There is little practical advantage in going for the over-expensive D version of the ProII - especially if you are not contemplating a digital back. The only real benefit of the D is that it can take a digital back without the need for an adapter plate. I have both the RZ and RZ ProII and have an Imacon iXpress digital back to augment my film backs - so you can enjoy digital on the RZ67 without buying a ProIID. The only thing to remember with the ProII versions of the RZ is that the earlier AE Finder is not compatible without a change to its circuitry (no longer possible) and the PD Finder can't be used at all (according to the ProII manual). I also have the very rare AE Focusing Hood (brilliant accessory!) but have not tried it on the ProII - but logically none of these RZ Pro finders would be capable of recognising the half-stops of the ProII. All academic of course if you prefer to use a hand-held lightmeter....

Quote Originally Posted by lewis-richards View Post
I am thinking of buying a new medium format camera, I was originally going to have a bessa III however after reading reviews I don't feel it would be as well suited to me as I thought. I am wanting the camera for landscape mainly. I have used both an RB and RZ camera however I liked them both very much. I have one question about the RZ however is that should I go for the ProII or the ProIID as I only want to film so is there much difference as is the ProIID mainly aimed for a digital back attached?