Mamiya RZ67 - Is it worth resurecting?

Glyn Carnell

Glyn Carnell

Suspended / Banned
Messages
555
Name
Glyn
Edit My Images
Yes
I suppose after finding this forum and reading the threads in the Film section I already know the answere.
In 1997 my solicitor asked me to loose some money, I duely purchased this camera with a couple of backs & lenses. Was always a dream of mine to own one. I's in mint condition. I have my own darkroom kit (LPL 6x7) and all the tackle. A cannon 4990 scanner.

It's only ever had about 9 or 10 rolls of film through it in all those years..... (single parent and the passion went). However, reacently my passion for photography is returning. I have a Canon 1DS (MK1) from new and that does all I need although only 11MP.

Not sure I want to get back to the wet side of things but hoping it will be worth the effort using the RZ and scanning the images.... What do you think?

Also I have a 120 & 220 back for this and would like to know if I can run a 120 through the 220? Sure I've done it before but can't remember now.

2 rolls of FP4 from 1997..... would you bother?

Your thought and advice would be very welcome.
 
Last edited:
Well, I've just bought one :) So I think my biased view would be "absolutely"...

The reason I did it was I only really took up photography at the beginning of this year and really enjoyed getting into it with a "go anywhere" Pentax K5. Quality was fine (for me as an absolute beginner) and a great selection of lenses to pine after. Ultimately, though, I found I was taking far more pictures than I was actually doing photography. By this I meant no matter how hard I tried, I always had the "oh well, if it doesn't work, I can delete it / reshoot it" mentality. So I decided to supplement it with the polar opposite: an RZ67.

Although I've only been shooting for a matter of days (one roll now developed, second roll waiting to be sent away and a third almost finished), I just love it.

I even brought it down to my folks' for Christmas along with my Pentax. I thought I might want to take a couple of shots, as well as the majority with the digital. Only problem was, I forgot to bring the battery for my Pentax so all Christmas shots this year will be on 120... hopefully, since I've also had to guess the exposure as I was planning on using the Pentax as the light meter!

Whatever... I think it's a lovely complement to a more "normal" camera. It allows you to appreciate each for what they are.
 
I've been using an RZ67 for landscape and still life for about four years and now about 80-90% of my images are made with the RZ. I don't really do portraits but plenty of people do with an RZ

I scan the results with an Epson V700 after home processing and example results can be seen at
https://www.flickr.com/photos/landscapepics/sets/72157633532052645/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You don't have to get wet, you can send the fil off for processing and just scan it yourself. Just do it, you won't regret it. There's magic in them thar rolls, I tell 'ee!

Don't put 120 in the 220 back (or vice versa)... the 220 has no backing paper and the pressure plate is in a different place to compensate. Not sure quite what happens, but it's probably not what you want...

1997 FP4, that'll be fine. I suspect @pentaxpete would regard that as a rather young film! Maybe rate it a stop or so slower, 50-80 range? (1 stop per decade, from memory, and there's also the general advice to over-expose negative film anyway...). If you're not sure how well it's working, maybe a fresh roll to try it out, just to reduce the variables, OTOH you've already got it so why not just plunge in...

... and please show us the results!!!
 
Sounds a very christian thing to do.
 
Glyn Carnell said:
2 rolls of FP4 from 1997..... would you bother?

Your thought and advice would be very welcome.
Click to expand...

no i wouldnt bother ,,rz's are a piece of rubbish ,,,,,,,
i'll send you £10 for postage and an address to send it all to for re-cycling :)

and welcome to TP ,,,hope you'll stay around this bit for more ( sensible ) advice
 
I have a home for old cameras where they are looked after and taken out at regular intervals. A much better retirement for them than Donut's recycling camera scrapyard!


Steve
 
Last edited:
Well, I live on a lovely farm where old cameras can live out their remaining years frolicking in the sunny meadows and taking pictures of the beautiful countryside with free film...... Send it to me and give it its freedom.:rolleyes::D

Seriously though, I think if you give it a bit of TLC and run a film through it then you will realise just how good it is.

Andy
 
I represent RZ older brother Richard Back the 67th he says he would love for his brother to come stay with us.
 
Hi Guy's
Sorry I have not been back to reply but been laid up with the Man Flu & chest infection since Xmas day. Urgh, 2 weeks in blood bed while we had the snow & frost.... Great!
I have decided to resurect this baby, just got to get some chemicals and I'm away.

Can you still get FP4 or is there a better film available now? One that uses the same chemistry.
 
Glyn Carnell said:
Hi Guy's
Sorry I have not been back to reply but been laid up with the Man Flu & chest infection since Xmas day. Urgh, 2 weeks in blood bed while we had the snow & frost.... Great!
I have decided to resurect this baby, just got to get some chemicals and I'm away.

Can you still get FP4 or is there a better film available now? One that uses the same chemistry.
Click to expand...

Your FP4 you already have should be ok...I've tested some bulk FP4 35mm that I bought in 1982 that was ok, also some old FP4 120 that I found lying around that was OK too.....and these B/W films were\still stored at room temp.
 
I have been using Fuji Acros 100 as my go to b&w film, lovely smooth tones and virtually grain free. I also like T-max 400 for a faster film.

Andy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top