Which 6x6/6x7 Cameras Have Removable Backs?

[braxus]

Sorry guys. I was needing a camera that will shoot the same shot on different rolls of film, whether color and B&W, or two different types of B&W. I dont want to lug around two cameras, as its just too fiddly trying to switch between the two to try and get the same shot. I do have a Youtube channel and I like to show differences in films. Lugging a 5 pound camera isn't a huge issue with me. Its just trying to carry two separate cameras as the same time. Not only that but the RZ system allows for 6x6, when I want to shoot square instead of rectangle. I have decided the RZ system is probably my best bet, since it offers all I'm looking for. Its not cheap, but I consider it an investment. Like all my other film cameras. The RZ will probably only go up in price. Im sure there are more people able to repair a Mamiya then an off brand camera. Lots of used parts out there for this model.

 

[AgX]

As you already have made up your mind, why did you ask for other brands?

 

[braxus]

I looked into the other ones mentioned. Not interested so much. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking a common camera. After some thought, I was leaning towards wanting 6x7 mainly with 6x6 as a backup.

 

[Paul Howell]

I looked into the other ones mentioned. Not interested so much. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking a common camera. After some thought, I was leaning towards wanting 6x7 mainly with 6x6 as a backup.

Another advantage of the RB is that Mamiya made a lot of them, there are still a few tech who service them, if you can a beater body in working order get it as a parts body.

 

[MattKing]

I have nearly matching 35mm bodies for just such a purpose - late model Canon film cameras that can be bought for a song .
But if I wanted to do this on 120, I would use my Mamiya 645 Pro.
In fact, I have done it with the 645 Pro:
T-Max 400:

Ektachrome 100:

 

[awty]

Braxus, I don't think you mentioned what you're going to do with it. If it's handheld portraits, rather than tripod-mounted landscapes, then weight becomes a factor. Keep that in mind. Also, a 110mm lens with an RB67 was a fairly common portrait combo. Pros shot the hell out of them. So be careful with the camera and lens you buy. Alan.

Yes, being used by professionals means the biggest challenge is getting one that hasnt been worn out. Big heavy and awkward to use, hard to get parts, hard to get serviced and the cost of them has more than doubled over the last couple of years.......great lenses though, worth every cent.

 

[braxus]

Thanks for all your thoughts guys. There weren't too many cameras that could do both 6x6 and 6x7. You guys mentioned some. I'd like to see what all the fuss is about with the RZ. There is a reason its so popular.

 

[Pieter12]

If your intended purpose is to compare film, using a normal lens, why not go for a 4x5 field camera? You only have to have film holders load with the films you intend to compare, it is probably cheaper and lighter than a medium-format SLR with a couple of backs. And you don't have to shoot an entire roll to get what you want. You're already working on a tripod, too.

 

[braxus]

If your intended purpose is to compare film, using a normal lens, why not go for a 4x5 field camera? You only have to have film holders load with the films you intend to compare, it is probably cheaper and lighter than a medium-format SLR with a couple of backs. And you don't have to shoot an entire roll to get what you want. You're already working on a tripod, too.

I have a 4x5 Graflex, but I dont often use it because I like to shoot quicker then what it allows at times, and I also like to shoot more then just several shots. Carrying 10 to 15 film holders isn't my idea of fun. Also in the locations I shoot at, I dont have that much time to set up the shots with all the people around. I've done it, but I wouldnt want to do that on a regular basis. I have B&W 4x5 developing capability, but my holder only holds 6 negs, so if I had a couple dozen pictures to do, it would take me a whole afternoon developing them all. Not to say I wouldnt do that either, just not often. More film options in 120, and cheaper film costs. 120 rolls are the sweet spot of economy and quality, speed and slowing down a little to take the shots. Medium format 120 is my favorite camera to use.

 

[braxus]

RZ lenses are high quality professional lenses as good as they get when it comes to medium format. It only becomes a mater of which flavour you prefer when they get to that standard.

How does the Pentax 67 lenses compare against the RZ lenses? Is there much a difference or noticable?

 

[Paul Howell]

Although I never shot a Pentax 6X7 it was widely used by Pro's, the images I've seem over years have been excellent, the only negative thing that has come up as been mirror slap.

 

[braxus]

I found a 50mm Mamiya lens isn't so much money compared to the 90 and 110mm. I might just get the 50 as well as a normal lens for the system.

 

[narsuitus]

I might just get the 50 as well as a normal lens for the system.

The (G) 50mm wide-angle and the (A) 90mm normal are two of my favorite lenses for the RB67.

I also use the (C) 140mm macro, (B) 150mm soft focus, (D) 180mm telephoto, (F) 250mm telephoto, and (E) 100-200mm zoom.

All use 77mm filters.


RB67 lenses by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Donald Qualls]

Also worth noting that, presuming you override interlocks as needed, an RB67 will work with any 2x3 Graflok back. I have factory 6x4.5 and 6x7 backs, but also have Graflex 22 (an RH12 would be nicer) and 23 (RH8 would be an improvement). The camera won't quite cover the 6x9 frame in the 23 back, but my RB67 Pro is quite happy to use it (though it is also quite happy to let me shoot on the dark slide with the 22 and 23 backs). I'm also in process of permanently converting a 220 6x7 back for 35mm 24x70. In terms of formats, the only medium format that comes close to the versatility of the RB is a Century or Baby Speed or the various up-market competitiors (Plaubel Makina, etc.). Given the RB is an SLR, it wins for me...

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The RB67 also comes with insta-film backs.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The RB67 also comes with insta-film backs.

But only for instant films that are no longer manufactured. The Coyote Instax back is barely available, if at all. It is possible to mount other 2x3 Graflok accessories, including 2x3 Grafmatics; this would matter a lot more if there were more than two or three emulsion choices in 2x3 sheet film. Just being able to shoot 120 in four different frames (counting 6x9 the same as the Mamiya 6x8, since that's the image size you'll get) as well as 35mm pano format, and lenses from 50 mm to 500, with three choices of viewfinder, is enough to make me willing to carry the heavy iron.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have nearly matching 35mm bodies for just such a purpose - late model Canon film cameras that can be bought for a song .
But if I wanted to do this on 120, I would use my Mamiya 645 Pro.
In fact, I have done it with the 645 Pro:
T-Max 400:
View attachment 283884

Ektachrome 100:
View attachment 283885

Is that old house still standing?? I shot it with my RB a few years ago. Shot a couple on HP5 and SFX, one after the other. That's what I like about having more than one back.

 

[MattKing]

Is that old house still standing?? I shot it with my RB a few years ago. Shot a couple on HP5 and SFX, one after the other. That's what I like about having more than one back.

Yep.
Those shots are from 2020.
It looks just about the same now.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

But only for instant films that are no longer manufactured. The Coyote Instax back is barely available, if at all. It is possible to mount other 2x3 Graflok accessories, including 2x3 Grafmatics; this would matter a lot more if there were more than two or three emulsion choices in 2x3 sheet film. Just being able to shoot 120 in four different frames (counting 6x9 the same as the Mamiya 6x8, since that's the image size you'll get) as well as 35mm pano format, and lenses from 50 mm to 500, with three choices of viewfinder, is enough to make me willing to carry the heavy iron.

I've got that back and a roll of Fuji FP100 instant film left. It's probably bad by now. But someone could come back with new instant film again. If they do, my back will suddenly go up a lot in price so I can sell it.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Well, there's One Instant -- but it costs TWICE as much for three (not very reliable, from what I've seen) frames as we used to pay for a pack (8 frames) of FP-100c twenty years ago. Tricky to load, too, and no warranty at all.

For the foreseeable future, the only instant films you can reasonably depend on are those from reconstituted Polaroid and Instax -- and lots of people seem to dislike the color balance from the Polaroid. Instax is great stuff, but not much use to me until my Lomograflok ships (and then not compatible with my RB67).

 

[braxus]

Yep.
Those shots are from 2020.
It looks just about the same now.

Where is this house? Maybe I should grab my camera and get a shot myself.

Did more looking on Ebay at RZ lenses. Most of them are really quite cheap. Some less then $100 bucks like the 100-200 zoom, and some between $100-250. That seems more easily purchased. I dont know why the normal lenses like the 90 and 110 are so way up there in price? They vary between $600-1000.

 

[MattKing]

Where is this house? Maybe I should grab my camera and get a shot myself.

Some background info: https://www.delta-optimist.com/in-t...-historic-delta-home-to-eventually-go-3115301

Highway 17 goes almost over top of it, but there is no direct exit. PM me if you need specific directions.
It is just down 72nd from the North 40 Park reserve, which is where a lot of my tree photos come from.

 

[MattKing]

Where is this house? Maybe I should grab my camera and get a shot myself.

Did more looking on Ebay at RZ lenses. Most of them are really quite cheap. Some less then $100 bucks like the 100-200 zoom, and some between $100-250. That seems more easily purchased. I dont know why the normal lenses like the 90 and 110 are so way up there in price? They vary between $600-1000.

Many of the RZ lenses are probably inexpensive because they don't work on the RB.
The zoom is really large.
The 110mm is the fastest lens in either the RB or RZ's range, and a nice focal length.
My 65mm and 140mm pair on the RB worked really well for me. But I got a lot of joy from the 50mm too.
The 180mm K/L lens I had was great, but in my case under-used.

 

[braxus]

I noticed a lot of lenses on Ebay are listed as for the Pro II camera. Is there any difference in lenses between version 1 and 2 cameras? I would think they'd all work as long as its for the RZ mount?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

I noticed a lot of lenses on Ebay are listed as for the Pro II camera. Is there any difference in lenses between version 1 and 2 cameras? I would think they'd all work as long as its for the RZ mount?

That's just marketing from eBay sellers. There's no difference in the lenses for one version or the other of the RZ. Also, bear in mind with the 110 f2.8 that there are two versions of that lens - the 110 and the 110 W. The W version is highly sought after and commands a premium. The regular 110 should be available for less -more like $600 US. The W versions go for around $1000 US.

The RZ is an excellent option. For all people complain about the weight, I've traveled internationally with mine and shot "street" photos. The weight, combined with how smooth and well-damped the mirror on it is, is actually an advantage when shooting long-ish hand-held exposures. I've pulled off a 1/15th of a second pointed straight up with the 50mm on the RZ. Tack sharp, no blur, no shake. Another advantage of the RZ with its electronically controlled shutter is that you have shutter speeds up to I think it's 8 seconds. With the RB lenses, you're into B territory and that weird system they have for triggering long exposures where you attach a cable release to the lens, not the shutter button, put the lens on T, trip the body shutter button, then trigger the lens, count your time, then re-trigger the lens. The RZ lenses do that too, but you don't have to go to that extreme until you're doing REALLY long exposures.