Topic: Rz lenses on digital back (Read 12593 times)

michele · « **on:** August 10, 2009, 08:45:25 am »

Hello,
i know it has been discussed many times, but i couldn't find any semples in the forum... I'm thinking about getting a Mamiya RZ ProII D for my P45+, i have an AFDIII with new PhaseOne digital lenses. I can have the 50mm, 110mm and the 180mm for the RZ from a friend of mine, but i have to buy the ProIID with the plate for my back, for now I can't test the 67 lenses, can somebody post some 100% semples? Comparisions beteween the 110mm and the 80mmD and 120mmD are perfect...!!! BTW everything you have will be appreciate!!
Many thanks

chiek · « **Reply #1 on:** August 11, 2009, 05:39:50 am »

I have RZ 50,110,180mm. I've tested my 22mp digital backs.

110,180 is very good, but not excellent than other brand prime lens.
(HC150, sinaron digital 105, even non digital macro sinaron 180)

50 is not good. detail, sharpness, CA... is bad.
center sharpness is good. but that's all.

JK

heinrichvoelkel · « **Reply #2 on:** August 11, 2009, 05:45:27 am »

I talked to the Mamiya service in Germany on the phone about this.

Basically what they said is, the RZ lenses are good enough, but not as good, as the 645 D lenses...

Steve Hendrix · « **Reply #3 on:** August 11, 2009, 09:33:12 am »

Quote from: heinrichvoelkel

I talked to the Mamiya service in Germany on the phone about this.

Basically what they said is, the RZ lenses are good enough, but not as good, as the 645 D lenses...

This sounds like they're basing their answer on how much native resolution the lenses have, which is a response I would expect from the manufacturer. I don't know that it addresses whether the RZ lenses are "as good" as the 645 D lenses. I don't know any of our customers who don't love what the RZ lenses do with digital, regardless of the native resolution. The feedback I've gotten has always been that they're plenty sharp enough and they draw beautifully.

Those RZ lovers. You know who you are.

Steve Hendrix

asf · « **Reply #4 on:** August 11, 2009, 10:46:15 am »

Which 50 did you test Chiek?

The previous 50 W (no floating element) is not so great on digital (very nice on b/w film). The newer ULD lens is more than good enough, nearly as sharp as the 65 LA (with floating element).

I'd test any used RZ lens for digital use - the shutter can cause sync problems if it has gotten a little sticky. A good cleaning usually fixes it.

TMARK · « **Reply #5 on:** August 11, 2009, 11:24:39 am »

I think the RZ lenses are delicious. Aptus 54s.

Snook · « **Reply #6 on:** August 11, 2009, 01:08:21 pm »

Contrast and sharpness on my RZ lens Blow away any 645 AF lens I have use. Cannot speak of D lens on the 645.
120 macro on 645 is very nice.

My favorites are the 65mm 110 and the 145 macro. When in focus NO after sharpening is EVER needed, actually I have to soften models skin as they are too sharp sometimes!!

Snook

heinrichvoelkel · « **Reply #7 on:** August 11, 2009, 03:14:07 pm »

Quote from: Steve Hendrix

Those RZ lovers. You know who you are.

Steve Hendrix

Steve, I know you're right. I loved my RZ sooo much. And I will get me another one soon

michele · « **Reply #8 on:** August 12, 2009, 03:16:38 am »

Thank you all for the answers... Actually i hoped to see some images... I used to have a RZ and it was beautiful, I need a back-up for my 645, but i don't like the idea of spending 1000 euro for the same camera i have now... The lenses i can get for the RZ can cover and also expand my demand of focal lenght... I can use a central shutter and can say stop to the batteries... one thing that i hate of the 645 is the battery consumption, 6 or 12 AA batteries per day, it's something that stress me!

HarperPhotos · « **Reply #9 on:** August 12, 2009, 06:06:35 pm »

Hi Michele,

If your Mamiya 645 is using 6 or 12 batteries per day your camera has a fault with it. I have a Mamiya 645AFDII camera and with Eveready Lithium batteries get up to 6 months of use.

Also I have been using my Mamiya RZ for 25 years using the 37mm fisheye, 50mm (old model), 65mm, 75mm short barrel, 90mm, 110mm, 127mm, 140mm macro,180mm short barrel, 360mm lenses and 1.4x converter with fantastic results with my Leaf Aptus 75.

Cheers

Simon

michele · « **Reply #10 on:** August 13, 2009, 03:28:13 am »

Quote from: HarperPhotos

Hi Michele,

If your Mamiya 645 is using 6 or 12 batteries per day your camera has a fault with it. I have a Mamiya 645AFDII camera and with Eveready Lithium batteries get up to 6 months of use.

Also I have been using my Mamiya RZ for 25 years using the 37mm fisheye, 50mm (old model), 65mm, 75mm short barrel, 90mm, 110mm, 127mm, 140mm macro,180mm short barrel, 360mm lenses and 1.4x converter with fantastic results with my Leaf Aptus 75.

Cheers

Simon

6 months??? It's a dream... Actually i always heard that the mamiya needs for a long day shooting around 6 fresh batteries... So i thought that my camera was ok... But 6 months, is incredible! I use eneloop rechargeble batteries... But now I'm going to try out the eveready lithium!
Many thanks Simon!!!

BigWooha · « **Reply #11 on:** August 13, 2009, 03:33:23 am »

Quote from: michele

Thank you all for the answers... Actually i hoped to see some images... I used to have a RZ and it was beautiful, I need a back-up for my 645, but i don't like the idea of spending 1000 euro for the same camera i have now... The lenses i can get for the RZ can cover and also expand my demand of focal lenght... I can use a central shutter and can say stop to the batteries... one thing that i hate of the 645 is the battery consumption, 6 or 12 AA batteries per day, it's something that stress me!

Hi Michelle

I have samples of both with my p40+ back (so the resolution should be fairly similar but the crop factor 1.3 rather than 1.1 on the p45+) is on RZ proIID and Phase one 645, if you give me till the weekend I'll get them on for you.

I have to say I don't think there is much to choose between the 110mm RZ and 80mm 645 D lens.............BUT I have to say any files I've done digitally with an RZ just have a nicer feel to them. Not something that can be explained by technicalities probably (I say probably because there is always someone round here with an answer!)

G

Frank Doorhof · « **Reply #12 on:** August 13, 2009, 03:46:25 am »

Hi,
110mm and 180mm and 140mm are my favorite lenses for what I do.
But I actually like them all.

The main thing with the RZ is what Steve already said, they render an amazing image, even when looking at our studio monitor (which is just a normal 40" LCD TV for seeing the images coming in) the quality is seen.

I also love the quality of the 645 but the images just look more flat, and lacking some contrast/realness.
Some people will not see it but for me it's obvious.

On batteries.
I'm using 2600Mah and the new green rechargables and they last app one day of intense use.
When I'm shooting less or on location they will last app 2 days. But than it's done.
When on holiday I'm using normal batteries and they last app a week depending on the climat.
6 months is amazing and I wonder how many frames that is.

On a normal trip I shoot app 2000 frames before the batteries die, seeing that in the manual they state a lot less I already found myself lucky
With rechargables I average arround 600-700 frames.

michele · « **Reply #13 on:** August 13, 2009, 03:59:43 am »

Thanks BigWooha and Frank!
Every help is welcome!!

teddillard · « **Reply #14 on:** August 13, 2009, 07:03:28 am »

Quote from: michele

Hello,
i know it has been discussed many times, but i couldn't find any semples in the forum... I'm thinking about getting a Mamiya RZ ProII D for my P45+, i have an AFDIII with new PhaseOne digital lenses. I can have the 50mm, 110mm and the 180mm for the RZ from a friend of mine, but i have to buy the ProIID with the plate for my back, for now I can't test the 67 lenses, can somebody post some 100% semples? Comparisions beteween the 110mm and the 80mmD and 120mmD are perfect...!!! BTW everything you have will be appreciate!!
Many thanks

Lens testing and comparison is such a slippery slope... Even if you get to a spot where you do have a good, solid test comparison of two lenses, then you get into the variations between two individual lenses of the same model.

That said, I'm going to throw this out there- based on what I've done with Mamiya RZ, 645, Hasselblad old and new lenses, I'd strongly caution you against expecting the same quality from the RZ lenses and what you're getting from the PhaseOne lenses. I'm fairly certain, but can't demonstrate it, that they will have a very different look. I've worked with a few photographers who love the RZ and want to use it for their digital backs, and the camera is tough to work with- the tolerances are just too, well, sloppy for me, personally, in terms of focus and even flash-sync. The lenses, again, for me, in my experience, just don't perform compared to the latest generations of medium format glass...

OK, now the is a CAUTION, it's based on my experience working with several DBs and camera systems as a digital tech... it's an OPINION. I know full well that a whole lot of people LOVE the RZ, and that's great, it's a wonderful camera if it suits your taste. ...and in spite of this disclaimer, I'm gonna duck and run away now...

asf · « **Reply #15 on:** August 13, 2009, 10:22:16 am »

Quote from: teddillard

Lens testing and comparison is such a slippery slope... Even if you get to a spot where you do have a good, solid test comparison of two lenses, then you get into the variations between two individual lenses of the same model.

That said, I'm going to throw this out there- based on what I've done with Mamiya RZ, 645, Hasselblad old and new lenses, I'd strongly caution you against expecting the same quality from the RZ lenses and what you're getting from the PhaseOne lenses. I'm fairly certain, but can't demonstrate it, that they will have a very different look. I've worked with a few photographers who love the RZ and want to use it for their digital backs, and the camera is tough to work with- the tolerances are just too, well, sloppy for me, personally, in terms of focus and even flash-sync. The lenses, again, for me, in my experience, just don't perform compared to the latest generations of medium format glass...

OK, now the is a CAUTION, it's based on my experience working with several DBs and camera systems as a digital tech... it's an OPINION. I know full well that a whole lot of people LOVE the RZ, and that's great, it's a wonderful camera if it suits your taste. ...and in spite of this disclaimer, I'm gonna duck and run away now...

Trying to understand your post - which RZ model and which lenses have you actually used?

AndreNapier · « **Reply #16 on:** August 13, 2009, 10:56:04 am »

You mean like a synch that actually works. Like a tethering to a computer that connects 100% of times and not only than when it wants to.
Like a camera that does not send you error massages. Like the rotating back etc. I know it is hard to get used to at first but if you add superior glass for $200 a lens it kind of make sense.

Andre
H2, AFI7, D3x
and.....Rz

teddillard · « **Reply #17 on:** August 13, 2009, 11:06:08 am »

Quote from: asf

Trying to understand your post - which RZ model and which lenses have you actually used?

oh crap... this was about 3-5 years ago, but I'm pretty sure they were all the ProII body- I seem to remember a problem even getting the Pro to work at all- a various assortment of lenses, based around the normal (90mm 3.5 was it)? I had one client who wasn't particularly married to them and ended up with the 645AFD after HUGE connection problems with Leaf, she used longer lenses, the 150 if memory serves, and was more happy with her results on a Leaf Aptus.

and Andre? exactly...

TMARK · « **Reply #18 on:** August 13, 2009, 12:41:25 pm »

My experience with my RZ bodies (Pro and ProII) with an Aptus 54S, shooting into LC11.x, has been great. Few problems not remedied with a CLA of a lens or two. I think the tolerances are better than the V system, although the 503cw was pretty tight.

As to the lenses, they are all good. I do like the 80 2.8 for the M645 system, but the 110 on the RZ is very, very nice.

Disclaimer: I don't shoot too many high volume 5k shots a day shoots with the RZ. When I did, I had a few problems, but nothing more than the usual MFDB nonsense. A ds3 is better suited for that anyway. I know as a tech you see all sorts of nonsense all day long, especially on the software side. LC10 was awful. I was scarred for life by it.

teddillard · « **Reply #19 on:** August 13, 2009, 02:40:26 pm »

Quote from: TMARK

LC10 was awful. I was scarred for life by it.

AAAAAomgomg, now I'm gonna have to go back to therapy again... the "treatment" had banished it from my mind...

Author Topic: Rz lenses on digital back (Read 12593 times)

Snook