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!
Eddie Adams used to shoot with an RZ and a AE chimney finder.Max -- great shot!
I did see your post about the loupe modification and have been meaning to do the same. The AE finder with mamiya magnifier just doesn't add much (if any) to the RZ's built in WLF magnifier.
Where did you source your loupe and intenscreen?
And have you seen THIS?
Thanks. Yeah, I've seen these AE chimney finders before and prices are always pretty steep considering the fact that you don't gain much exept for metering and the AE feature of course. Magnification is exactly the same and so is with the 3x-5x dual magnifying hood for the RB67 I once had (these are pretty rare aswell but fit the RZ perfectly).Max -- great shot!
I did see your post about the loupe modification and have been meaning to do the same. The AE finder with mamiya magnifier just doesn't add much (if any) to the RZ's built in WLF magnifier.
Where did you source your loupe and intenscreen?
And have you seen THIS?
That is a very well used looking camera....producing amazing results.Here is another quick snap of my RZ. I got myself another loupe because the metal plate holding the beattie screen is slightly thinner than the original Mamiya screen so I had to modify another one. And I managed to use black tape, which means it finally looks like a camera again.
It would be very interesting to see the response if someone starts the thread for "MF more than 22 mp". It certainly will not be meI wouldn't be surprised if the P65+ images in "sensor plus mode" looked very good, but I think we have to draw the line re "fat pixel" backs here....it's either a real 9 micron (fat pixel) sensor or it's not. There are plenty of other threads for the big guys to play in....this one is for the little fat guys who all too often, get no respect.
It was said somewhat in jest folks (hence the "wink" icon)....who all too often, get no respect.
Well said Gary. Also the images you'll see from these fat pixel backs also are a great reminder that megapixels don't really matter for most prints (ahem ... can you say D800? ) but colour really does.It was said somewhat in jest folks (hence the "wink" icon).
Obviously, many folks here still appreciate the quality of these fat pixel backs. But as we all know, there is a race to the top re more and more megapixels and it's those 40, 60 and 80 megapixel backs that get most of the press and attention these days.
Gary
I hope so! :thumbs:This thread has a potential to be another long-term thread like "Fun with MF images" or "Tech camera Images" and I've really enjoyed it.
Thanks,
Pramote
Well said Gary .It was said somewhat in jest folks (hence the "wink" icon).
Obviously, many folks here still appreciate the quality of these fat pixel backs. But as we all know, there is a race to the top re more and more megapixels and it's those 40, 60 and 80 megapixel backs that get most of the press and attention these days.
Gary
Thanks... uhm, yes I should post larger sizes, the image is coming from my dated private web gallery that generates image sizes that where good back in the days we had 1024x768 screensTorger
Even at this small size this image is very peaceful - I have no doubt at a larger size it would be more enjoyable still.
Mal