At A Crossroads; Opinions Solicited

[Monday317]

Mamiya Press Super 23 or RB67. Have a great kit for each platform but only need one. All purchased from 100% positive-rated Japanese eBay seller in Mint condition. No haze, fungus, or balsam separations on my optics!

Anyway, I’m torn, want to hear (informed, if available) opinions.

I like the somewhat larger 6x9 Press negative and the more “photographic” image quality of the Press system lenses—almost like a small LF kit. Sort of a gray area between MF & LF. The con for this system is I don’t much care for rangefinders and the beast is utterly non-automatic, with a dozen ways to unintentionally multi-expose or leave frames blank.

I have long loved the utter perfection of the RB67 system and lenses. It’s also a beast but I much prefer the reflex system over rangefinders. Moreover, even with a marginally smaller negative size, the Sekor K/L lenses are beyond perfection; Zeiss doesn’t compare. Images have a three-dimensional quality no other system, analog or digital can match. Almost too perfect! The con is weight and difficulty in field use over the Super 23.

I need to sell one or the other. My workflow is a tedious grind, being a rank amateur. I’ll pick something I want to photograph, and wait for the position of the moon, local weather, or whatever to get just what I had visualized. I might take a month to expose a roll of film then develop and scan it. I also have several film backs to switch stock easily. Pathetic.

That said, anyone ever agonize over selling a Leica for a Nikon? Had remorse over the decision later but coped anyway? You’d think a bugshutter with 70 summers on the right side of the turf wouldn’t need advice, but it’s MF, you know?

Your comments are appreciated!

Cogito ergo Bebop a Lula

 

[gordrob]

It sounds like you have already made up your mind that the RB67 is your most enjoyed camera of the two. For me I fell in love with the Mamiya Universal and then the Super 23 about 25 years ago. I had the opportunity to try the RB67 when it came out. I was never able to get use to the weight and ergonomics of the body at the time and never got interested in it. My current kit is the Super 23 with a full set of lenses and multiple 6x9 backs. I have a 6x7 back but it has never been used as I don't care for the format. I have a lot of spare parts for both the rollfilm holders and the body and lenses so I am set for as long as I will use it. A lot of people always comment on the weight of the Super 23 and I get a chuckle from that because they have never used a 5x7 SuperTechnika with lens hand held weighing in around 13lbs. I have some years on you and the only comment I would have about your choice is to use the camera that you get the most enjoyment from and that sounds like the RB67.

 

[aconbere]

I’ve thought some on this, as I also have both systems. They are very different cameras that excel at very different kinds of shooting. So for me the answer would be about what kind of pictures do you imagine you’ll be taking, and then what compromises you are willing to make.

If I was planning to do a lot of portraiture or close-up work I would pick the RB67. The Universal is capable but its lenses aren’t as fast and checking the ground glass is much slower than the reflex finder for checking DOF.

Turned around; If I was doing slower landscape work, or handheld out and about shooting I would pick the Universal. I find the universal easier to frame with the rangefinder or with ground glass than the RB67, and handheld I find the RB67 a bit of a disaster.

 

[Monday317]

It sounds like you have already made up your mind that the RB67 is your most enjoyed camera of the two. For me I fell in love with the Mamiya Universal and then the Super 23 about 25 years ago. I had the opportunity to try the RB67 when it came out. I was never able to get use to the weight and ergonomics of the body at the time and never got interested in it. My current kit is the Super 23 with a full set of lenses and multiple 6x9 backs. I have a 6x7 back but it has never been used as I don't care for the format. I have a lot of spare parts for both the rollfilm holders and the body and lenses so I am set for as long as I will use it. A lot of people always comment on the weight of the Super 23 and I get a chuckle from that because they have never used a 5x7 SuperTechnika with lens hand held weighing in around 13lbs. I have some years on you and the only comment I would have about your choice is to use the camera that you get the most enjoyment from and that sounds like the RB67.

Thank you for the perspective. Yeah, I was kind of thinking the same thing as I was writing the post.

 

[Monday317]

I’ve thought some on this, as I also have both systems. They are very different cameras that excel at very different kinds of shooting. So for me the answer would be about what kind of pictures do you imagine you’ll be taking, and then what compromises you are willing to make.

If I was planning to do a lot of portraiture or close-up work I would pick the RB67. The Universal is capable but its lenses aren’t as fast and checking the ground glass is much slower than the reflex finder for checking DOF.

Turned around; If I was doing slower landscape work, or handheld out and about shooting I would pick the Universal. I find the universal easier to frame with the rangefinder or with ground glass than the RB67, and handheld I find the RB67 a bit of a disaster.

Good points.

My own experience with the Press has been better on a tripod for studied imagery rather than handheld. Putting the big Press body to the eye for street shooting can be intimidating for random subjects with a 100mm or shorter lens. And it’s hard to be circumspect with a 250mm ƒ5.0 lens that’s heavier than the camera body itself, sporting a 105mm front element.

For me, the RB67 with a good carry strap, handle, 127mm lens and the waist finder do well when I can use shutter speeds 1/125 or faster. I prefer a cable release as I tend to be a shutter button jabber. With the waist (sometimes waste-) finder, doing street is a much easier process than operating the big ol’ Press for quick shots.

There I go again, hah?

 

[aconbere]

Good points.

My own experience with the Press has been better on a tripod for studied imagery rather than handheld. Putting the big Press body to the eye for street shooting can be intimidating for random subjects with a 100mm or shorter lens. And it’s hard to be circumspect with a 250mm ƒ5.0 lens that’s heavier than the camera body itself, sporting a 105mm front element.

For me, the RB67 with a good carry strap, handle, 127mm lens and the waist finder do well when I can use shutter speeds 1/125 or faster. I prefer a cable release as I tend to be a shutter button jabber. With the waist (sometimes waste-) finder, doing street is a much easier process than operating the big ol’ Press for quick shots.

There I go again, hah?

You did it! So hard to make these calls

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Would buying a RZ-67 be better as it's a little lighter than the RB67 (which I have). I'm not sure you can use the KL lenses on the RB as they're made for the RZ, but you'd have to confirm this. I found shooting by hand is tough with the RB. Go with a fast film. I shoot landscapes mainly and always use a strong tripod. Good luck.
RB67 shots of mine: https://www.flickr.com/search/?sort...h=1&tags=rb67&user_id=55760757@N05&view_all=1

 

[mgb74]

Mirror, mirror, on the wall...

The only one that can answer this is the mirror. You have both, you know both, no one else knows as much about how you will use them as you do.

So my advice, sell them both and buy a Hasselblad.

 

[Prest_400]

Keep the RB67 if its size and volume are not bothering you, and if you shoot it as if it were LF you have a more solid and precise system than a RF. IIRC there is a 6x8 back which you could look into for a bigger negative.

I need to sell one or the other. My workflow is a tedious grind, being a rank amateur. I’ll pick something I want to photograph, and wait for the position of the moon, local weather, or whatever to get just what I had visualized. I might take a month to expose a roll of film then develop and scan it. I also have several film backs to switch stock easily. Pathetic.

Until a couple of years ago I was having a similar approach to film shooting. Not patethic, but is resource saving and maximises keepers while you may eventually regretting not taking X, Y, Z picture that at the moment by "editing before camera" but on memory later on you wished you had.
Nowadays I am more generous with the shooting, but do still take care. Color because of the material costs and B&W because I can't anyways print so much, and it's good to have more keepers in the limitations of Medium format.

Initially I picked my Fuji 6x9 RF for its negative size and relative lightweight for the format, its 5 element lens is well performing and I realised afterwards that when incorporating sub 6x6 vintage cameras. Tessar types are good but not equal to the Fujinon.
Print larger, and then it might be nice to have the higher performance lenses in use!

That said, anyone ever agonize over selling a Leica for a Nikon? Had remorse over the decision later but coped anyway? You’d think a bugshutter with 70 summers on the right side of the turf wouldn’t need advice, but it’s MF, you know?

I'd get hanged in certain circles, but those Leicas are puny 35mm, you anyways get a lot more bang for the buck in MF! OT: Wish that Leica had made a 6x6-6x9 medium format rangefinder... Look at how Mamiya did theirs (M6-7)
Or there is the Hasselblad advice, ha.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'll admit to some bias (I love my RB67 and don't have a Press 23 or Super), but IMO the SLR is more versatile, enough so to be worth the weight penalty.

With the same body, I can shoot fairly extreme macro (two extension tubes with a 90 mm goes above 1:1), wide angle landscapes, portraits, and telephoto on a negative that ;prints to 8x10 without cropping, or (with other Mamiya or Graflex roll film backs) 6x4.5, 6x6, and 6xwhatever my camera's baffles will allow on a 6x9 negative. The sheer versatility (three viewfinders, five lenses and counting, a 2x teleconverter, both macro tubes, multiple film backs) puts the RB ahead of any other camera or camera system I've been exposed to.

The tradeoff is weight, of course. I can carry a 4x5 monorail, a couple Grafmatics, and three lenses for about the same weight as the RB67 and three lenses (wide, normal, and long), one viewfinder, and one film back -- but that loadout isn't beginning to touch what the RB67 can do.

 

[BradS]

I have owned and enjoyed both systems and although I am generally no fan of "the rangefinder experience", I prefer the Mamiya Press to the RB67. In the end, I sold all of the medium format gear except for an old folder and some pinholes and opted instead for a 4x5 Crown Graphic with a well calibrated range finder. Once I had the Crown Graphic in hand and used it a little bit, I wondered why the devil would I ever use either the RB67 or Mamiya Press ?

 

[aconbere]

I have owned and enjoyed both systems and although I am generally no fan of "the rangefinder experience", I prefer the Mamiya Press to the RB67. In the end, I sold all of the medium format gear except for an old folder and some pinholes and opted instead for a 4x5 Crown Graphic with a well calibrated range finder. Once I had the Crown Graphic in hand and used it a little bit, I wondered why the devil would I ever use either the RB67 or Mamiya Press ?

I can think of a couple of reasons. First it’s a lot easier to pack a bunch of 120 film for travel, second it’s easier to use with a variety of lenses. But I do think the press is often at its best when used like a small agile view camera.

I’m traveling in iceland at the moment and brought my press because I can pack 10 rolls of film in a pocket or my bag, and shoot with lenses from a 50 to 150 quickly enough that my kids don’t try to overthrow the government

 

[Donald Qualls]

I have a 4x5 Speed (Anniversary model) with Kalart, and a 2x3 Century with Kalart -- both are nice to use, but neither one lets me switch lenses and keep using the Kalart without going through the 20-30 minute rangefinder calibration process -- which I haven't memorized, since I've only done it once. So, if I want to replace the 135/4.5 Tessar on my Speed with the 150/4.6 Compon I use on my Graphic View II (same lens board), I have to either focus with the ground glass or recalibrate the RF. I don't have to do any of that with my RB67.

Now, with most cameras originally built as a rangefinder, there's a mechanism between lens and RF mechanics to compensate for the difference in movement to focus different focal length lenses -- but neither of those cameras were built as RF; the Kalart was an aftermarket accessory. Even for a top-RF Pacemaker, you have to replace the cam with a (nearly impossible to find) one that matches the lens you're switching to.

I also have three medium format cameras with RF; a Mamiya 6 folder, a Zeiss 531/2 Super Ikonta B, and a Moskva 5. All lighter than the RB67, but all stuck with one format (or inserting a mask while loading film) and one lens each. I carry one or more of them every day, to work and back, but if I'm going out intentionally to make photos, the RB67 is at the top of my list, the 4x5s right below, and my Kiev 2 is fourth.

 

[JerseyDoug]

In the same situation, assuming I could afford to do so, I would pack up one system, put it somewhere not too accessible, and use the other system. More than once I have regretted selling a complete camera system. I have never regretted packing up and storing my LTM Leica system (purchased ca. 1965) or my Nikon F system (purchased ca. 1972) as my situation and interests have changed over the years. I am currently using a fairly complete Hasselblad V kit (purchased ca. 2005) but I have no doubt that I will switch back to one or the other of the 35mm systems eventually.

 

[Jeremy Greenaway]

I have a somewhat eclectic camera rack as far as LF/MF is concerned: c1956 Pacemaker Speed Graphic 5x4, c1925 Thornton Pickard Junior Special reflex, c1970s Mamiya Press, 3 VN folding strut 6x9 (all full working condition and really the forerunner of the 23 and Press designs), Mamiya RB67 with 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 backs. Also, Mami C330S, Bronicas in focal plane and lens shutter models, and 'Blad 503CX and ELM bodies. The VNs were very much the Pressman's go-to tool. They were simple,very reliable, and had no focussing aids other than the wire viewfinder. The standard lens was superb and images fabulous. They were particularly popular for sport, particularly soccer. They were the standard kit when I started work on my first paper in 1959 and remained in use throughout the industry well into the 1960s. The Mamiya 23/Press was widely adopted by VN users as it was quick in use with the sports finder.

Monday317, bear in mind choice of which camera should be according to the suitability of the camera/lens to the job. However, chopping and changing between types can lead to a lack of a really deep knowledge and familiarity of each or any. I like the Press with the 6x9 back as a hand-held field/view camera and easier to handle than the RB. The latter's range of superb lenses however extends the RB's use, particularly for portraiture, still life, architecture and so on, although the latter is limited by lack of perspective controls. As for 'street' photography, it's too heavy and cumbersome and I use it only on sticks or a pod.

My advice: keep both, use both!

 

[Donald Qualls]

In the same situation, assuming I could afford to do so, I would pack up one system, put it somewhere not too accessible, and use the other system. More than once I have regretted selling a complete camera system. I have never regretted packing up and storing my LTM Leica system (purchased ca. 1965) or my Nikon F system (purchased ca. 1972) as my situation and interests have changed over the years. I am currently using a fairly complete Hasselblad V kit (purchased ca. 2005) but I have no doubt that I will switch back to one or the other of the 35mm systems eventually.

Unless the money to be (re)gained by selling the "losing" system in this situation is critical to either filling out the other system, or something larger than photography (rent, medical bills, etc.), I think this is the best advice so far in this thread.

 

[Jeremy Greenaway]

Thanks for your support Donald! I agree the rangefinder issue on the Speed Graphic. Perhaps the answer is to acquire (I can hear her indoors moan: 'Not more junk!) a clip-on or slip-in rangefinder such as a Photopia. There are several currently on the UK fleabay site but no doubt you'll find some in Trumpland -

 

[chuckroast]

Mamiya Press Super 23 or RB67. Have a great kit for each platform but only need one. All purchased from 100% positive-rated Japanese eBay seller in Mint condition. No haze, fungus, or balsam separations on my optics!

Anyway, I’m torn, want to hear (informed, if available) opinions.

I like the somewhat larger 6x9 Press negative and the more “photographic” image quality of the Press system lenses—almost like a small LF kit. Sort of a gray area between MF & LF. The con for this system is I don’t much care for rangefinders and the beast is utterly non-automatic, with a dozen ways to unintentionally multi-expose or leave frames blank.

I have long loved the utter perfection of the RB67 system and lenses. It’s also a beast but I much prefer the reflex system over rangefinders. Moreover, even with a marginally smaller negative size, the Sekor K/L lenses are beyond perfection; Zeiss doesn’t compare. Images have a three-dimensional quality no other system, analog or digital can match. Almost too perfect! The con is weight and difficulty in field use over the Super 23.

I need to sell one or the other. My workflow is a tedious grind, being a rank amateur. I’ll pick something I want to photograph, and wait for the position of the moon, local weather, or whatever to get just what I had visualized. I might take a month to expose a roll of film then develop and scan it. I also have several film backs to switch stock easily. Pathetic.

That said, anyone ever agonize over selling a Leica for a Nikon? Had remorse over the decision later but coped anyway? You’d think a bugshutter with 70 summers on the right side of the turf wouldn’t need advice, but it’s MF, you know?

Your comments are appreciated!

Cogito ergo Bebop a Lula

I've owned and used Mamiya press cameras (Super 23 and Universal) on- and off for many decades. In the end I got rid of my Universal because I had to thin the herd and it was nowhere near the camera and optical system of my Hasselblad - noting that the Hassy is a different format altogether.

When I feel the need for 6x9, I shoot with a "Baby" 2x3 Speed Graphic with both sheet- and rollfilm.

But I think you've answered your own question. You want a reflex and the larger format so ... the RB sounds like your choice.

I'd quibble with your claim the RB optics win over Zeiss. They're just different. The RB has Japanese optical sensibilities, the Zeiss has German. They have rather different points of view in matters of correction and color balance. Both are superb.

 

[Paul Howell]

I have always thought of the RB67 as a studio camera, while the Press/Universal as designed for field work. I have Universal and a Press, a set of lens, I like the 6X9 format and only the 6X7 back on rare occasion. Not a light camera, with grip easy to hand hold, for landscape I use a heavy tripod. Latley I've been using a Busch Pressman 6X9 and Graphic 6X9 with sheet film. Much lighter, I a Topcon 101 on the Graphic and the Kodak 101 on the Busch. Both are sharp, but the Kodak does not have much movement. Down side of both is that 6X9 sheet film is expensive.

 

[ags2mikon]

Different camera systems are a lot like your children. You love them all but they have different personalities. I had the rb67 system and sold it because I thought I didn't need it. Wasn't a good idea in the end. I ended up buying it all again. I also have a Mamiya press system that uses rb67 and horseman backs. I like it a lot, especially the 50, 65, and 75mm lenses. I also like the wider format 84mm with the horseman backs. With the prices of camera equipment going up now I'm hanging on to everything now. My cameras are not like my cats that need feeding so I shoot with one system and then switch off to something. I also have the horseman VH-R system to further complicate things. Camera movements are really nice to have on occasion, and the backs are all interchangeable.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Perhaps the answer is to acquire (I can hear her indoors moan: 'Not more junk!) a clip-on or slip-in rangefinder such as a Photopia.

The problem there is that you need a focus scale that's calibrated for the mounted lens -- and these seem to be like hen's teeth for press cameras in general. They usually come with one -- but it may or may not be accurate for the lens that's mounted on it, and if they are, won't work for any other focal length.

 

[Jeremy Greenaway]

Very good point - forgot about that!

 

[reddesert]

I have a somewhat eclectic camera rack as far as LF/MF is concerned: c1956 Pacemaker Speed Graphic 5x4, c1925 Thornton Pickard Junior Special reflex, c1970s Mamiya Press, 3 VN folding strut 6x9 (all full working condition and really the forerunner of the 23 and Press designs), Mamiya RB67 with 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 backs. Also, Mami C330S, Bronicas in focal plane and lens shutter models, and 'Blad 503CX and ELM bodies. The VNs were very much the Pressman's go-to tool. They were simple,very reliable, and had no focussing aids other than the wire viewfinder. The standard lens was superb and images fabulous. They were particularly popular for sport, particularly soccer. They were the standard kit when I started work on my first paper in 1959 and remained in use throughout the industry well into the 1960s. The Mamiya 23/Press was widely adopted by VN users as it was quick in use with the sports finder.

A dumb question: what's a VN ? I imagine a camera brand common in the UK, and less so in the US. In the US, press photographers (I mean local press, not war correspondents) likely used Graphics well into the 1950s and perhaps even early 1960s, eventually being supplanted by TLRs, occasional MF RFs like Graflex XL and Mamiya Press in the 1960s, and then 35mm SLRs. This has been discussed elsewhere more accurately than I could present.

Many people have strong feelings about RF and SLR for one reason or another. I got a Mamiya Press system in the mid-late 1990s in part because it seemed the only MF system I could afford at the time. It is indeed bulky. I never have tried to use a 250mm lens for it. However, one feeling I have about MF TLRs and rangefinders is that you may be able to get away with a smaller tripod than for an MF SLR, which can reduce the weight/bulk of the entire kit by a lot. It is nice to look through an SLR. The RB67 is almost the extreme pole of MF SLR bulk among common systems, though (okay, there is probably something bigger, but rarer, like a Makiflex).

 

[Jeremy Greenaway]

A dumb question: what's a VN ? I imagine a camera brand common in the UK, and less so in the US. In the US, press photographers (I mean local press, not war correspondents) likely used Graphics well into the 1950s and perhaps even early 1960s, eventually being supplanted by TLRs, occasional MF RFs like Graflex XL and Mamiya Press in the 1960s, and then 35mm SLRs. This has been discussed elsewhere more accurately than I could present.

Many people have strong feelings about RF and SLR for one reason or another. I got a Mamiya Press system in the mid-late 1990s in part because it seemed the only MF system I could afford at the time. It is indeed bulky. I never have tried to use a 250mm lens for it. However, one feeling I have about MF TLRs and rangefinders is that you may be able to get away with a smaller tripod than for an MF SLR, which can reduce the weight/bulk of the entire kit by a lot. It is nice to look through an SLR. The RB67 is almost the extreme pole of MF SLR bulk among common systems, though (okay, there is probably something bigger, but rarer, like a Makiflex).

The VN was a folding strut camera which was a popular form of plate camera which started off in the early 1900's with the Goerz company in Germany. They became widely used throughout Europe by news photographers, but when the First World War prevented their sale in many parts of Europe, including the UK, a British optical and photographic company formed in the 1890's called Peeling and Van Neck adapted the design to their own folding strut model, the first of which came to market in around 1917. The 9x12 cm format was a popular one, and although the VN Press had only a wire frame viewer and no rangefinder, soon became de rigeur in the newsrooms of British newspapers, as well as Continental ones. Despite the dislike of anything British by the US outfits, VNs were used by some American papers, particularly when used with roll film backs. They were lighter and faster to use than Graflex baseboard types. In Europe, they remained in service up to the mid-1960s with their natural successor the Mamiya 23 or Press.