wider selection of film and much less expensive color film or the like (the reasons I use a 6x7 back on my 4x5 sometimes.)

So yeah, of course it's cheaper, but it's still married to the big camera. And I don't see any reason to shoot a smaller negative on a big camera, when it uses the exact same film. The only reason would be film savings.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom