WOW! Mamiya RZ67 glass looks extremely sharp through the viewfinder!

mweintraub · Jun 10, 2015

I've said it before, but I just got a 65mm L-A lens and tried it out (dry firing) and WOW! That viewfinder + glass just makes it pop into focus, SHARP focus!

That is all.

flavio81 · Jun 11, 2015

Wait until you see the negatives... That "PROFESSIONAL" label on the side is no joke, this is really a pro-caliber system. Congrats on choosing the RZ, one of the best cameras ever!

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

flavio81 said:
Wait until you see the negatives... That "PROFESSIONAL" label on the side is no joke, this is really a pro-caliber system. Congrats on choosing the RZ, one of the best cameras ever!

Oh, I've had this for over a year. It's been sitting for a few months and getting the 65mm rekindled my love for it again. It's been a long three days at work so looking forward to shelping this around at lunch taking photos! Hope the 90+ degree F weather in jeans doesn't kill me.

ETA: I'm now thinking of selling my Mamiya 645 Pro kit and Keep this and the Bronica SQ-A (I have a 645 back for it and the RZ). =/

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

Might not be the best scan, but I do enjoy the kit!

EdSawyer · Jun 11, 2015

Good choice. I'd take the RZ over almost any other medium format setup, really. the 65 M/L-A is a super lens, one of the sharpest out there I think. It's almost criminal how cheap they are now (used) vs. when they were new. That was a $1500-2000 lens back in the 90s, now you can get them for ~ $250ish. crazy!

flavio81 · Jun 11, 2015

EdSawyer said:
Good choice. I'd take the RZ over almost any other medium format setup, really.

Over the RB as well?

Sirius Glass · Jun 11, 2015

Welcome to MF photography. Wait until you see enlarged prints or projected slides.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

flavio81 said:
Over the RB as well?

110mm 2.8. Sorry.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alan Gales · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
Oh, I've had this for over a year. It's been sitting for a few months and getting the 65mm rekindled my love for it again. It's been a long three days at work so looking forward to shelping this around at lunch taking photos! Hope the 90+ degree F weather in jeans doesn't kill me.

ETA: I'm now thinking of selling my Mamiya 645 Pro kit and Keep this and the Bronica SQ-A (I have a 645 back for it and the RZ). =/

You sound like me. At one time I owned an RZ outfit plus Bronica EC 6x6 and Pentax 645Nll 6x4.5 outfits. The RZ lenses are sharp.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

Alan Gales said:
You sound like me. At one time I owned an RZ outfit plus Bronica EC 6x6 and Pentax 645Nll 6x4.5 outfits. The RZ lenses are sharp.

I've been blown away by the RZ. It kind of not makes to not want to shoot anything else.

Are there other affordable systems that are as sharp? I figured the unfiltered ("-affordable") list would be:

Hassy
Fuji GX680

flavio81 · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
I've been blown away by the RZ. It kind of not makes to not want to shoot anything else.

Are there other affordable systems that are as sharp? I figured the unfiltered ("-affordable") list would be:

Hassy
Fuji GX680

I'm not sure if the Hassy would be sharper, maybe "as sharp" but not sharper. The RZ has more negative area (usable on a typical aspect ratio: 56x70mm versus 56x45mm, that's a 55% increase); which will help with resolution and sharpness. And the RZ lenses are probably still state-of-the-art or very close to state-of-the-art.

I don't own the RZ, i own the RB67 and I find the 90/3.8C lens to be able to fully use the resolution of the Fuji Acros 100 film right to the corners, which means i can't improve too much on it!!

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

flavio81 said:
I'm not sure if the Hassy would be sharper, maybe "as sharp" but not sharper. The RZ has more negative area (usable on a typical aspect ratio: 56x70mm versus 56x45mm, that's a 55% increase); which will help with resolution and sharpness. And the RZ lenses are probably still state-of-the-art or very close to state-of-the-art.

I don't own the RZ, i own the RB67 and I find the 90/3.8C lens to be able to fully use the resolution of the Fuji Acros 100 film right to the corners, which means i can't improve too much on it!!

I'm referring to these tests: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html and on the Hassy V system lenses (6x6). To be honest, I'm very happy with my SQ-A system no matter what the tests say.

Sirius Glass · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
I'm referring to these tests: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html and on the Hassy V system lenses (6x6). To be honest, I'm very happy with my SQ-A system no matter what the tests say.

http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html has it right. That is what my experience showed me, but I did not have any hard data to back it up. SQ-A is good, but the Hassleblad optics, compact size, system and weight has the late comer competitors left in the dust.

flavio81 · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
I'm referring to these tests: http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html and on the Hassy V system lenses (6x6). To be honest, I'm very happy with my SQ-A system no matter what the tests say.

Using the data of such test:

hasselblad 80/2.8, lines per mm at f8:
96 107 60 (center, middle, edge)

average = 87.7 lines / mm
usable film area = 56x45mm (assuming you print to 8x10" or similar paper where the aspect ratio is 1:1.25 rectangle)

lines of resolution per picture area:
horizontal = 45 mm * 87.7 = 3947 lines
vertical = 56 *¨87.7 = 4911 lines
product (useful for comparison) = 3947*4911 = 19'383,717

mamiya 110/2.8, lines per mm at f8:
76 85 68 (center, middle, edge)

av= 76.3 lines / mm

usable film area = 56x70mm

lines of resolution per picture area:
horizontal = 70 mm * 76.3 = 5341 lines
vertical = 56 *¨76. = 4273 lines
product = 5341*4273 = 22'822,093

The Mamiya system is still resolving more according to such tests.

Also, note that you need more than one sample to compare. For example, in such link the 80/2.8 for the mamiya TLR system only resolves a maximum of 67 l/mm on Tmax 100, while another test on the web, still on Tmax 100, achieves 90 l/mm with that lens. Lens samples vary, conditions vary, etc.

flavio81 · Jun 11, 2015

PS:

On the test cited, at the end it says:

"Many camera lenses were tested at 20:1 distance to focal length ratio. Those that weren't are noted in the above table. For 75mm/80mm lenses this works out to 5 feet from the test target or 50 to 61 inches. "

Lenses are not always optimized at the same focusing distance. For example a manufacturer may choose to optimize a certain lens for best performance an infinity, while another may choose to optimize the lens for closer distances, for example 3 meters. Any lens optimized for infinity will suffer in performance if used at short distances, such as the ones used in the above test.

A comprehensive lens test would also compare the performance when the lens is focused at infinity. That would be a fairer test.

For example the lens on the Minox 35GT is poor performing if used at the conditions above (very short focusing distance), while if it is used at infinity, it is extremely sharp.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

flavio81 said:
PS:

On the test cited, at the end it says:

"Many camera lenses were tested at 20:1 distance to focal length ratio. Those that weren't are noted in the above table. For 75mm/80mm lenses this works out to 5 feet from the test target or 50 to 61 inches. "

Lenses are not always optimized at the same focusing distance. For example a manufacturer may choose to optimize a certain lens for best performance an infinity, while another may choose to optimize the lens for closer distances, for example 3 meters. Any lens optimized for infinity will suffer in performance if used at short distances, such as the ones used in the above test.

A comprehensive lens test would also compare the performance when the lens is focused at infinity. That would be a fairer test.

For example the lens on the Minox 35GT is poor performing if used at the conditions above (very short focusing distance), while if it is used at infinity, it is extremely sharp.

Yeah, you're right. Good catch.

paul ron · Jun 11, 2015

flavio81 said:
Over the RB as well?

no difference in images! Just one body is built cheaper than the other. mamiya glass has always been at the top in its class.

Alan Gales · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
I've been blown away by the RZ. It kind of not makes to not want to shoot anything else.

Are there other affordable systems that are as sharp? I figured the unfiltered ("-affordable") list would be:

Hassy
Fuji GX680

Just the RB or some of the Fuji rangefinders with fixed lenses. You mentioned Hasselblad and Fuji GX680. You can add Mamiya 6 and 7 and Rollei SL66 to the expensive list.

I ended up selling mine to fund my large format equipment. I admit that sometimes I do miss the old RZ. I owned the 50mm ULD, 110mm and 180mm lenses for it. I mostly shot portraiture and they were a great set of lenses. Just make sure that you have a good solid tripod to use with your camera. RZs are not the lightest things in the world.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

Ah yes, I guess I was thinking more SLRs.

I don't find RZ very heavy. And it has a very smooth mirror transport that makes it very, um, smooth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Alan Gales · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
Ah yes, I guess I was thinking more SLRs.

I don't find RZ very heavy. And it has a very smooth mirror transport that makes it very, um, smooth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's all relative. An RZ is heavy compared to a Blad. I owned a 500/cm for a while too. Pick up the Mamiya "L" grip. It makes the RZ handle a whole lot better plus it gives you a cold shoe to mount a flash.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

Bronica SQ-A 1.525 kg
Kiev 88 cm 1.515 kg
Mamiya Rz67 2.457 kg

All with their standard lenses, 120 back and wlf.

I like too keep my RZ Minimal when carrying. I have the bracket but don't use it. I have a prism but would probably only use it when on tripod at eye level or maybe running and gunning at eye level for short periods, ha

Alan Gales · Jun 11, 2015

mweintraub said:
Bronica SQ-A 1.525 kg
Kiev 88 cm 1.515 kg
Mamiya Rz67 2.457 kg

All with their standard lenses, 120 back and wlf.

I like too keep my RZ Minimal when carrying. I have the bracket but don't use it. I have a prism but would probably only use it when on tripod at eye level or maybe running and gunning at eye level for short periods, ha

I used my RZ on a tripod mostly but I still liked the L grip. Besides the waist level finder I also had a metered finder but didn't like it. For running and gunning I used the Pentax 654Nll with autofocus, autowind and matrix metering.

mweintraub · Jun 11, 2015

I thought I'd use the 645 Pro for that, but I've done well with the RZ on the street. I just always have an eye on the meter setting I should use so I can quickly set them, then focus.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Theo Sulphate · Jun 11, 2015

paul ron said:
no difference in images! Just one body is built cheaper than the other. mamiya glass has always been at the top in its class.

Which is the cheaper (less robust?) body - RB or RZ?

I have the RB67 Pro S - have never handled an RZ, though the RZ lenses look awesome.

film_man · Jun 12, 2015

Theo Sulphate said:
Which is the cheaper (less robust?) body - RB or RZ?

I have the RB67 Pro S - have never handled an RZ, though the RZ lenses look awesome.

I suppose people mean the RZ is "cheaper" as it has more plastic on the outside than the all metal RB.

WOW! Mamiya RZ67 glass looks extremely sharp through the viewfinder!

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency