New cameras or new lens

Ben johns

Ben johns

Messages
957
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
No
so I have the mamiya 645j which I use manly for landscapes. Just come into a little bit of money so been thinking about getting a new lens as I only have the 80mm 2.8, want something a little wider.
However I would also like a camera with a bigger negative. So is it worth buying a new lens or should I save a bit longer and get say a mamiya rb67? Can’t really stretch to a 6x9
 
For 6x7, the RB is a big heavy thing
I personally wouldn't give up 645 for it, there are more choices in 6x6 that aren't the colossus the rb is.
If rf's were too expensive and I was up for a giant camera, might as well go 5x4
 
oh....forgot about the Bronica 6x7, that might be less bulk...:)
 
Right ok, the main reason I was looking the rb or rz is that I’ve seen them for about £350 with a lens.
The only 6x6 I really see are hasselblads and Kiev’s, recently anyway.
 
Bigger camera will mean heavier and possibly a heavier tripod as well to stop it moving. Bronica prices do seem to be on the up at the moment, and the GS1 6x7 was pretty rare compared to the SQ 6x6 and the ETRS 645. I'd be tempted to go with the wider angle lens at the moment and take your time deciding on your next camera choice., especially getting the chance to try some out if possible.
 
A lot of the folks on here have RB's or RZ's and they are stunning but they are both very large and heavy beasts, much to large for me anyway. The Ross 820 has a lens that was compared with the best German lenses of the time and is a comparatively lightweight camera.

An example.

Mow-Cop1 by Andy, on Flickr
 
Andysnap said:
A lot of the folks on here have RB's or RZ's and they are stunning but they are both very large and heavy beasts, much to large for me anyway. The Ross 820 has a lens that was compared with the best German lenses of the time and is a comparatively lightweight camera.

An example.

Mow-Cop1 by Andy, on Flickr
Click to expand...
I’ve just started using nd grads and stuff so really I want an optical viewfinder.
 
Peter B said:
Bigger camera will mean heavier and possibly a heavier tripod as well to stop it moving. Bronica prices do seem to be on the up at the moment, and the GS1 6x7 was pretty rare compared to the SQ 6x6 and the ETRS 645. I'd be tempted to go with the wider angle lens at the moment and take your time deciding on your next camera choice., especially getting the chance to try some out if possible.
Click to expand...
Size and weight doesn’t matter too much to me tbh (I’m sure everyone says that until they get a bigger Camera). I mean if I had the money I would go 4x5 but that would mean new dark room equipment, New Camera, lens, scanner, film, New everything. So I just want as big a negative as I can.
Just hard to know if I should invest in the 645 format if I will eventually get a bigger frame Camera
 
Ben johns said:
Size and weight doesn’t matter too much to me tbh (I’m sure everyone says that until they get a bigger Camera)
Click to expand...

RB67 Pro-S with focusing hood, revolving adapter = 1450g
Pro-S film holder = 450g
65mm wide angle K/L lens = 1070g

That's basically 3 kilos worth of photography equipment.
 
Ben johns said:
New camera or new lens
Click to expand...

More or better film

Ben johns said:
Size and weight doesn’t matter too much to me tbh (I’m sure everyone says that until they get a bigger Camera). I mean if I had the money I would go 4x5 but that would mean new dark room equipment, New Camera, lens, scanner, film, New everything. So I just want as big a negative as I can.
Just hard to know if I should invest in the 645 format if I will eventually get a bigger frame Camera
Click to expand...

Well, I'm having to upgrade quite a bit of my kit (e.g., tripod, ballhead, etc.) after purchasing a Pentax 6x7, despite shooting medium format cameras (e.g., Rolleiflex SL66E, Rolleiflex 2.8E, Bronica SQ-A, Hasselblad 2000FC, Plaubel Makina 67, etc.) for a number of years now, so make sure your equipment is up to the task of some of these 6x7 SLRs if you do decide to move up.

And while the Pentax 6x7 and its lenses seem pretty big, keep in mind that the Mamiya RZ67 and RB67 are even bigger, as they are effectively 8x8 cameras.

For me, the sweet spot in medium format really is Bronica SQ series in terms of costs, form factor, and results.

For what it's worth, in my prints, I can only tell the difference between 6x6 and 6x7 because of the aspect ratio. You aren't going to get an appreciable difference in resolution, colour, etc. between these.

Ben johns said:
I’ve just started using nd grads and stuff so really I want an optical viewfinder.
Click to expand...

Do you mean through-the-lens viewing? Rangefinders have optical viewfinders, for instance, but you can't see effect of the grads because the optical view is not through the lens.
 
Last edited:
freecom2 said:
RB67 Pro-S with focusing hood, revolving adapter = 1450g
Pro-S film holder = 450g
65mm wide angle K/L lens = 1070g

That's basically 3 kilos worth of photography equipment.
Click to expand...
I scoff at 3kg :p. Joking aside unless it’s back crippling I’d rather take the extra weight if the outcome is worth It.
 
skysh4rk said:
More or better film



Well, I'm having to upgrade quite a bit of my kit (e.g., tripod, ballhead, etc.) after purchasing a Pentax 6x7, despite shooting medium format cameras (e.g., Rolleiflex SL66E, Rolleiflex 2.8E, Bronica SQ-A, Hasselblad 2000FC, Plaubel Makina 67, etc.) for a number of years now, so make sure your equipment is up to the task of some of these 6x7 SLRs if you do decide to move up.

And while the Pentax 6x7 and its lenses seem pretty big, keep in mind that the Mamiya RZ67 and RB67 are even bigger, as they are effectively 8x8 cameras.

For me, the sweet spot in medium format really is Bronica SQ series in terms of costs, form factor, and results.

For what it's worth, in my prints, I can only tell the difference between 6x6 and 6x7 because of the aspect ratio. You aren't going to get an appreciable difference in resolution, colour, etc. between these.



Do you mean through-the-lens viewing? Rangefinders have optical viewfinders, for instance, but you can't see effect of the grads because the optical view is not through the lens.
Click to expand...
Yea though the lens, that’s why I’ve been looking at slr type cameras
 
Ben johns said:
I scoff at 3kg :p. Joking aside unless it’s back crippling I’d rather take the extra weight if the outcome is worth It.
Click to expand...

You'll need to be using a very good tripod, engaging mirror lock up, getting high quality scans, and printing quite big to see much of a benefit in your results, I would think.

I actually would get better results from 6x4.5cm or 6x6cm right now because it's easier for me to stabilise the smaller cameras than I would with my Pentax 6x7. Bigger negatives do not necessarily equal better pictures or better resolution, as these cameras often require additional care and attention in order to maximise their potential.
 
For what it's worth the RB is probably less likely to cause problems with a tripod than the Pentax 67 or Bronica GS1. The rotating back means that you never have to tilt the camera on it's side so the weight of the camera is always kept directly above the tripod and tripod head. The others will need to be tilted and so the weight is shifted sideways which will put more strain on things (if I understand correctly). Another consideration is that the majority of Mamiya lenses have a 77mm filter thread so if your filter system can't accommodate such large lenses it could be expensive buying new filters.

The RB and RZ are big cameras but manageable if you are reasonably fit. I'm not that fit (I spend all day at work sat down) but I can take the RZ out with 110mm lens, 65mm lens and an extra film back and make a day of it in the Peak District. The walk is more enjoyable when I take my Rolleicord or a 35mm camera but the photographic experience is definitely more fun with the RZ and provided that I'm feeling lively it makes up for the weight. I have a 645 system but the first time I saw the results from my RZ they really stunned me.

If you really do want an RB then I'd at least advise being patient. £350 is probably top end money. Harrison cameras in Sheffield recently had a RB67 Pro S kit for £295 I think and their used equipment is backed up by a 12 month warranty. Gumtree and Shpock sometimes have good deals and eBay can if you are really lucky.
 
mdjchat said:
For what it's worth the RB is probably less likely to cause problems with a tripod than the Pentax 67 or Bronica GS1. The rotating back means that you never have to tilt the camera on it's side so the weight of the camera is always kept directly above the tripod and tripod head. The others will need to be tilted and so the weight is shifted sideways which will put more strain on things (if I understand correctly). Another consideration is that the majority of Mamiya lenses have a 77mm filter thread so if your filter system can't accommodate such large lenses it could be expensive buying new filters.

The RB and RZ are big cameras but manageable if you are reasonably fit. I'm not that fit (I spend all day at work sat down) but I can take the RZ out with 110mm lens, 65mm lens and an extra film back and make a day of it in the Peak District. The walk is more enjoyable when I take my Rolleicord or a 35mm camera but the photographic experience is definitely more fun with the RZ and provided that I'm feeling lively it makes up for the weight. I have a 645 system but the first time I saw the results from my RZ they really stunned me.

If you really do want an RB then I'd at least advise being patient. £350 is probably top end money. Harrison cameras in Sheffield recently had a RB67 Pro S kit for £295 I think and their used equipment is backed up by a 12 month warranty. Gumtree and Shpock sometimes have good deals and eBay can if you are really lucky.
Click to expand...
Oh yea I forgot about the rotating back, that was another plus.
I actually hand hold the filters at the moment, I had a filter holder but can’t find it at all at the moment. The only filter I might have to buy again is a 10 stop as I just have a screw on one, but even then I tend to do long exposure with digital.

The main reason I’ve started to look at a bigger frame is recently all I’ve been doing is using film so I’d like to maximise my results as much as possible.
 
The RB doesn't really need stabilising it's such a heavy beast that even the enormous mirror doesn't really cause any mirror shake the movement of the mirror is dampened, plus it's a heavy beast (did I mention that ).
You need a decent tripod but I've been using a calumet one for years which isn't that heavy but sturdy enough for both the RB and my 54 (which is probably lighter).

The rotating back is handy as you don't need to throw away any negative if your not a square shooter .

And the big view finder is a sight to behold
 
If you’re into landscapes, I’d definitely go for a wide, or wide + long lens, rather than moving up in negative size. There’s nothing at all wrong with 645.

I absolutely love camera gear, and completely understand the desire to buy new and exciting stuff, but after the above lens purchases my advice would be to spend money on:

1. Travel to photogenic locations
2. Printing ink, paper, chemicals, photo books, frames etc.

Get out and shoot more, then print everything at all sorts of sizes, and give yourself projects with printed end goals.

Also, I reckon in this country, at this time of year, one of the best photographic purchases you can ever make is good gloves!
 
Well Ben owning a ETRS and RB67 thought I could add something useful to this thread, but I've never compared the two cameras results for pixel peeping taking the same subject at the same time. I originally chose the RB67 for portrait\indoor group shots and with the larger neg it was easier to enlarge and do prints in the darkroom (dust was a PITA for 35mm enlarging).
So what you want to know is:- can you see any difference in say 16X12" print comparing mamiya 645j\etrs with a Rb67 like for like...but would add looking through the viewfinder on the RB67 is a treat.
 
FujiLove said:
If you’re into landscapes, I’d definitely go for a wide, or wide + long lens, rather than moving up in negative size. There’s nothing at all wrong with 645.

I absolutely love camera gear, and completely understand the desire to buy new and exciting stuff, but after the above lens purchases my advice would be to spend money on:

1. Travel to photogenic locations
2. Printing ink, paper, chemicals, photo books, frames etc.

Get out and shoot more, then print everything at all sorts of sizes, and give yourself projects with printed end goals.

Also, I reckon in this country, at this time of year, one of the best photographic purchases you can ever make is good gloves!
Click to expand...
I think your most likely right, I do have a slight obsession with buying gear, had it even worse when I played guitar a lot, I’ve owned 7, I’m only 29! I also worry that as these kind of cameras aren’t being made anymore that one day they won’t be available to buy, have to get an intrepid then :)
I’ve seen something about that book before, didn’t know he was using a 645.

So if New Camera is out any lens recommendations? I was looking at the 45mm 2.8, seen it for about £160 I think. The 2 lenses I use for digital landscapes are usually either a samyang 12mm or the Sony 35mm 1.8. On the a6000 that works out as 18mm and 50mm basically. I think the 45mm and the 80mm I already have would be the equivalent?
 
Ben johns said:
Size and weight doesn’t matter too much to me tbh (I’m sure everyone says that until they get a bigger Camera). I mean if I had the money I would go 4x5 but that would mean new dark room equipment, New Camera, lens, scanner, film, New everything. So I just want as big a negative as I can.
Just hard to know if I should invest in the 645 format if I will eventually get a bigger frame Camera
Click to expand...
What is it that the 645 isn’t giving you? As somebody who has bought and tried just about all formats going from 110 to 5x4 the Mamiya 645 1000s remains one of my favourite cameras.
 
RaglanSurf said:
What is it that the 645 isn’t giving you? As somebody who has bought and tried just about all formats going from 110 to 5x4 the Mamiya 645 1000s remains one of my favourite cameras.
Click to expand...
It’s purely negative size. This does have to be taken with a pinch of salt as I scan with a Epson v550 which isn’t going to give the most amazing resolution ever. When you ask what doesn’t it give me it doesn’t seem a bit silly just saying negative size but I’ve always wanted as much as I can get be out film or digital.
I would be interested in getting a drum and seeing what they look like
 
What’s the opinion between the 45mm 2.8n and the 55mm 2.8n? The 45mm works out at about 28mm on 35mm I think so that’s the wide angle I’d be after but I’ve read the 55mm is a lot better? A lot sharper
 
I only took a standard lens with me the last time I was in Iceland, and I can only recall feeling I needed a wide angle a handful of times. However, there were tons of shots where I could have used a long or very long lens. I can see this every time I print from those negatives, as I often crop a lot away to focus on a distant subject.
 
Ben johns said:
What’s the opinion between the 45mm 2.8n and the 55mm 2.8n? The 45mm works out at about 28mm on 35mm I think so that’s the wide angle I’d be after but I’ve read the 55mm is a lot better? A lot sharper
Click to expand...

If you're using an Epson flat bed, will it even be able to pick up any supposed advantages of the 55mm over the 45mm in a scan?

I'd just get the one that best suits you photographically, but to each his own.
 
FujiLove said:
I only took a standard lens with me the last time I was in Iceland, and I can only recall feeling I needed a wide angle a handful of times. However, there were tons of shots where I could have used a long or very long lens. I can see this every time I print from those negatives, as I often crop a lot away to focus on a distant subject.
Click to expand...
I thought about a long lens, how do x2 teleconverts look? Could use one with my 80mm.
 
skysh4rk said:
If you're using an Epson flat bed, will it even be able to pick up any supposed advantages of the 55mm over the 45mm in a scan?

I'd just get the one that best suits you photographically, but to each his own.
Click to expand...
No I suppose not. 45mm is closer to the lens I use with digital
 
Ben johns said:
I thought about a long lens, how do x2 teleconverts look? Could use one with my 80mm.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the ones for Mamiya cameras, but the Hasselblad and Vivitar ones for the Hassy V system are pretty good. There are a couple of threads about them over on Photrio.com, and they compared favourably to using a standard long-lens. A drum scan would no doubt pick up the differences, but I'll bet you would be hard pushed to spot the converter vs the long lens in a final print.
 
FujiLove said:
Not sure about the ones for Mamiya cameras, but the Hasselblad and Vivitar ones for the Hassy V system are pretty good. There are a couple of threads about them over on Photrio.com, and they compared favourably to using a standard long-lens. A drum scan would no doubt pick up the differences, but I'll bet you would be hard pushed to spot the converter vs the long lens in a final print.
Click to expand...
Might just take a punt and try one. They are on ffordes for £25 and I think they have a good return policy anyway
 
6x6 negative will give you enormous flexibilty and is obtainable without breaking the bank, there are a variety of SLR type systems out there from cheaper Mamiyas and Bronicas to Hasselblads. Although you say the weight of RB wouldnt bother you it really is a lump and a bit of a challenge to carry around, especially if you add in a couple of lenses and film backs.
 
FujiLove said:
Not sure about the ones for Mamiya cameras, but the Hasselblad and Vivitar ones for the Hassy V system are pretty good. There are a couple of threads about them over on Photrio.com, and they compared favourably to using a standard long-lens. A drum scan would no doubt pick up the differences, but I'll bet you would be hard pushed to spot the converter vs the long lens in a final print.
Click to expand...
New lens and teleconverter came today. Lens looks goods. The converter works really well with the 80mm, basically have 3 lenses now
 
That's 4 lenses then, 45, 80, 90, 160 :)

I've had a 250 F4 and a Komura x2 for years for Veronica, besides 1 roll of film last year I never use them.
And I only shot that out of casual interest..lol
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top