I have the Mamiya DM-Series 28Mp DSLR Camera and would like to know what I would need to use the back on a RZ series camera.
I have the Mamiya DM-Series 28Mp DSLR Camera and would like to know what I would need to use the back on a RZ series camera.
You may just need the RZ Adapter plate, model HX701. I needed the adapter plate to mate the Mamiya ZD back to my RZ.. Works like a charm.
There is one adapter for the RZ Pro IID (cable free) and a different adapter for the RZ Pro II (requires cable to lens). That's it. I strongly suggest the cable free solution (RZ Pro IID with adapter plate) since it's significantly more elegant to just put the back on the body and not have to worry about the cable.
We'd be happy to help with a rental-towards-purchase if you want to try how well an RZ fits your style before you buy.
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Mamiya Leaf, Leica, Arca Swiss, Cambo, Profoto, LaCie, Canon, TTI, Broncolor & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off
I just might take you up on that Doug. Thanks for the response
Interesting idea, I got an old RZII (non D) that I cant sell here in Hong Kong.
I have an IQ180 in a Phase One/ DF mount . The adapter I see online are for Hasselblad V mount.
Would I need a Phase One Mamiya to RZ mount (Item number: 70994 as seen on Phase's website)? plus some regular interface cable from my tech cam?
Does anybody have experience with the lens quality.
The RZ body has to be either an RZ Pro IID to use a cable free adapter
Do you already have the RZ?
What are you looking to do with the RZ and the 28 back?
Here are some images of the adapters:
Last edited by FredBGG; 13th February 2012 at 21:09.
1 Member(s) liked this post
If the body is a non-D model (RZ, RZ PRO, RZ PRO II) then you need a mechanical adapter, for which you have 2 options:
1. Leaf adapter: Part number is 518-02213A and it comes with a marked focusing screen, a lens-to-back sync cable and a motordrive control cable
2. Mamiya HX705 adapter: you'll need to order the focusing screen and the cable/s separately
If you camera is the D model then you can either go with option 1 or do as Doug has suggested and get the HX701 plate (and the focusing screen)
I don't have the RZ, just playing around with the idea of getting one to replace the Mamiya 645 DF, for some reason I like the RZ better handling wise.
Thanks for all the information.
i still can't see the point...
i have a DF... really mobile... but when i wants more movements, then i'm using a monorail in the studio... Arca M line two, arca F line 69... linhof...
The RZ is bulky, and does not have movements... what's the point ?
i probably miss something there !
I am using a rz67 pro ii on a leaf aptus 6-II 28mp back. I really do not mind the extra cable, not a big deal for me. The price difference between an rz67 pro II and the pro IID is just ridiculous. I would hands down recommend the rz67 pro II. As far as adapter goes, I am using the hx701 which is actually for the proIID, only problem with it, is it pushes in the dark slide detecter on the rz67 pro II body, so I had to dremmell them out, I am not a mechanically inclined person but it was super easy to do. Cables for it are super easy to find on ebay aswell. Very cheap and modular solution, love it.
Many of my clients shoot with RZ/Hasselblad V combo. And often the waist level finder is the attraction. But you never really know. Do photographers always have a point? I don't think so. Sometimes they just like something. When I shoot *X* I like the way it .... etc. Photography is not one size fits all.
Personally, I also like looking down into the WLF of the RZ, and also the ergonomics and feel of the focusing rail as I do so - even if it is not a large sensor.
But the 'D' adapter cost a lot (1000eur in my european country) and I suspect the RZ lenses not to be the best ones to use with 80mpix (nothing to prove that, just suspicions).
Hummm, sometimes I wish I would have chosen the S2...
The RZ Pro-IID is a long time, very versatile and fun to use Pro system much loved by users. In addition to WLF that many prefer, it has a wide range of lens options, some of which are very cleverly designed. It does have a T/S adapter that, while limited in movements, still provides benefits including infinity focus when used with the 75mm and 180mm SB (short barrel) lenses ... there is also a 75 T/S lens. The fisheye is a blast, the 140 macro very good, and the 210/250 APOs are very very good. The 180mm Soft focus is a great portrait lens with clever Imagon type inserts for various degrees of soft feel not readily reproducible in post.
I used one for many years with a Leaf Aptus 75 and 75s digital back and loved the files. The focusing system on the RZ is very precise, using a dual knob for very fine adjustments.
You have had to work with one to really understand the on-going attraction.
"You have had to work with one to really understand the on-going attraction."
i used to have a pro sd and a RZ... but i went for an arca fline 69 for movements, and an hasselblad 503CW for the WLF... and with a leaf back, i was able to shoot with the WLF in vertical or horizontal !
Now i'm using an RM3D and a DF... i went with the DF for focus confirmation... and my most used lens is the 80 Macro N, bought for 200 euros including a CLA... fantastic lens for my use !
a question of taste...
One issue you will come up against is focusing.
While the RZ has a fine waist level finder it is still designed for a 6x7 screen , not a 44x33 screen area.
The RZ prism has low magnification too. I had one, but ended up always using the waist level finder.
I have a similar issue with the Fuji gx 680, but Fuji made a focus loup.
It is basically a loup that hovers above the focusing screen and lets you move it around.
I've got a 6x loupe on order for my RZ67... will report back on how well it works after I've received it. It's a taller/thinner loupe so I hope to be able to use it in conjunction with the WLF, just drop it down the chimney and right onto the focusing screen glass.
I'm now of the opinion, after shooting an RZ for a while with an Aptus II 6, that the RZ isn't as hard to focus once you get the focus screen calibrated and also use a loupe to focus.
Fred sold me a 4X horizon loupe and I can now say that focussing is not that difficult... what's more, I can tell my focus screen is indeed mis-calibrated as misfocus is by the same amount consistently... which shows me I'm focussing (bad eyes and all) to the same place essentially every time. In this digital age you just have to watch the calibration of everything. I'm going to spend an hour or so tomorrow shooting tethered to get the focus spot-on and then adjust the focus screen until it shows the same focus spot. Andre Napier did the same with all his bodies and had no probs focussing.
As far as missing something... I strongly believe that the RZ lenses draw beautifully with the lower MP backs. I absolutely love the look I get with portraits (and landscapes). It's a "smooth-sharp" aesthetic. Plenty of resolution, but with less local contrast than the more modern digital optics.
Lastly, cost on the Pro IID bodies (with 110mm lens usually) on the used market are insanely low right now... I see them in the $1200 - $1500 range coming out of Japan all the time. It's a great, affordable system to get into if you like shooting on a tripod and appreciate the look of the glass rendition.
I had to adjust the focusing screen on my RZ67 to match my Aptus 22. It was showing a bit of backfocus so I had to lower the focusing screen slightly.
I wish I'd had a proper tool to adjust the screws that the focusing screen sits on, I ended up using a pair of needlenose pliers which was a less than elegant solution.
I totally agree on the RZ recommendation. I was able to pick up a RZ67 Pro II body plus 50, 65, 110, 150, 180 and 250mm lenses for under $1500. Combined with a Mamiya HX-701 adapter plate (modified) there's not even a need to get the Pro II D model. The lenses are wonderfully sharp with a nice rendition.
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.
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
Last edited by Sheldon N; 22nd February 2012 at 13:24.
2 Member(s) liked this post
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
Selling your body to buy a camera... Now that's dedication! ;-)
3 Member(s) liked this post
Glad it works for you, Sheldon
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.
3 Member(s) liked this post
Ed I mainly shoot nude girls so I'm told I've already sold my soul so why not the body
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Got the 6x loupe for my RZ today, posted my impressions in the other thread discussing loupes. You can see it here.
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.
Ok, many, many thanks Sheldon, I understand now.
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:
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?
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
All i read here is false.
I've already used a P40+ on a RZ pro II, with a HX701 plate.
Non D model and it doesn't need the HX705.
So there is something that i don't understand...
For the dealers:
Please clarify this question: the Leaf, Mamiya, and Phase One adapters, will each of them be compatible with which digital back brands. For example, the Leaf adapter will it work on the Phase One digital backs and and if so which Phase One digital will work and which one will not work? The digital backs that I would like to know are: Hasselblad, Leaf, Mamiya, Phase One and Sinar. I think compatibility will be important to get this expensive adapter.
V is for Hasselblad
M for Mamiya/Phase One
C for Contax
You can use whatever backs on the Rz, it depends of the adapter plate.
You can use an HX701 for Leaf back and Phase One, on a non D version.
The 701 is also for the D version.
There is also Leaf plates for Leaf backs.
The HX705 plate... i still don't figure out why it's there.
I think the posted part numbers might create some confusion, since Leaf and Mamiya have changed part numbers (not to mention branding) so many times I lost count. At one point, I started a KB article for our site that detailed the various combinations of RZ adapters and native interfaces and digital backs and ..... I never finished the page, it became such a convoluted mess I found incredibly difficult to compose the information in a legible format.
Here is what is for sure - the HX701, which is an electronic Mamiya Interface Adapter for RZ67, is still available, and can work on the Pro II-D RZ bodies, as well as Pro/Pro II. But with non-D, you'll need the $20 pc sync to mini cable for a Leaf Aptus, or the $58 pc sync to 8 pin cable for Leaf Credo/Phase One IQ.
With the Pro-II D, you'll have more transferrable metadata. I also don't believe you can trigger the Pro-II D camera from the host computer, via software, (like C1), although something in the back of my mind tells me I saw something recently that may have overcome that limitation. You've always had this option with the Pro/Pro-II bodies via motor drive cable.
The other interface option is the older interface adapters for RZ, which could have been branded under Mamiya or Leaf. These provided additional interface options for Hasselblad H and Hasselblad V, and was not electronic, so had to have the sync cable. I don't recall that a Contax to RZ was ever produced by Leaf or Mamiya (there was a version made by a Japanese vendor, but the name escapes me).
*HX701 - Mamiya Electronic RZ Interface Adapter for M645
- Leaf Credo/Phase One IQ (M645 native interface) on Pro-II D
- Leaf Aptus/Aptus-II (M645 native interface) on Pro-II D
- Phase One P/P+ (M645 native interface) on Pro-II D
- Leaf Credo/Phase One IQ (M645 native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and sync cable
- Leaf Aptus/Aptus-II (M645 native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and sync cable
- Phase One P/P+ (M645 native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and sync cable
*Mamiya/Leaf Branded Generic RZ Interface Adapters
(I have not attempted to use the above adapter with a Pro-II D and sync cable, so I cannot at this moment confirm that works without limitation).
- Leaf Credo/Phase One IQ (M645, Hasselblad H/V native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and sync cable
- Leaf Aptus/Aptus-II (M645, Hasselblad H/V native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and sync cable
- Phase One P/P+ (M645, Hasselblad H/V native interface) on Pro/Pro-II and Wake Up cable*
*There is also a Phase One RZ Interface for native Hasselblad V mount that will automatically wake the P/P+ digital backs.
Hasselblad and Sinar digital backs might also work with the above combinations, though each has made their own RZ Interface Adapters for their digital backs (Hasselblad with the iXpress and CF series).
If there's errors above or anyone has more to offer, by all means add it - there is not enough solid information about the DB to RZ situation.
***PSon - I agree on the wonderful way the RZ lenses render, but you didn't mention another nice feature of the RZ, the waist level finder. For many, that right hand on the focus knob and their eyes glued down just feels right - not anywhere near the same effect with a monorail camera...
Has anyone done a side by side comparison between the RZ67 and the 645 AFD+?
It would be interesting to see how each system renders similar images.
You dont take a photograph, you make it. Ansel Adams
With pro II (non D), you don't have the metadata registered?
I thought it was close from the winder, manifestly not?!
I can confirme it work with a P40+
Will it work with a P25+ and a P45+ ?
The Old Phase One? The grey V mount?
this: DF to RZ
and this: www.getdpi.com/forum/392129-post22.html
is totally wrong!!!
I hope that clears that up for you.
Thanks for the information you've provided in patient and professional manner Steve.
I would have been tempted to reply to MrDen's comments "All i read here is false" and "So this...and this....is totally wrong!!!" in a less diplomatic fashion.
Last edited by bensonga; 3rd March 2015 at 18:01.
2 Member(s) liked this post