Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,878   Posts: 1,520,360   Online: 1177
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735

    RZ

    Generally, the RZ is the better choice, for many reasons. It's been discussed, search the archives.

  2. #12
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,905
    Images
    6
    I've used an RZ for a long time. I don't like traveling with it because it's heavy. I also don't like the waist level finder because the image is reversed. I saved enough for a prism and now my camera is even heavier. It's true that the RZ is more versatile due to interchangable backs. You can for example switch from BW film to chrome film by changing backs. It's a great studio camera, but it sucks as a travel camera. I'd go with a something more compact. You should even consider more compact and lighter range finders like the Fuji GW 670. Also a lighter camera requires a lighter tripod. As I get older my RZ system is heavier.
    Last edited by Mainecoonmaniac; 12-12-2010 at 04:33 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  3. #13
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    I'd consider leaf shutter lenses, exchangeable magazines, and bellows focusing to be a big benefit in most situations. However, you can get certain lenses for the Pentax that use leaf shutters, and you can get extension tubes. Additionally, the benefits of a leaf shutter are not huge in a landscape shot. Over all, I'd say I like the RB/RZ better, but for one specific use such as landcapes, I don't see too much of a difference. The exchangeable backs always help, though, in almost any situation. The focusing scale on the Pentax is much better for landscapes in my opinion.
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 12-12-2010 at 02:33 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    67
    Images
    1

    RZ or Pentax

    What I prefer about the RZ is the waist level finder. It is great for composing your landscape picture. Like looking at a mini photo. I've always found it more difficult to really get good composition from a 35mm camera or the Pentax using the prism veiwer.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    239
    For landscape and macro I chose the Pentax 67II. The deciding factor for me were the lenses. The Pentax 67 system offers wider wide angle and faster tele lenses than the RZ system. For example, two of my most frequently used lenses are the 4.0/45mm and the 4.0/300mm ED lenses which don't have a direct counterpart in the RZ system. Both are excellent systems.

  6. #16
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,905
    Images
    6

    Love the big focusing screen but...

    Quote Originally Posted by dande View Post
    What I prefer about the RZ is the waist level finder. It is great for composing your landscape picture. Like looking at a mini photo. I've always found it more difficult to really get good composition from a 35mm camera or the Pentax using the prism veiwer.
    Love the big focusing screen but never got used to the flopped image with the waist level finder. I use a prism that weighs as much as a lens.

  7. #17
    NJS
    NJS is offline
    NJS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    125
    the only reason why I haven't decided for RZ yet as my next camera is those damn takumars, 45mm and 35mm. other than that I think RZ leaves the P67 in dust, very versatile thingy it is.

  8. #18
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by dande View Post
    What I prefer about the RZ is the waist level finder. It is great for composing your landscape picture. Like looking at a mini photo. I've always found it more difficult to really get good composition from a 35mm camera or the Pentax using the prism veiwer.
    Either of these cameras can be used with a WLF or a prism.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    88
    I also went through the same decision for MF landscape and macro work and ended up with the Pentax which was definitely the better decision for me. The issue came down to size and portability over absolute convenience once in the field. Though the Mamiya offered advantages over the Pentax (bellows, rotating backs), neither of them were absolute advantages. They only made things a little more convenient but not enough to outweigh (pun intended) the fact that the Mamiya was too big and heavy for my needs. A different supposed advantage (interchangeable backs) wasn't relevant to me since I only shot one film at the time. For macro work, I used the Pentax 165/2.8 and extension tubes with excellent results, either with the waist level finder or metered prism.

    I second the suggestion to use the system before your buy. Renting equipment locally is not always possible or cheap. If you can get a no questions return policy on your purchase, that would give you the chance to play with the gear for a week or so before permanently committing to it. Then again, a week isn't very long to get to know a system well. Another alternative is to buy a modest, reasonably priced, used system and spend a good amount of time shooting with it to see if it suits your needs. If it doesn't, you can usually sell if for around what you paid for it. Any loss you might incur will likely be a fraction of any rental fee.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1
    While a bit late to this thread, I just wanted to add that many people find the vibrations in the Pentax system to be problematic, even with the mirror locked up on a sturdy tripod. I initially had three of the 67/MLU bodies (precursor to the 67II), two for film and one dedicated to a Polaroid back. Upon returning from each distant location shoot, I'd nearly pull my hair out at the number of frames that had issues with vibration (often the right side of the frame). I eventually gave up on the Pentax 67's and went to Horseman SW cameras with rollfilm backs - worked great but not a very fluid solution for most people.

    Pentax then came out with the 67II, which promised better vibration dampening, 1/2 stop shutter speeds, and a few other features that were more marketing than practical. I figured I'd give it another go as most of my work at the time was best suited to the compactness of that system vs. some of the larger 6x7 competitors. Well, the 67II was indeed nicer than the 67, but there were a number of shutter speeds (1/2-1/30th) that were all but impossible to attain a TRULY SHARP image at. No amount of mirror lock-up or 75# tripod is going to dampen that huge shutter (forget the mirror, the shutter itself causes issues). After returning from several major shoots overseas with models in tow, and reviewing the images on the lightbox back home, the second experiment with Pentax MF came to a close. The lenses I owned were the 35/45/55/90/105/200. I never used the leaf-shutter lenses intended for the Pentax 67, those may be the ticket for subduing the vibration. That said, I can't be limited to just those lenses.

    The optics themselves are quite good, the 105 is rather amazing.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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