tell me about the RB67

[CGW]

Here's what's where, seal-wise, with the Pro body and back. The back-adapter seal and back seals are what usually go first. They're also the easiest to replace. I use thin, adhesive-backed sheet foam from craft stores that works perfectly. The scope of replacement here might not be necessary.

http://aki-asahi.com/store/html/Mamiya-RB67/Light-seal/index.php

 

[Wayne]

Holy crow, thats a lot of seals! But it doesn't look that hard to replace them.

 

[CGW]

Holy crow, thats a lot of seals! But it doesn't look that hard to replace them.

Relax, Hoss, only a few are probably rotten. Where the back attaches to the RB and the hinge seals inside the back are probably all that require replacement. These are the usual suspects for light leaks.

 

[Wayne]

Can I use a Pro-S back or SD back on a Pro, or am I stuck with the Pro backs only?

Edit: OK, I read they are for the most part interchangeable but let me know if that's wrong.

 

[MattKing]

Can I use a Pro-S back or SD back on a Pro, or am I stuck with the Pro backs only?

Edit: OK, I read they are for the most part interchangeable but let me know if that's wrong.

If you haven't seen the Reznitsky chart, you need to .

http://www.reznitsky.info/Mamiya/Comchart.htm

 

[Wayne]

Yes, I needed that.

So the answer is yes but does "No doung exposure prevention" apply only to the RZ series? I assume that means no DOUBLE exposure prevention...And double exposure prevention would be why I would want a later back.

 

[MattKing]

Double exposure prevention requires contributions from both the back and the body. The RB67 Pro bodies cannot offer that advantage with any of the available backs.

Surprisingly, while it is a disadvantage of the Pro bodies, it isn't as much of a problem as you might think - most likely due to the fact that winding the film and cocking the shutter are two separate actions.

EDIT: and if you do get the later backs, they will offer that function when you buy the Pro-S or Pro-SD body to supplement your kit

 

[fmajor]

Hi Wayne - sorry i'm late to the conversation RE: light seals.

Don't be intimidated with changing light seals. I changed the light seals in my Pro-S 120 back and while there are more than a few areas, it's pretty easy with the right materials (and some simple tips). The more challenging part is getting all the old seal material/adhesive out (i tend toward perfectionism so i probably went overboard in this....). I don't have access to the best solvents for this so i had alot more 'sweat-equity' in cleaning mine out, but in the end it all went well. It was the 1st time i've done this and i am completely pleased with the results - no light leaks and a much more "tight-fitting" enclosure plus the added satisfaction i got from doing it myself.

I've not done the camera body b/c it came from KEH w/new seals in place - though i believe that would be a more involved job and would likely send it a Professional Tech for a CLA/Light-seal replace 'all-in-one' service.

I'd not hesitate to buy another Pro-S 120 back if all it needed were new light seals (and the mechanics were working). However, a Pro-SD back (which has no degradable light seals and are newer so likely less use) is also appealing, but they come at a higher price usually.

 

[fmajor]

OK, so i'll add another post....(i've some time to write!!).

For the price ($175 - not too much money even on a tight budget) i'd ask if he'd consider throwing in another 120 back - 'just asking and i don't want to offend you, but would you consider throwing in another back for the camera?'.... At that price, you're still getting into an *awesome* system and format - even if it was just one back.

Once you've determined how wonderful the RB67 is for you (or not...), you can then buy a Pro-SD model (as i will probably do) and start going crazy w/lenses!!!

While i love using my Pro-S i wish i had just bought a Pro-SD in the 1st place. It can use a wider range of lenses and the 75mm Tilt/Shift lens that i'd love to be able to use. The inability to use the 75mm lens is the only regret to my Pro-S purchase - otherwise for me there's nothing else i need/want to do that the Pro-SD does that the Pro-S cannot.

 

[philosomatographer]

Unless you specifically want to use the 75mm Shift or 500mm APO lens, I really wouldn't stress about the differences between Pro, Pro-S, Pro-SD. They're all mechanical cameras, they all require you to think, so the extra added interlock or two won't make a big difference.

I have an ancient (made in 1970) original RB67 body, and I have been having an absolute ball with it for the past four years. Recently started shooting Pan F @ ISO 32 with it:

 

[markbarendt]

Unless you specifically want to use the 75mm Shift or 500mm APO lens, I really wouldn't stress about the differences between Pro, Pro-S, Pro-SD. They're all mechanical cameras, they all require you to think, so the extra added interlock or two won't make a big difference.

I have to agree, I have the 90mm non-C and a 150SF-C and rarely find myself wanting anything different.

I have been bitten by a double exposure on the RB but that's just part of learning the camera. Once you establish a pattern for use it's not a big deal.

On this note though I will suggest that you always advance the film immediately after each shot and if you can't remember if you did advance one more anyway. This is complicated more when you have multiple backs in play and are in a hurry. Doing it the same way every time normally eliminates the issue.

 

[Wayne]

Happy Birthday to me. Took almost 3 months since I started this thread, but I'm now the owner of an RB67 pro, a 90mm M-S lens, and a couple of 120 backs. I didnt get the regular waist level viewer I wanted, but it has some non-folding magnifying viewer instead. BUt it will work. I also got some free frozen outdated rolls of HP5+, Velvia, Pan F and Ektachome to get me started.

Now I just have to figure out how it all works. I downloaded a manual and its time to read up.

How can you tell a Pro back from a Pro-S back? One of the backs has a Pro-S darkslide, but I haven't found any other differences in it yet so I suspect that's the only part of it thats is Pro S.

 

[MattKing]

The Pro-S backs are labelled as such - both on the back of the outside shell and in the middle of the insert.

Congratulations, and have fun!

 

[bushpig]

Congrats, Wayne. Glad for you.

Matt is correct. A Pro-S back can easily be identified by the 'pro S' logo in the top right hand corner of the back.

Have fun with it, Wayne. It's a wonderful system. A lot of fun to use.

 

[fmajor]

Congrats Wayne!!!!

You're gonna have a blast. I'm heading to Budapest in the morning with a roll each of Fuji Acros, T-Max400 and Kodak Portra NC160 and of course my Pro-S!!!

 

[Wayne]

I'm already having a blast just getting familiar with the system. What a sturdy and complex, well designed piece of equipment. I am truly impressed and I haven't even exposed a frame yet. Hopefully that will be rectified soon. Unfortunately I'm realizing now that my shutter speeds are a bit slow, but it will still work.

 

[markbarendt]

Unfortunately I'm realizing now that my shutter speeds are a bit slow, but it will still work.

Welcome to the MF world.

 

[keithwms]

You can get much faster shutter speeds in 645.

 

[Wayne]

I think I've been misunderstood. I meant my shutter needs a CLA. My 1 second is closer to 2 seconds, and 1/2 second is closer to 1 second.

 

[markbarendt]

Yes, misunderstood.

 

[keithwms]

No, we need to sell you a different camera!!!

 

[bushpig]

I'm already having a blast just getting familiar with the system. What a sturdy and complex, well designed piece of equipment. I am truly impressed and I haven't even exposed a frame yet. Hopefully that will be rectified soon. Unfortunately I'm realizing now that my shutter speeds are a bit slow, but it will still work.

I'm sorry to hear about your shutter. You'll get it worked out. I don't know how much it'll cost to get your lens CLA'd, but it may be cheaper to just buy another. They lenses (especially the 90) are plentiful.

 

[Wayne]

So I finally got around to developing some film, and I obviously have some light leaks. The seals on the back of the camera where the film back seals are definitely shot. I'm wondering if anyone can diagnose other possible trouble spots from this picture. Its a crappy scan and looks like the whole film area is fogged, which it isnt-but the whole frame area shows some. There is a broad, more diffuse horizontal- lengthwise smear of leakage, and the darker vertical line 1/3 of the way into every frame. The lengthwise smear is continuous from one end of the roll to the other, and shows through even in exposed frames, but the vertical mark doesn't show up in any of the exposed frames. That vertical mark goes all the way to the edge of the film in blank frames, as shown, but does not show up on the edges of exposed frames.

I'm off to get some seal material...

 

[CGW]

So I finally got around to developing some film, and I obviously have some light leaks. The seals on the back of the camera where the film back seals are definitely shot. I'm wondering if anyone can diagnose other possible trouble spots from this picture. Its a crappy scan and looks like the whole film area is fogged, which it isnt-but the whole frame area shows some. There is a broad, more diffuse horizontal- lengthwise smear of leakage, and the darker vertical line 1/3 of the way into every frame. The lengthwise smear is continuous from one end of the roll to the other, and shows through even in exposed frames, but the vertical mark doesn't show up in any of the exposed frames. That vertical mark goes all the way to the edge of the film in blank frames, as shown, but does not show up on the edges of exposed frames.

I'm off to get some seal material...

Don't sweat it. Light leaks happen in the best of families.

Go back upstream and look at the Japanese link I posted on the anatomy Mamiya light seals. Looks like the whole roll leak is probably the film back/RB seal. The cross frame leak looks like the clasp/hinge seals on the clam shell portion of the back that surrounds the film insert. Both sets are an easy fix with thin adhesive backed foam.

 

[Wayne]

I don't understand why the darker leak isn't present on exposed frames...

But anyway, I've got most of the seals replaced now on my backup holder, which was in worse shape than I realized when I bought it. I have a half roll of exposed film in the other back. I think I will switch the film carrier innards over to this shell with new seals, and see if the second half of the roll comes out any better. Or maybe I should transfer the film carrier over, repair those seals and put the carrier back in that one and finish it up. That's probably smarter.