# Will a Mamiya RB67 meet my needs?



## thepaulreid (Feb 5, 2012)

Hi Guys,

I have recently gone from a Pentax K5 to a Rolleicord Vb and have started self developing.  Whilst I love the charm of the Rolleicord images (Xenar 3.5), I am looking for something with greater contrast and detail to shoot people/models. I have read some reviews and am happy to shoot slow on a tripod (I shoot Rolleicord for god's sake!) but I am looking to shoot more natural light rather than flash.  My questions are, 

will the RB67 give me more detail and contrast?

what is the diff between this and a 645??

which is the best portrait lens?

what are the disadvantages to shooting with this camera?

Thanks

Paul:mrgreen:


----------



## gsgary (Feb 5, 2012)

Ive had a look at you Flickr page and i'm not sure you could do any better some really nice shots on there


----------



## thepaulreid (Feb 5, 2012)

Hi gsgary, very kind of you. I think there is still room for improvement!!!  

Anyone paid up with the RB67 club????


----------



## Overread (Feb 5, 2012)

I know you might have already looked, but there is a fairly active RB67 group on flickr :
Flickr: Mamiya RB67

I know cameras like this can end up with you not getting as much info/as many replies/opinions here, though we do have some good experienced users. The above group might, however, give you a few more inputs to help make your choice.


----------



## Proteus617 (Feb 5, 2012)

Scanned negatives?  The Xenar is a fine, modern coated lens.  If you are not getting the contrast you desire, look at your process, not the lens or the body.


----------



## maris (Feb 5, 2012)

> thepaulreid;2488715]Hi Guys,
> I have recently gone from a Pentax K5 to a Rolleicord Vb and have started self developing.  Whilst I love the charm of the Rolleicord images (Xenar 3.5), I am looking for something with greater contrast and detail to shoot people/models. I have read some reviews and am happy to shoot slow on a tripod (I shoot Rolleicord for god's sake!) but I am looking to shoot more natural light rather than flash.  My questions are,
> will the RB67 give me more detail and contrast?


I use the Mamiya RB 67 system for the same advantages you are looking for. Yes, there is more detail and contrast in a Mamiya 6x7 negative than a 6x6 Rolleicord negative because it's bigger. The Mamiya lens designs are more modern with better coatings. 


> what is the diff between this and a 645??


The 6x7 negative is more than 50% bigger than a 645. This is a difference you can see easily. Remember, all 6x6 cameras, Rolleicords and Hasselblads included, are really 645's if you are making standard rectangular photographs.


> which is the best portrait lens?


Best? Too subjective to answer! Some folks say the 180mm is best. Others say the 150mm SF (soft focus!) is the ultimate. Remember, all Mamiya RB lenses focus really close so you can get full face portraits with virtually anything in the lens range. And you don't have to fit extension tubes like unfortunate Hasselblad users must.


> what are the disadvantages to shooting with this camera?


The Mamiya RB 67 doesn't offer rise, shift, or swing movements. That's why I also use 4x5 and 8x10 format view cameras.


----------



## compur (Feb 5, 2012)

Firstly, congratulations on your film work and wonderful film images. 



thepaulreid said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> I have recently gone from a Pentax K5 to a Rolleicord Vb and have started self developing.  Whilst I love the charm of the Rolleicord images (Xenar 3.5), I am looking for something with greater contrast and detail to shoot people/models. I have read some reviews and am happy to shoot slow on a tripod (I shoot Rolleicord for god's sake!) but I am looking to shoot more natural light rather than flash.  My questions are,
> 
> will the RB67 give me more detail and contrast?



I don't know what you mean by more contrast.  Some of the Rolleicord photos on your flickr account seem to show extreme contrast so I don't know what you're after on that score.  You seem to like back-lit photos too which do show reduced contrast (as is often the case with such) and the RB lenses may help you to reduce flare in those situations and thus increase contrast due to better lens coatings.  But, then again they may not.  You'll have try them and see. 

As for more detail, it depends on what you do with your photos.  It looks like you scan the negs and post them on the internet. In that context you won't necessarily get more detail with a 6x7 neg over a 6x6 neg.  You'll just get photos that are wider than the square ones from your Rollei.

The "more detail" bit comes in when you optically print the negs (in a darkroom). It may also affect digital prints to some degree if you print to normal paper sizes (and are thus forced to crop the 6x6 negs).

But, it helps to understand that film and digital are two different worlds with different rules and practices. Film was invented to be printed with an enlarger in a darkroom.  So film images are almost never reduced in size but are usually enlarged.  Digital images (including scanned negatives) are just the opposite -- they are almost never enlarged but often reduced in size (for internet posting, email, etc).  When you reduce a digital image you are discarding a portion of its detail. This is something that buyers of high pixel count cameras may not realize -- they are shooting at high "resolution" but then throwing away much of that resolution as soon as they re-size the image for internet display.

Image detail is often described with the word "resolution" but resolution has different meanings in the two worlds. In the film world "resolution" refers to density of image elements but in the digital world it refers to quantity of image elements. These are two different things with different ramifications.



> what is the diff between this and a 645??



A 6x7 neg is larger than a 645 neg.  Exact dimensions are given here:
120 film - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> which is the best portrait lens?


The one you like the best.



> what are the disadvantages to shooting with this camera?


It's bigger and heavier than most medium format cameras.  It's really a 7x7 camera with a revolving back (RB) that is 6x7 so you don't have to turn the camera to take portrait or landscape oriented photos.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 5, 2012)

Well I shoot 645 off a Mamiya system, and I've never ran into a situation where i'm not getting enough contrast out of the lens. Quite the opposite actually. Now I don't do self development or scanning, I send that out to Richard Photo Lab, whom i've never been dissapointed with and am convinced they are the best lab in the world. If you do things yourself, guaranteed you'll get different results that may be better or worse..in my case they were much worse. 

If you're looking for something that can give you crispness and a little more bite to your portraits, I'd stick to 645. The 645 aspect ratio for me is easier to compose with, and much easier to maneuver than an RB/RZ. The RZ is designed for the studio or the tripod. The 645AFD that I shoot, was designed to work in the field without support, and looking at your Flickr stream, it's obvious that's more your style. 

I don't know much about B&W, but if you're shooting color, Ektar 100 is _AMAZING_ for portraits...So long as it's scanned correctly. If it's not, it looks like total garbage. There is no in between with that film. Portra 160/400 or Fuji 160S/400H have lower contrast of course. Ilford's XP2 and Kodak BW400CN have _really_ strong contrast too. 

Like I said, if you're into shooting hand-held, the Mamiya 645AF is really comfortable, and really maneuverable for a 645, There's alot of plastic and the AF sucks..but I guess you can't win them all. 




Here's some examples, mind you these scans are _damn near_ what I got straight from the lab save for resizing and a little bit of liquify. The color is unchanged. Available light, no reflectors, no lights, just exposing for the shadows-ish

*Ektar 100 @ 50*












*Fuji 400h @ 200*






And a little test I did:


----------



## thepaulreid (Feb 6, 2012)

Overread, proteus, maris, Compur and Switch fx. Thanks for your replies and information! I feel I need to add more detail. First up thanks for visiting my gallery. To be fair to the rolleicord there are a lot of steps of user input , or error, before a shot is done. I have no light meter so exposures are hit and miss, my developing is still in early days also. So to blame the cord for my images is unfair. The images on my gallery have been scanned with an epson v500 @2200 and made better with lightroom often sorting exposure and and increasing contrast for more punch.So what I am after is more detail and sharpness. I would like my subjects to stand out of the image more. I think the cord gives a more even and softer detail to subject and background. I also like metal beasts. Can the rb67 be used in the field?? Our does anyone do it?Switch, your images are beautiful, what lens did you use fro the shots with the lens flair? Well done. I hate using lightroom to tweak my images! Digisix on the way though.

OK - I am swaying more towards the 645 for portability. There seem to be lots of versions. Ideally, I would like to have a spot metering option built in so I can expose correctly from the off. Did they have this option? and if yes was it any good? It would be great to have an exposure bar in the viewfinder!, apart from that, not sure what else...!

Can't wait to hear what you all think!

Thanks

Paul


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 6, 2012)

Thanks! And I hate having to fix images all the time too unless I want to. The only lens I have for the Mamiya is the 80mm f/2.8AF, and these were all shot with it wide open. They make an 80mm 1.9 that just destroys backgrounds, but doesn't have the crispness or edge of the 2.8. 

The 645 AFD has spot and average, and is trivial to use. Instead of giving you a bar though, it tells you how far off from "normal" you are in stops. For example, if I've got something backlit and expose for the shadows, the meter will say 0.0, but when I point the camera back up at the subject, it may say -4.5...It's a little different, but really easy to comprehend. I wouldn't say it's worse or better than the typical bar you get in AF SLR's.

The AFD also has data or date imprinting, a motor drive built in, can shoot digital with some Phase One backs, and has a little bit different meter functionality than the AF. If I had to do it all over again and couldn't afford a Contax 645, I'd get another one.


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 6, 2012)

You need some new 'film rocks' example photos, Switch.  I've seen that girl a million times already (not complaining though), lol!


----------



## harriknight (Feb 6, 2012)

Sw1tchFX said:


> And a little test I did:



Wow, the Fuji looks so flat next to Ektar, haha.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 6, 2012)

O|||||||O said:


> You need some new 'film rocks' example photos, Switch.  I've seen that girl a million times already (not complaining though), lol!


I do.  I should have a ton more once this spring hits though! The sun just sets so early up here during the winter. 4-4:30pm and it's dark. Especially when it's raining.


----------



## thepaulreid (Feb 9, 2012)

Just bought a Mamiya 645 pro tl on ebay! wahooooooooooo!  Thanks for all your help.


----------



## thepaulreid (Feb 22, 2012)

Turned up yesterday. I have a shoot today so will try this beast out!


----------

