The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

DF to RZ

Shelby, is it really that much easier to focus with the 4x loupe compared to the WLF? Does it cover the area of the digital back? Did you manage to attach it to the body or simply place it over the ground glass while shooting?

As far as lenses go, I absolutely agree. There really is something magical in their rendering, something I don't see in the older Mamiya 645 glass. This leaves me curious how the Schneider LS lenses compare. They certainly do have more microcontrast, but its hard to judge if they have that special something without actually using one. Does anyone use both and can do tests? :)

The RZ really is great, there is nothing to be desired image quality wise, in fact it probably surpasses a number of MF systems out there! Not to mention for what price. My only regrets are that being a 6x7 camera it is not optimized for todays (sub)645 backs, as well as metering in the WLF, but then again there is always the AF/DF for that.
 

Sheldon N

Member
In follow up to the discussion about the different adapter plates and using a Leaf Aptus back with an older RZ67 Pro II (non-D) model, I thought I would share a picture of how I did it. Credit goes to SergeiR who originally posted on the forum about this modification and even took the time to send me a photo of his plate so I could get it right.

This is the Mamiya HX-701 adapter plate, which is designed to mount the ZD back (or other AFD backs) on the RZ67 Pro II-D. I think the alternative model number on B&H is #212-107. It fits fine on the RZ67 Pro II but interferes with the darkslide sensors. By drilling or dremeling out the correct location on the plate you can get it to work perfectly. It also doesn't adversely affect the function of the plate if you ever upgrade to the Pro II-D (I've been told).

Here's what the plate looks like, and the modification on the back side.



Also, I just have to say again how impressed I am with the RZ lenses. I was shooting some images of my son with the RZ 150mm f/3.5 last night, and was checking out how well the lens performed when shot wide open. I was stunned at how good it was. Depth of field is really shallow at that aperture though. Here's a full frame image and then a 100% crop.

RZ67 Pro II + RZ 150mm f/3.5 wide open



100% crop

 
Last edited:
P

Paul66

Guest
I'm going to have to sell my body and 80 LS along with a 150 3.5 and 55-110 before I can do this switch over
 

Ed Hurst

Well-known member
Oh, it seems very reasonable to an obsessive like me. I fear, however, that such a step would fail, in my case, to raise the necessary funds... By quite a margin.
 
P

Paul66

Guest
Ed I mainly shoot nude girls so I'm told I've already sold my soul so why not the body ;)
 
M

mahaney_mark

Guest
I'm just now moving into exploring the digital world. I've professionally been using film, mainly large format, but I also regularly shoot color negative with the RZ. I love the camera. It was original wish to shoot RZ with a phase one back.
I rented a phase back and immediately ran into focus issues. I shoot a lot of slower shutter speeds in natural light and didn't know I had to put the mirror up to avoid shutter/mirror slap shaking. Once that was figured out, I was able to get a nice sharp image and was impressed.

It does seem like the RZ lenses + Phase yield a more film-like look than the ultra sharp digital lenses out there. Is that the consensus here? That the micro contrast of the digital lenses create a kind of super-realistic look? There's something unnatural about their sharpness.

In general, I'm still waiting to be blown away by any digital system. It's one thing if you shoot in a studio with strobes, but shooting with ambient light or even mixed lighting, I haven't found any digital system that yields images that render non studio conditions as well as film. Why is it that medium format backs are so bad with back lighting? Even a Canon 5D MarkII does a better job than the Phase p45+ I just used. Why is this?

I love the RZ, but I really don't like when paired with a 645 digital back that the lenses are no longer their native focal length. The look and feel of each lens is lost and shooting wide shots become a challenge.
 
M

mahaney_mark

Guest
I love the RZ, but really don't like the fact that when paired with a MF digital back, the native focal lengths are no longer the case. A 110mm is something more like a 130mm. It makes shooting wide shot difficult.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Well, not really. A 110mm is still a 110mm whether you shoot native 6x7, 645, 35mm or any other sensor size. Obviously what is different is that your FoV is more restricted so yes the 'apparent focal length' is changed from the wider 6x7 view that you might have been used to with film.

The look of the lenses doesn't change but the coverage does. Can you get the same look as you're used to with native 120/220 film, no, or at least not unless you stitch for the same coverage or accept a smaller FoV.

Nothing new here really. This discussion comes up all the time with every image format.
 
M

mahaney_mark

Guest
I'm sure what I'm bringing up is nothing new, but the look and feel of the lens from a performance standpoint is different. In order to get the field of view of a 90mm lens, I have to use something like a 65mm. Obviously, the wider a lens gets, it changes how the depth of field is rendered compared to shooting with the same fstop on a longer lens. What depth of field I used to be able to achieve at f4 with a 90mm is now different than what I have to use to get that same field of view using a 65mm at f4. The depth of field is not as shallow. The look is different. THe look of each lens doesn't change, but in changing to a wider lens to achieve the same field of view, the look of the image does change in my experience.
 

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Agreed. The lenses don't change THEIR look with format but having to pick different focal length lenses to achieve the coverage you need certainly does change the character of the image.
 
In follow up to the discussion about the different adapter plates and using a Leaf Aptus back with an older RZ67 Pro II (non-D) model, I thought I would share a picture of how I did it. Credit goes to SergeiR who originally posted on the forum about this modification and even took the time to send me a photo of his plate so I could get it right.

This is the Mamiya HX-701 adapter plate, which is designed to mount the ZD back (or other AFD backs) on the RZ67 Pro II-D. I think the alternative model number on B&H is #212-107. It fits fine on the RZ67 Pro II but interferes with the darkslide sensors. By drilling or dremeling out the correct location on the plate you can get it to work perfectly. It also doesn't adversely affect the function of the plate if you ever upgrade to the Pro II-D (I've been told).

Here's what the plate looks like, and the modification on the back side.

Also, I just have to say again how impressed I am with the RZ lenses. I was shooting some images of my son with the RZ 150mm f/3.5 last night, and was checking out how well the lens performed when shot wide open. I was stunned at how good it was. Depth of field is really shallow at that aperture though. Here's a full frame image and then a 100% crop.

RZ67 Pro II + RZ 150mm f/3.5 wide open
Sorry to revive this old thread, but I'm selling my DF and would like to do this.

Before I commit to purchasing this stuff, could anyone advise if this mod would with an IQ160 + HX701 adapter and an RZ PRO II (non D model)?d

Many thanks
Paul
 

Sheldon N

Member
Sorry to revive this old thread, but I'm selling my DF and would like to do this.

Before I commit to purchasing this stuff, could anyone advise if this mod would with an IQ160 + HX701 adapter and an RZ PRO II (non D model)?d

Many thanks
Paul
From the digital back standpoint, it doesn't affect the useage at all. The contacts on the adapter/back aren't affected. On the RZ67 Pro II (Non-D) camera, the contacts on the adapter don't even line up with the camera so it's essentially a dummy plate.

The reason for drilling the indentations in the adapter is because the RZ Pro II (non-D) has a small metal sensor that's like a ball sticking out of the rear of the camera. It senses whether there is contact with the dark slide on a film back and prevents the shutter from releasing until the dark slide is pulled. With the digital adapter, it thinks there is a film back with the dark slide present, until you drill the holes to prevent contact with the sensor.

The modified HX-701 plate should work with any Mamiya mount back that works with a "dumb" adapter. Some of the Phase one backs require a wake up cable, but I don't know if the newer IQ backs do. You should look into that to be sure.
 

yaya

Active member
Paul if you want to use an IQ (or a Credo) on a non-D body you can get an HX705 plate and use a lens-to-back sync cable. Just set the shutter latency to Zero
We'll soon have a modified Leaf adapter (similar to the current Aptus one) that will also work with the IQ and Credo

This is a modified adapter which I made for the Credo & IQ:




BR

Yair
 
Last edited:
Thankyou Yair!

Perhaps I can ask you also, I'm toying with D or non-D body, but being unlikely to use the prism finder (when I had a C330, the prism sat in the box) is there any other benefit to a D version other than losing the external cables?
 

yaya

Active member
Thankyou Yair!

Perhaps I can ask you also, I'm toying with D or non-D body, but being unlikely to use the prism finder (when I had a C330, the prism sat in the box) is there any other benefit to a D version other than losing the external cables?
Hi Paul,

On the D, since it uses an electronic interface, you cannot overshoot the camera, this is relevant if you shoot fast, obviously.

Also, since the D is relatively new, it is likely that you will find one in a better condition if you buy it second hand

Hope this helps

Yair
 
Top