Mamiya 645 vs 67

[angeloks]

Hi,

I have a Mamiya 645 Pro TL with the 45mm f2.8 and 80mm f2.8 lens. I love the "little" camera. But now that I'm using big negatives, I want bigger negatives... I'm looking into the Mamiya RZ67 Pro II. I could trade in my current kit plus some money for the 6x7 format with the 65mm and 180mm.

I mainly shoot landscapes/cityscape with my MF camera. I know that a Mamiya 6/7 would probably be more portable, but I like the SLR for composition. I heard the 65mm with FLE is great. I guess that'd be a good start for landscaping. Also, I like the idea of using polaroid with the 6x7 (on the 645, it kinda sucks).

Anyone has experience with the RZ67 II and 65mm. How would it compare to the 645 with 45mm ?

Thanks,

 

[redisburning]

are you car based?

even with a tripod, I would not put up with a RZ67 if I had to walk anywhere substantial. for that level of weight, 4x5 seems like a clearly superior option IMO. in fact, even something as impractical as my Sinar F folds up nice and isn't that bad even with a 90/150/210 combination with 3 lens boards and 10 holders. a field camera with a 90/150 like a Toyo 45 would give you the same coverage you already have if you are really jonesing for more real estate.

FWIW if you want to spend more money, why don't you pick up the 120 macro as a replacement for your 80? I think you would see an increase in IQ without being out too much cash or having to lug around an RZ.

I don't have a problem with the RZ67 system per se but for me it's really more of a camera that lived and died at the studio where you could just leave it on location. there you could make use of your polaroids, use roll film to take a bunch of different angles, sync it up to your strobes, etc.

for land/city-scape where you're going to scout a location, set up once and take only a few exposures when the light is just right, I don't think it makes sense. If you go the 4x5 route there is always the option of the 6x9 roll film back. and btw, there are absolutely large format lenses that run with the RZ optics. any modern Plasmat will put down enough resolution on 6x9 to trump the 6x7 of the RZ. the newest German APO plasmats are particularly impressive.

 

[sevo]

I have the 645proTL, and a couple RZ (plus a RB thrown in). The RZ (and before that the RB) was my studio work horse. Almost as huge and heavy as the RB, and hardly fit for hand-held use if you use the eye-level prism (which adds another kilo and makes the thing dangerously top heavy), but fun with a WLF, even out on the street.

I don't have the later 65mm, the old one already was excellent. Generally, I consider the floating elements on RB/RZ lenses a nuisance for non-studio work and avoided them wherever possible. They are not focus coupled, you manually have to set the ring to match the focus - if you forget it (which I mostly did), the results will be no better and may be even worse than from the earlier version (non floating element) lenses.

All RB/RZ wides are a bit flare prone, so use a compendium.

 

[bastian a.]

A Pentax 67 (II) would be a good alternative ...

 

[Spanik]

If I would go larger than my ProTL I'd go to a Fuji GX680. But right now I'm happy with the G690BL. I get 6x9, from 50mm to 180mm and reasonably portable.

 

[ruby.monkey]

I use an RZ Pro II with 110mm f/2.8 and WLF as a walkabout camera. As long as one avoids the prism finders, weight isn't really a problem; and that rotating back is a great feature.

I also have a Pro TL. They're both superb cameras - and unlike the Pentax 67, they don't make passers-by dive for cover every time the shutter goes off.

 

[j.scooter]

I currently have a rz and had the Pentax 67. I prefer the RZ because the viewfinder. The WLF even with the standard prism is so bright and snaps into focus. I struggled to get correct focus with the Pentax. The rotating back, bellows focusing and leaf shutters of the rz are pretty cool too.

I also don't have a problem hand holding the RZ.
Carrying it is another issue, I think it is too big and boxy to use a strap so I use a smallish shoulder bag that just fits the rz with lens and back attached with a front pocket for a light meter. Take the camera out when I want to take a shot then back in the bag until the next shot.

 

[Soeren]

A Pentax 67 (II) would be a good alternative ...

Hmm maybe but not if you ask my banker. Have you seen the prices they go for? You could have 2 RZ for the price of on P67II
Best regards

 

[sevo]

If I would go larger than my ProTL I'd go to a Fuji GX680.

Excellent camera and lenses, and very affordable these days. But with its open rail mechanism, it is not that much more hand-holdable than a Sinar F - and it weighs around 50% more than the already heavy RZ.

Besides, the low GX prices today are due to it being too dependent on electronics, micro-motors and plastics gears for long term survival. Many are already dead, literally worn out, and there are many parts that cannot be re-made at workshop scale now that the supply of original spares is gone. To a lesser degree the RZ (relative to the RB) and Pentax 67(II) (relative to the 6x7) have sustainability issues as well, but a bigger share of them have only seen casual or amateur use, while the majority of GXes seem to have been pounded to death in rental studios...

 

[Roger Hicks]

RBs are wonderfully reliable and deliver excellent quality, but as others have said, they're big and heavy and most at home on a tripod. By comparison, the 645 is about as heavy as many big autofocus 35mm SLRs and DSLRs. Having had both (my wife wore out her 645) I'd be more inclined to go with a "baby" (6x9) Linhof: range/viewfinder for speed, ground glass for precision (and yes, I've had those too and still have one). You need the hand-grip, though, to use it hand held.

Cheers,

R.

 

[haempe]

I lately turned in the opposide direction.
Added a M645 so I can leave the RB67 in the studio.
I'm tired to carry the RB67 around and for hand-held things it was always try and hope. Tripod is necessary with such a camera.

As redisburnig wrote, I too would grab the Sinar F2 with rollfilmback not the RB67 for scapes, similar weight and way better adjustment possibilities.

I think the 645 is a good compromise between negative size and portability.

 

[shadowfox]

My main 6x7 system camera is the Mamiya Universal Press (or MUP).
I don't know if it's because of the superb lenses, or the S-shaped back that is advertised to provide better film flatness; maybe both.

I had an RB67 kit once, sold it to a photography graduate whose arms are bigger than mine 🙂

Check out Bronica GS-1. They are supposed to be lighter than the Mamiya RB, but just as good.

 

[fuji645]

I have the 645 Super with the 45mm 2.8 and an RB67 with 55mm 4.5. I find both set-ups a joy to use; Handholding the RB not a big deal and the shutter release very smooth. Having both kits, I prefer the RB wide angle combo over the 645 Super for landscapes, primarily because of the revolving back. FWIW, I also have the Fuji 6x9 with the 90mm 3.5. Frankly, that setup comes in last behind the 2 Mamiya's for landscapes as well as overall sharpness and functionality.

 

[angeloks]

First, thank you all for your inputs ! That's really appreciated. And finally, I took the plunge, and got the kit Yesterday. Indeed, that thing is huge ! It dwarfs the 645... But it's so lovely. It's definitely something that I can carry around. I'll make some tests this week ! But for now I'm keeping the Pro TL, just in case I change my mind. I fear that I'll have to keep both kits...

 

[haempe]

...
I fear that I'll have to keep both kits...

No doubt this is the best solution... 😉

 

[Spanik]

Now where have I heard that before? Enjoy your new toy.