From: huw@castle.ed.ac.uk (H G J Evans)
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Subject: Re: Moving up to 6x7 (Mamiya)
Summary: Differences between RB67, RB67ProS, RB67ProSD and RZ67.
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:38:29 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Nov6.154034.112@athena.mit.edu> sli@athena.mit.edu (Sheung L Li) writes:
>Could anyone tell me the difference between the various variants of
>the RB67, and the RZ67.  Is the rotatable back on the RZ really useful
>in practice?
>
>Any experiences with favorite lenses would be appreciated.
>Have there been any significant changes in lens design over the
>years?

There are, as far as I am aware four variations on the original RB67
theme: the RB67 itself, RB67 ProS, RB67 ProSD, and the RZ67. Of these,
only the RB67 ProSD and the RZ67 are currently in production (the
various RB's were just updated versions of the original), although there
are plenty of all types around on the second hand market (in this
country, at least).
  The RB67 ProS is distinguished fron the RB67 (I believe) by the
inclusion of an inter-lock to prevent unintentional double exposure (it
can be over-ridden). In truth, this is a feature of the film back rather
than the camera as a whole, and it is necessary to be carefull when
buying s/h backs if this concerns you. There may well have been other
small changes, but I believe the differences are mostly minor (like the
focussing lock?? I'm not sure if the RB67 had this).
  The differences with the RB67 ProSD are much more significant. The
most important is a redesigned lens mount which will accept the APO
and shift lenses previously only available to RZ users. Old RB lenses
are still usable. The new ProSD film backs are slightly different as
well: they now have a dark-slide storage slot which replaces the lugs on
the side of the body of the earlier cameras. Whether or not this is more
convenient I cannot say. All RB backs can be used on all RB cameras.
  With the introduction of the Pro SD, Mamiya have redesigned some of
the RB lenses. Specifically, the 65mm, 90mm,  and 127mm are completely
new, with the 90 (and 127?) now incorporating moving elements, and also
there is some use of low dispersion glass. New to the range are the
75mm, 75mm shift, 210mm APO, 250mm APO, 350mm APO, and 500mm APO. The
new lens series is designated the 'K series'. Older lenses are 'C
series', and some older still, without the C designation, should perhaps
be avoided, as they were un-coated.
  The RZ67, as you probably know, is basically an electronic version of
the RB. Shutter speeds are controlled from the camera body (which is why
you can't use RZ lenses on an RB, although it is OK the other way round)
and film wind on is coupled to the shutter wind on (on the RB's you have
to wind each on separately, unless you have the special motorized film
backs). The back mounting system for the RZ is totally different to the
RB, which uses an adapter in between body and back, providing the
rotation feature.
  The rotating back is really the "raison d'etre" of the RB and RZ
cameras (RB = Rotating Back), and it is *immensely* useful. It means the
end of needing to turn the camera on its side to take vertical format
pictures. This may not sound like much, but it is significant for two
reasons: first, you do not, as with every other rectangular format MF
SLR (apart from the Fuji 680), need an expensive, heavy, and bulky prism
finder to give you upright images when using vertical format (remember,
with a waist level finder only, you get a laterally reversed image);
second, trying to properly frame a shot with 6 or 7 pounds of (for
instance) Bronica GS1 and prism finder, supported from the side (on a
tripod), is not all that easy, at least not if you are using a B&S tripod
head. With a pan & tilt head I dare say it's not so bad.
  My only experiences of the lenses is with the 90mmC and 140mmC macro
for the RB. I find the 90 superb. As is usual with 'standard' lenses for
MF and LF cameras, it is a *true* standard; that is, the focal length
approximates to the diagonal of the image area (88.4mm, in the case of
ProS film backs). This makes it, for my tastes, a very good landscape
lens, being slightly wider angle than a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera. The
140 I only bought recently and haven't really put it through it's paces yet,
but initial impressions are good.
  I would admit to having one or two small gripes about the RB, but they
are not significant enough to put me off it. It is unquestionably a
superb machine, very well made, and extremely reliable, which does what
it is intended to do about as well as any camera could.


>
>Should I be looking at anything else?
>
>sli@athena.mit.edu

  I personally have no regrets about buying an RB67 ProS, but if you're
not prepared for the weight and bulk of the RB/RZ, or for the nuisance
of the two wind-on actions with the RB, then consider the Bronica GS1,
or, if you can handle the smaller and non-rectangular format of
something like a Hasselblad or Bronica SQA (no need for rotating backs
there) then maybe 6x6 would be a better way to go.




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%Huw Evans          huw@castle.ed.ac.uk     %
%                   huw@maths.ed.ac.uk      %
%                   Tel.  +44 (0)31-650-5067%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Newsgroups: rec.photo