Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Mamiya RZ67 with digital back?  (Read 14255 times)
george2787
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 81


« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2013, 09:43:20 AM »
ReplyReply

If you opt for the DM28 and a non-D body you need to order the Leaf adapter which A) rotates, B) comes with a lens-to-back synce cable and a marked focusing screen for your back

As TMARK mentioned you only need a sync cable from the lens to the back

Cheers

Yair

Yaya, one quick question... With an rz pro IID and an aptus ( not sure if any aptus or just the II version) you won't need any cable. I suppose you will need an adapter.

Thanks Smiley
Logged
amsp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 788


« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2013, 11:23:21 AM »
ReplyReply

No matter if you decide on the AFD or the rz67 the nice thing is you can always complement it with the other later on. I love being able to move my P25 between such different camera systems.
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2013, 12:05:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Ah yes, the mirror lock-up. That is one thing I keep forgetting to find out.

I'm amazed at the quality you got from the Epson V750. I had no idea it was so capable. How large do you feel a file like that would print?

Right know I'm basically just tossing up between getting an RZ or AFD. There are two digital backs I'm looking at between a Phase One P25 and Mamiya DM28.

Basically it seems features of the two systems are:

RZ
- Very heavy and large but well made
- Mechanical design should be reliable and needs very little battery power
- Cheap bodies and lenses
- Very good optical quality

AFD
- Smaller and lighter
- Auto focus
- Relies on battery power
- More modern automated features

Regarding backs I would suggest going with the larger sensor size of the P25 that is 48x36.
The DM28 is a 44x33 sensor. You will get better wide angle coverage with the p25.
More coverage is important considering that you are already cropping a 6x7 system.

Regarding the reliability of the RZ, even the first version is very good. The two weak points are:

Lens shutter failure. While quite rare it can be a real problem with film because if the electronics fail the
shutter defaults to a fast mechanical shutter speed. 1/400th if I recall correctly. Also it sounds just the same as a 60th going off.
Anyway less of a problem with digital because you would know right away.
Seeing as I shoot film in 6x7 or 6x8 I decided to move to the Fuji gx680 as it has a sensor that measures light reflected off the film to confirm shutter functionality
on all exposures. It sounds an alarm if exposure is not within 1 stop. A nice feature when shooting film.
However I have never has a Fuji gx680 shutter fail. I had two shutter failures on the RZ. One was a used lens, and the other was bough new, but only failed after
about 4 years of use... and that was by me and my two assistants.

Second weak point is transport mechanism wear, but this again is more of an issue with film.
The shutter/mirror cocking mechanism and film advance is all done with the same lever and over time it wears out.
I would not say this is much of an issue buying new, but if you are buying used take a good look at the transport/cocking lever play.

One other thing I never likes was the really crappy motor drive. I always affectionately called it the coffee grinder.
It also makes the camera harder to hand hold.

All that said the RZ is a fine camera and my experience with it was good. I can't say the same for the Phase One AF and Phase One DF.
Logged
george2787
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 81


« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2013, 12:12:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Yaya, one quick question... With an rz pro IID and an aptus ( not sure if any aptus or just the II version) you won't need any cable. I suppose you will need an adapter.

Thanks Smiley

While I'm at it... Is there any combination of rz (non d version) and back that does not require sync or wake up cable?
Logged
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #24 on: March 17, 2013, 12:38:34 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm amazed at the quality you got from the Epson V750. I had no idea it was so capable. How large do you feel a file like that would print?

Well it's not all the V750. The large 6x7 negative is a great starting point. 645 will not be the same.

Print size looks very nice even very large. However it's a different type of detail and look to digital.
One really nice thing about film with very large enlargements is that the way the detail falls off into the grain texture
is nice and smooth. Digital on the other hand gets funky artifacts right on the drop off of detail.

Here is a comparison



Bigger here:
http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/miroscope-700.jpg

Unfortunately the comparison does not include a very fine grained film, but the point I want to make is that
if you like the feel of grain printing even very big looks nice. An IQ180 will get you way more detail than 6x7 film
Also part of the artifact problem is due to there being no anti alias filter.

Going back to the v750 you can get great results. Quailty is excellent, however it is not a heavy duty machine and sometimes the glass flatbed gets a bit fogged up and needs to be opened to clean it. You can get even better quality making a wetscan with the v750 as well as dual exposure.
The Silverfast software it comes with can get great results, but it's quite complicated and does not ship with particularly good film negative profiles.
I find I sometimes have to do a fair bit of fiddling around.

Anyway here is another example, but this time with a very fine grained film.. Panatomic-X (unfortunately no longer available):



and here is a crop:




Anyway if you also want a DB solution and also want to dabble in film I think that the RZ is a good choice to have both with the same camera.

If size is not an issue I would recommend the Fuji gx680, but you also need a control box to control camera and back.
Prices are really good on the version I and it's also my prefered model. You also get tilt and shift on all lenses. 50mm to 500mm.
You can also use the shift to do stitching. Very effective for landscape.

I ca send you some documentation of the Fuji gx680 is you want, just PM me your email.

« Last Edit: March 17, 2013, 12:54:59 PM by FredBGG » Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2838


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 17, 2013, 06:31:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Just a quick note that the above linked comparison was (from the look of it) almost surely done in capture one v6 or ACR/LR. Capture One v7 handles micro detail much better; more correct details, less artifacts. This puts an iq180 (or any phase/leaf) much closer in any such test.

It should also be pointed out that the premise/methodology of that tea was pretty sound but was geared towards answering a question like "in a perfect world how much detail can be had from x, y, and z formats." As always I recommend any testing be done by the person who wants answers, and be done in as close to real-world conditions (for that persons shooting style/situations) as possible. Though tests like this are always academically interesting.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
FredBGG
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1651


« Reply #26 on: March 17, 2013, 08:13:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Just a quick note that the above linked comparison was (from the look of it) almost surely done in capture one v6 or ACR/LR. Capture One v7 handles micro detail much better; more correct details, less artifacts. This puts an iq180 (or any phase/leaf) much closer in any such test.

It should also be pointed out that the premise/methodology of that tea was pretty sound but was geared towards answering a question like "in a perfect world how much detail can be had from x, y, and z formats." As always I recommend any testing be done by the person who wants answers, and be done in as close to real-world conditions (for that persons shooting style/situations) as possible. Though tests like this are always academically interesting.

Doug... my point was not to say that film is better then the IQ180. Film will out preform the IQ180, but we would be talking about 8x10 film, a huge heavy camera and it would have to be very good processing and scanning. It's pretty clear that an IQ180 or IQ160 will produce better results form a purely technical point of view than film that can be used in a manner that is even remotely as practical.

The point I was making is that when making big enlargements film reveals it's limitations, but they are "pretty".
With digital while it may take more to reveal the artifacting when it shows up it looks far less appealing.
And that is the same with all digital, the only difference is that with a very high res sensor it's takes more for it to show up.
In a certain sense the Sigma chips have an edge on all the others.

Also how often do you see artist trying to mimic the digital artifacts and how often to you see digital photographers trying to recreate distressed film.

While some like the new "engine" in Capture One 7 IMO it's too punchy and has a somewhat manipulated look to it.
Phase One did well to keep the previous rendering engine as an option in version 7.

Going back on topic the Mamiya RZ with a P25 back and a film back is a nice combination. Inexpensive, can use Capture 1 6 or 7 rendering as well as film.

I think it would be an even better option if Phase One made a stitch back adapter for the RZ.
Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 193


« Reply #27 on: March 17, 2013, 08:15:36 PM »
ReplyReply

I just found out it's actually a P25 Hasselblad mount with the RZ67 system. So essentially I'm comparing two systems within my price bracket.

- P25 on RZ67
- Leaf AFI II 6 / DM28 on Mamiya AFD
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #28 on: March 17, 2013, 08:31:54 PM »
ReplyReply

While I'm at it... Is there any combination of rz (non d version) and back that does not require sync or wake up cable?

No. The wake up cable is a pain. It's an extra trigger, essentially.
Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 193


« Reply #29 on: March 17, 2013, 09:19:35 PM »
ReplyReply

I think maybe I have only one option left available to me now. The listing for the DM28 appears to be a scam. I tried Google image search on the product photos and it came up also on ebay.co.uk and had been sold previously.

http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/perth-cbd/digital-cameras/dm28-leaf-aptus-ii-6-28-0-mp/1015942795#
Logged
pjtn
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 193


« Reply #30 on: March 17, 2013, 09:49:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone have a P25 file they could send me? Preferably of landscape.
Logged
Doug Peterson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2838


WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 18, 2013, 08:33:50 AM »
ReplyReply

If you work with a dealer rather than peruse gear listings (which as you just discovered can have major pitfalls - the "easy way" in this case), then you will be able to test the gear in hand (e.g. does the weight/balance/ergos of the RZ work for you), get lots of relevant raw samples and/or shoot your own, and will have someone to help you with any of the questions that can come up when you're going into an entirely new system.

Having read through your brief journey so far I'd strongly suggest you look at an RZ Pro IID which would keep all your options open in the future.

RZ Pro II: V mount, cables, WLF option
RZ Pro IID: M mount, no cables, WLF option
AFD/AFDII/AFDIII/AF/DF/DF+: M mount, no cables, autofocus, no WLF option

So if you go with a Pro II and a V mount you prohibit yourself from buying an AFD body (now or in the future).

If you go with a Pro IID and don't like the RZ body you can simply sell it and buy an AFD. Or even if you do like it you can still add an AFD and switch your back from one to the other (it takes <10 sec to switch from one to the other).

There are other minor advantages/disadvantages to each choice (e.g. the IID has to be "tricked" into going beyond 60 seconds when using a digital back).

I know budget, especially on the first purchase (the big hunk of it), is always an issue. But sometimes in trying to save money (e.g. some modest difference in price between [RZ Pro II + adapter] and [Pro IID + adapter] you back yourself into a corner which will may be more expensive in the long run.
Logged

DOUG PETERSON (dep@digitaltransitions.com), Digital Transitions
Dealer for Phase One, Mamiya Leaf, Arca-Swiss, Cambo, Profoto
Office: 877.367.8537
Cell: 740.707.2183
Phase One IQ250 FAQ
Chris Barrett
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 252


« Reply #32 on: March 18, 2013, 08:50:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Doug... my point was not to say that film is better then the IQ180. Film will out preform the IQ180, but we would be talking about 8x10 film, a huge heavy camera and it would have to be very good processing and scanning.

I have to wonder about that.  When I was handling the transition of Hedrich to digital (which involved the purchase of 6 entirely new camera systems) I tested our 4x5 stock against the P45+.  The P45+ easily out resolved Ektachrome 100 (EPN).  If you shot really slow 8x10 black and white and used a fine grain developer, I wonder how that would compare to an IQ180 on a tech camera?  Intriguing.  Almost intriguing enough for me to fire up my drum scanner.  Almost.

Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1588


« Reply #33 on: March 18, 2013, 09:45:53 AM »
ReplyReply

I have to wonder about that.  When I was handling the transition of Hedrich to digital (which involved the purchase of 6 entirely new camera systems) I tested our 4x5 stock against the P45+.  The P45+ easily out resolved Ektachrome 100 (EPN).  If you shot really slow 8x10 black and white and used a fine grain developer, I wonder how that would compare to an IQ180 on a tech camera?  Intriguing.  Almost intriguing enough for me to fire up my drum scanner.  Almost.

The best test I've seen so far in that regard:
http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2011/12/big-camera-comparison/
http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/cameratest-2/800px.html

Here 4x5" velvia (now dead!) vs P45+:
http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/cameratest-2/topping-housesleft-small/topping-housesleft-small_0006_4x5%20Velvia.jpg
http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/cameratest-2/topping-housesleft-small/topping-housesleft-small_0002_P45.jpg

If you want "grain-free" film does not resolve that much, but as film resolves past the grain quite much detail can be had from a 4x5" if you scan it at high ppi. In terms of resolved detail 4x5" is quite similar to IQ180, and definitely higher than P45+. But if you want grain-free, the P45+ could be said to exceed 4x5". And if we go to Portra400 which is still live today the resolution is not as good as Velvia and it is still closer with the P45+:

http://static.timparkin.co.uk/static/tmp/cameratest-2/topping-housesleft-small/topping-housesleft-small_0005_4x5%20Portra%20400.jpg

In any case, if you would make an extremely large print which can be viewed on nosing distance I prefer the film grain look out of 4x5" that the blocky aliasing from digital. Film (drum-scanned at ultra-high resolutions) enlarges to more pleasing results than upscaled digital I think.
Logged
Chris Barrett
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 252


« Reply #34 on: March 18, 2013, 10:03:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, if you have to enlarge to the point of grain visibility, I'd rather see actual grain than pixels.  For our tests, I shot the P45+ against the film stock that we used for 90% of our work.  I drum scanned the 4x5 chrome with enough res as seemed appropriate (I believe it was 1500dpi).  Then I made prints at 17x22.  There was more detail in the digital capture print.  Far more tonal range (easy enough against chrome) and better color fidelity.  The testing was restricted to our commercial workflow as any other parameters would have been irrelevant.  That print viewing was the death of film for us.

Thanks for the links, those are certainly interesting.
Logged
torger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1588


« Reply #35 on: March 18, 2013, 10:28:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Of what I've read/heard/seen I think the P45/P45+ and similar backs (i e the generation after the 9 um 22 megapixel backs) was indeed the tipping point for many professionals to ditch 4x5" film and go digital. Quality finally as good or even better, and much faster workflow.
Logged
Chris Barrett
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 252


« Reply #36 on: March 18, 2013, 10:32:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Also, we used Readyload / Quickload.  That stuff and the polaroids generated so much friggin landfill.  I do NOT miss it.
Logged
yaya
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137



WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 18, 2013, 10:35:11 AM »
ReplyReply

So if you go with a Pro II and a V mount you prohibit yourself from buying an AFD body (now or in the future).

If he goes with a ProII and an M mount (Leaf) back then there's no problem using the back on an AFD as well...
Logged

Yair Shahar | Product Manager | Mamiya Leaf |
e: ysh@mamiyaleaf.com | m: +44(0)77 8992 8199 | www.mamiyaleaf.com | yaya's blog
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1843


« Reply #38 on: March 18, 2013, 10:42:27 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't shoot film for the res.  I replaced MF film with a 1ds when it came out, but then went back to film for editorial work.  Its the look, is all.
Logged
Fritzer
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #39 on: March 18, 2013, 12:00:20 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm using my old RZ 67 II occasionally with the Aptus 75, and it works very well .
The RZ is still my favourite MF camera, I just love the focussing mechanism and no-nonsense controls .
And while it's a bit on the chunky side , it's also very light - until you attach a lens .

As for the lenses, I only have the 50, 110 and 150mm ; they look very sharp and detailed to me, but really require stopping down a couple of stops, else there are severe issues with CA , in my experience .

The mirror slap is another possible issue, as mentioned before, if you need to be shooting without mirror lock-up and available light.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad