Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,968   Posts: 1,523,419   Online: 1045
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by Graham_Martin View Post
    It's funny how the RB67 has such a lure for so many people that they keep coming back to it. I wonder of this is the same with other MF brands such as the Hasselblad 500/501 series. I took my new to me RB67 out yesterday. It is a pleasure to use. I had forgotten how heavy it is. I will just have to plan when and where to use it.
    I will not be selling my 501, so there's no need to come back. It's a lot lighter, so I just leave it in camera bag.

  2. #22
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Graham_Martin View Post
    It's funny how the RB67 has such a lure for so many people that they keep coming back to it. I wonder of this is the same with other MF brands such as the Hasselblad 500/501 series. I took my new to me RB67 out yesterday. It is a pleasure to use. I had forgotten how heavy it is. I will just have to plan when and where to use it.
    Easy to understand given its virtues. I've never owned one, or even SEEN one IRL, but I'm often tempted to get one but suspect/fear I'd use my 4x5 a lot less if I did. Big negative, rotating back, no sheet film hassles - for shots off a tripod which don't demand movements and prints no larger than, say, 20x24, it gives up so little to large format with modern films as to sorely tempt me to escape the hassles of sheet film. Even the zone system is easily accommodated. One back for N, one for N-1.5 or so and one for N+1.5. Combined with modern VC paper that's all I'm likely to ever need.

    Tempting, but I do love using the view camera.

  3. #23
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,132
    Images
    286
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Easy to understand given its virtues. I've never owned one, or even SEEN one IRL, but I'm often tempted to get one but suspect/fear I'd use my 4x5 a lot less if I did. Big negative, rotating back, no sheet film hassles - for shots off a tripod which don't demand movements and prints no larger than, say, 20x24, it gives up so little to large format with modern films as to sorely tempt me to escape the hassles of sheet film. Even the zone system is easily accommodated. One back for N, one for N-1.5 or so and one for N+1.5. Combined with modern VC paper that's all I'm likely to ever need.

    Tempting, but I do love using the view camera.
    That's exactly right, Roger. =) I'm probably at about 50%/50% usage percentage between my 4x5 and RB67. 3 lenses, 3 backs for different development and you're golden. It isn't any lighter than my 4x5 kit but it's much faster and you can load film anywhere.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Berlin Wi.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    244

    You guys are rubbing salt into my wound.

    When I read about you guys with your RB67 Pro S's, it is like rubbing salt into a wound. I had two RB's at one time, and had to sell them to pay the bills. Later I bought a Nikon DSLR to use for stock photography. If you think taking a picture with a camera that has 20 different options is fun, well then run down to your digital store and buy one. The thing that really bugged me was that after I had made the decision to sell the camera after the last roll was done, I took it to the camera store to be developed and when I got it back the guy handed it to me with it on a roll and the film was not cut or printed. I told him I didn't want just developing, but then I saw the price...$3.00. That was a big difference from the $8-$9 I was paying. I put the film in my scanner and examined the shots. I had taken pics of my sister. The detail was out of this world compared to 35mm. I don't know if I will ever get another RB, or go to large format. The weight never was much of a problem with me as I always used a tripod. Perhaps the day will come when I will get another. The thing I liked is that the viewing with the WL viewer was like watching a TV. At 61 year old, that helps a lot with these eyes. Ric.

  5. #25
    Graham_Martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    St. Augustine, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    213
    Images
    6
    The big VF is a huge help (I am 67 years old). I also find the RB67 incredibly easy to focus. Basically I just keep the bellows wound all the way in, and I am in focus. My camera came with a couple of extenders, and I am going to try them out to see that affects focusing.
    Graham from St. Augustine, FL

  6. #26
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,778
    4x5 can be both smaller and lighter than an RB, oddly enough. My Tech III and older lenses makes a pretty light kit and a Chamonix or Tachihara would be a good two pounds lighter still. And if you like the 6x7 ground glass a 4x5 is just more better, never mind 8x10. But it's much more expensive in terms of film, much more hassle with sheet film and much slower to use, though that last combined with movements adds to its own reward too.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo.
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    752
    I used to own an RZ. If you want to carry around a large lens kit for an RB or RZ, it can get pretty heavy!

    I sometimes miss my RZ. It was a great portrait camera.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin