Mamiya Medium Format owners group

I've a similar query, sorry Steven;

Mamiya RZ body made two versions of the 50mm wide angle lens, the standard 50mm, and a version which is called 50mm ULD (more expensive), does anyone know if the ULD version is superior quality (end result prints) and worth the extra money from your experience please ?

Thanks;
Peter
 
I have the ULD version of the 50mm, but haven't used the other version so I can't comment on the relative quality. Nor can I lay my hand on a scan of a negative that definitely came from that lens. It's at the moment out on loan so I can't even make a specific test exposure for you. All I can say is that when I bought it (new) the dealer did say that the performance was improved over the non ULD version.

Edit to add. One thing I can say though - I'm not aware of any flare issues with any of my Mamiya lenses. Though I might just be lucky/uncritical. I am aware of issues with my Schneider Symmar 150mm (not Symmar S, Apo-Symmar etc. etc.) in LF.
 
Last edited:
macvisual said:
I've a similar query, sorry Steven;

Mamiya RZ body made two versions of the 50mm wide angle lens, the standard 50mm, and a version which is called 50mm ULD (more expensive), does anyone know if the ULD version is superior quality (end result prints) and worth the extra money from your experience please ?

Thanks;
Peter
Click to expand...

The version I have is the Mamiya-Sekkor Z 50mm/f4.5W. I've never used the ULD version so can't make a comparison.
I have added tags to some of my Flickr images which were taken with this lens - so you could take a look and see whether they look OK to your eyes. Not at all scientific I know !

Here is the link:
https://www.flickr.com/search/?tag_...N03&tags=lensmamiyasekkorz50mmf45w&view_all=1
 
I finally got time today and headed out with my newly acquired RZ67 Pro 1/tripod/Sekonic light meter, loaded both 120 backs with Portra 400 & Tri-X and spent time taking shots of my washed/polished Audi car for a bit of practice at a local forest.

wOw it felt so good to do this again after a very looooong absence of about 22+ yrs. The waist level finder is really excellent with pop up magnifier, handy to compose with and lovely bright viewing, although I've a metered AE Prism for the RZ I still enjoy using the wlf. I used both RZ 110mm f2.8 and the RZ 180mm f4.5 lenses.

I'd actually forgot how versatile those interchangeable 120 backs are......brilliant! Looking forward to finishing off the films soon and get them posted off for developing/processing etc...

Exciting (analogue) times ahead! Loving it.


(pete)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Who did you post them to Adam ? Just curious.....

I can see myself slowly turning my back on digital to be honest. I shot 5x4 - 6x7 - 6x6 many ago and really (really) enjoyed it, this RZ67 has given me a new leash of life again!

I may be picking up a 6x6 format in the near future all being well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Analogue Peter? Film, you put film in your camera, not analogue. It wasn't called analogue before the digital revolution. Anyway, good to see you enjoying your RZ, look forward to seeing your results.
 
macvisual said:
Who did you post them to Adam ? Just curious.....

I can see myself slowly turning my back on digital to be honest. I shot 5x4 - 6x7 - 6x6 many ago and really (really) enjoyed it, this RZ67 has given me a new leash of analogue life again!

I may be picking up a 6x6 format in the near future all being well.
Click to expand...

I went for Peak Imaging in the end, seem like a good company with reasonable prices, will see what happens!

Adam
 
Ben Hur said:
Analogue Peter? Film, you put film in your camera, not analogue. It wasn't called analogue before the digital revolution. Anyway, good to see you enjoying your RZ, look forward to seeing your results.
Click to expand...

"Analogue" is handy to use to distinguish from digital.......although it might not be exactly correct after reading one long boring argument somewhere.
 
Ben Hur said:
Analogue Peter? Film, you put film in your camera, not analogue. It wasn't called analogue before the digital revolution. Anyway, good to see you enjoying your RZ, look forward to seeing your results.
Click to expand...

Language changes and evolves to suit a new paradigm. Rage against it all you want but the term as applied to film photography is here to stay, probably to avoid confusion with films made for new media such as youtube. Could always be worse, could be using the US spelling of analog. ;)
 
That's my first film (Kodak Portra 400asa) shot on the RZ67 and put in jiffy bag for onward free post to 'Peak Imaging' today (Wed), all being well should have the negs and 5x4 prints around middle of next week etc...


:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
magicolor1 said:
+1 This is the Film section of TP not the analogue section :)
Click to expand...

You're not allowed to join the mad hatter's tea party until you are brainwashed and use filmy words. :D
 
Last edited:
"Film" is a bit limiting, isn't it? What about wet plates, Daguerrotypes, direct-positive printing? "Analogue" is a nice analog[1] to "digital".

[1] Different word, not just different spelling
 
abdoujaparov said:
"Film" is a bit limiting, isn't it? What about wet plates, Daguerrotypes, direct-positive printing? "Analogue" is a nice analog[1] to "digital".

[1] Different word, not just different spelling
Click to expand...

Ah but wet plates use a liquid film on the plate to record the image ;)
 
abdoujaparov said:
[1] Different word, not just different spelling
Click to expand...

Not according to the OED. :)

Interestingly, the fifth definition runs as follows:

OED said:
5. Analogue technology; analogue or non-digital media, as analogue radio, analogue television, etc.
Click to expand...

My highlighting. While this appears to refer in the main to broadcast signals, I wonder whether it could also encompass photographic media, if only to end the repeated discussion of the word's use ;)
 
Isn't silver halide the original digital? The individual crystals are either exposed or not, darkened or not. Its only when you put these billions of crystals in pattern and view them from far enough away that they form an analogue image.
 
analogue is a euphemism for sh1t....isn't it ?

I can't really get past that.......and thus it shall be filum, an accurate noun/adjective with very few lavatorial connertations...:)

now that's sorted, I wish to strike "mono" from the filum vocabulary, and its entire family, aunties, uncles.....kids....pets the lot


kthks


:D
 
macvisual said:
Youse certainly are getting mileage from the analogue subject...........boring.
Click to expand...

You're right - apologies for fuelling that one! Time to get my Mamiya 6 out of retirement and put some of that light sensitive plastic stuff in it :)
 
trevorbray said:
@macvisual Building quite a system there Peter.
Click to expand...

Yes indeedy Trevor, means I'll have three good focal lengths, being; 50mm - 110mm - 180mm - WLF - AE Prism Finder - 2x 120 backs (looking for another 120 back as we speak) - 'L' grip - Polaroid Back - Sekonic light meter etc.....

Just ordered a Lee (100 system) 77mm wide angle adaptor ring yesterday from Wex Photographic. I'm gathering up 120 film like a mad man, I really need to find/source a cheapo (or free) fridge to start storing my rolls of 120 film as our main fridge is starting to bulge and is getting in the way of the food stored.......haha.

Thanks;
pete
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope I haven't repeated myself but I have an M645ProSv
Lenses: 35, 45, 80, 120,150 and 210

Last used June 2014 in the French Alps. Digital is now so convenient and 120 film is increasingly difficult to source (especially when Fuji keep discontinuing film - eg Velvia Mk1 and Provia 400, and giving us duffers such as Velvia 100F. I intend on taking the gear (some of it) plus my Pentax Z-1p to Venice in 7 weeks or so.
 
welshwizard645 said:
and giving us duffers such as Velvia 100F.
Click to expand...


how very dare you....I'm appalled...after Kodachrome, 100F was the danglers..:)

anyway, the talk limit has been reached here, if we don't see some pichures soon from all this gear hoarding lip flappin, I'm gonna call bullsh1t and mod flag it..:D
 
Evening gang, its been a few weeks but I've got myself an RB67 and, brace yourselves, just ordered some fresh film for it (that I can develop).
I've got a shot from it up in the show us ya pics thread, but I'm hoping to have some more soon :)
 
Just received my first shot roll of Kodak Portra 400asa which I sent to 'Peak Imaging' last week for developing/print and ten 5"x4" satin matt prints, the film turned out really well, exposed nicely.
I used both a Sekonic handheld meter and a dedicated Mamiya AE Prism Finder (and waist level finder) which were both very accurate exposure wise. Over the moon, no light leaks, excellent.

I've no way (at the minute) of scanning my 6x7 negatives to show the film results here, but hoping to work something out in the near future.


:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I first joined this forum I asked in here if it was worth resurrecting my RZ67 Pro2 after 18 yrs and ya can all guess the answer to that lol. So after pushing a roll of FP4 through it's cog's and a bit of PP here is another convert from Digi to film. I have posted this on the general film area.
 
Glyn Carnell said:
When I first joined this forum I asked in here if it was worth resurrecting my RZ67 Pro2 after 18 yrs and ya can all guess the answer to that lol. So after pushing a roll of FP4 through it's cog's and a bit of PP here is another convert from Digi to film. I have posted this on the general film area.
Click to expand...

Well done....you can enjoy both worlds...digi for snaps and film for something special ;)
 
Yes Brian.... I'm beginning to realise. I miss my film and I think it's making a come-back, thanks for the comment
 
17203693825_53fbe6724c_c.jpg


One from my latest roll of Fomapan 100, this one was not so friendly when trying to coax it onto the reel haha

Adam
 
Glyn Carnell said:
When I first joined this forum I asked in here if it was worth resurrecting my RZ67 Pro2 after 18 yrs and ya can all guess the answer to that lol. So after pushing a roll of FP4 through it's cog's and a bit of PP here is another convert from Digi to film. I have posted this on the general film area.
Click to expand...

You're back...great to see ..nice shot.
 
Glyn Carnell said:
Yes Brian.... I'm beginning to realise. I miss my film and I think it's making a come-back, thanks for the comment
Click to expand...

Best way Glyn i.e. using film and digi......as over the years I see quite a few digi guys go overboard with film (GAS) and buy lots of different cameras and then realise that film is not as convenient (or whatever) as digi , so best to use film for fun and special occasions or landscapes (you know what I mean).
For me I just use film for everything except digi snap shots of gear for ebay or here, and nothing is driving me to digi not even for a Sony A7 ;)
 
Why do you shoot film Bri.?, it seems as though you are a prime candidate for going the other way.

1. cost
once you've bought the gear there are no processing costs, so its cheap

2. lens kleptomania
you could still choose a digi system for which you can buy booty bargain lenses and use with an adapter.

3. iso 11tybillion
shoot your grandkids to hell and back in the pitch black with digi high iso performance.

4. the process
you don't shoot film for the experience of processing and printing it, because you send it all out.


mebbe you just like using film cameras ??, the thrill of the chase hunting for penny bargains ??, or shooting for a result in adverse conditions handicapped by film ??, you just like being awkward ??

I dunno...

:D
 
Well John I shoot film cos I want to, but I suppose I'm winding down after been there done it, and most of the guys here are winding up :D..or maybe I scared of going digi because I might like it :eek: And you are right I have found a hobby of trying out quite a few lenses and cameras that I wouldn't have bought in the past.
But my post was about photographers who suddenly want to try film, buys lots of gear then post for help in keeping their enthusiasm going and usually sell and disappear...to avoid this, surely it's best to dip your toe in the water first than diving in?
 
Well........maybe..

some peeps just want to go xlarge or not at all, right from the off, its not really a question of avoidance, they enjoy spending their money on things they want even if shortly afterwards they lose interest, there's always something to go xlarge with, it seems more of a personality trait, if the finance is available its just a different approach to an enjoyable pastime, you only live once and you can't put a price on happiness..:)

I bet, if you woke up with a million quids in your Saga account....lol......you'd still be down the booty with an 83p budget in the purse looking for bargains, cos you can't put a price on happiness..:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top