Assuming the following is in good shape and operational, what would a good ballpark price range be for this set?
Mamiya RB67 Pro S body
Chimney Finder
Waist Level Finder
120 film back
Polaroid back
macro extension tubes
140mm Macro f4.5 Mamiya- Sekor C
90mm f3.8 Mamiya- Sekor C
75 f4.5 SMC Takumar 6x7
65mm f4.5 Mamiya- Sekor C
50mm f4.5 Mamiya- Sekor C
I don't know why there's a SMC Takumar 6x7 lens in the set...
That's quite expensive...
That's quite expensive...
I just sent my Pro S, 3 backs and 3 lenses for a CLA and had to pay €250 for it. Okay, a bit profit, risk for warranty, but still far below €1699 and have 2 extra lenses, 2 backs.
Same here.Two bodies and a bunch of lenses are living in my photo closet.
That pictures are not very sharp to be honest...I never used FP100c, so I don't know if you can expect sharp pictures with instant photography?people have realized that these are mechanical cameras, no electronics failing. so the prices went up a little bit, but still they are good value. and since there are instax square backs for them, they are more attractive than ever. instax is instant fun. got one http://www.instantphoto.eu/other/coyote_instax_square.htm
That pictures are not very sharp to be honest...I never used FP100c, so I don't know if you can expect sharp pictures with instant photography?
if you hold the pictures in your hand, they are pretty sharp. think of the size, instax square is only 62x62mm, so there are limits of resolution. FP100c was 95x73mm, that's nearly twice the size. even polaroid sx70/600 is about 60% bigger. just scan a nice old 60x60mm photo from an old family album. it looks sharp in your hand, scanned and on your screen you will see the same limits.That pictures are not very sharp to be honest...I never used FP100c, so I don't know if you can expect sharp pictures with instant photography?
Aha, the scans in your link looked out of focus/blurry. That has in my view nothing to do with the size of the "film".if you hold the pictures in your hand, they are pretty sharp. think of the size, instax square is only 62x62mm, so there are limits of resolution. FP100c was 95x73mm, that's nearly twice the size. even polaroid sx70/600 is about 60% bigger. just scan a nice old 60x60mm photo from an old family album. it looks sharp in your hand, scanned and on your screen you will see the same limits.
FP100c is gone and the new polaroid SX70/600 has not reached the quality of the old film (yet?) the only bigger instant format availble is intax wide, 99x62mm. there are some backs and cameras on my instant website for that.
They were needed as boat anchors.I let go of my RB kit 2 years ago, now kind of missing it, and looking around currently see that it is almost impossible to find one. Mine was only $200 from CameraWest (a great store, but not exactly the bargain hut) a few years ago. Where the hey did they all go? Did some blogger do a popular post that suddenly made RBs the must-have camera???
They were needed as boat anchors.
Is it "true" that the no1 tube is for the 90mm and the no2 for 127mm? I thought I read that somewhere.i think you'll find the no1 tube (45mm) even more useful than the 'big one' you already have.
Would did you get for the kit if I can ask. I've got a complete kit with 4 lenses.I finally sold my rather complete RB kit last year, with multiple accessories and seven lenses. I have a medium format view camera kit that I use; the RB rarely, if ever, went out the door. Plus, I have a Mamiya Press camera outfit. The press and VC cameras cover all my medium format needs.
The RB67 is a great system, though. So, it's not surprising that demand has increased.
..the No2 tube would reduce the min focus excessivley with the lenses you mention. 90mm lens/tube 1, and 127mm lens/tube2 both get to life size (with bellows extension) - implying a degree of mutuality.Is it "true" that the no1 tube is for the 90mm and the no2 for 127mm? I thought I read that somewhere.
I bought my kit from the son of a retired pro photographer, it has 50-65 and 90mm. Hence the no.2 ring wouldn't make any sense?
Is it "true" that the no1 tube is for the 90mm and the no2 for 127mm? I thought I read that somewhere.
I bought my kit from the son of a retired pro photographer, it has 50-65 and 90mm. Hence the no.2 ring wouldn't make any sense?
I let go of my RB kit 2 years ago, now kind of missing it, and looking around currently see that it is almost impossible to find one. Mine was only $200 from CameraWest (a great store, but not exactly the bargain hut) a few years ago. Where the hey did they all go? Did some blogger do a popular post that suddenly made RBs the must-have camera???
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?