Which system to sell? M645 or RZ67?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Dan Beaty - 20 Aug 2008 18:41 GMT

Lately I have been enjoying the advantages of a Pentax k20d dslr, but I have
great hesitation to sell my MF systems just yet. The RZ quality is awesome,
and the 15MP digital is getting closer to 645. But I am wondering if digital
645 ever becomes more affordable, I will then want to keep my fine selection
of manual focus 45, 55 and 80mm lenses. Of course my original M645 body will
never accept any new backs, so the only reason for keeping it would be to
shoot film with it.

The 645 lenses would not get me much anyway, not nearly as much as it would
cost to replace them with AF later.

Anyone have any ideas regarding the future of MF, or advise for me here?
Remembering how the demand for TLR's returned just a few years ago, I am
wondering if my Mamiya equipment might later become valuable again. Or
should I unload it while film is still holding on?

Dan

Reply to this Message

Stefan Patric - 20 Aug 2008 23:03 GMT

> Lately I have been enjoying the advantages of a Pentax k20d dslr, but I
> have great hesitation to sell my MF systems just yet. The RZ quality is
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> wondering if my Mamiya equipment might later become valuable again. Or
> should I unload it while film is still holding on?

I would keep the RZ system, and sell off the 645 now while it still has
some value. The RZ should hold its value better, since it was really
designed for professionals, where the 645 was marketed more toward the
serious amateur. Plus, if medium format digital backs ever become
reasonably affordable, I'm sure there'll be one to fit the RZ.

Stef

Reply to this Message

Mr. Strat - 23 Aug 2008 05:19 GMT

> I would keep the RZ system, and sell off the 645 now while it still has
> some value. The RZ should hold its value better, since it was really
> designed for professionals, where the 645 was marketed more toward the
> serious amateur. Plus, if medium format digital backs ever become
> reasonably affordable, I'm sure there'll be one to fit the RZ.

Agreed. I never cared for the 645 format. It appealed to wannabes.

Reply to this Message

Lucky You - 24 Aug 2008 18:52 GMT

>Agreed. I never cared for the 645 format. It appealed to wannabes.

And with such a sweeping generalisation you condemn an entire section of
the MF community.
Well done. Now that this group's all but dead, I would have thought that
such idiotic remarks as yours would probably help to discourage any 645
owners from participating at all, just in case they get disdained by
you.

Wannabes to what, exactly? Tell me - tell us all - what and who are you
and what do you think gives you any right to look down your nose at any
camera owner, regardless of format?
Frankly, I'd be surprised if you produced anything worth looking at.

Reply to this Message

Alan Browne - 24 Aug 2008 19:36 GMT

>> I would keep the RZ system, and sell off the 645 now while it still has
>> some value. The RZ should hold its value better, since it was really
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Agreed. I never cared for the 645 format. It appealed to wannabes.

I have to agree with Lucky You that that is a broadbrush of the worst
kind... esp. as I know working pros who earn(ed) their livings with 645
... and note that the H1 and successive 'blads are maxed to 645.

Hardly addressing wannabes at over $20,000 per camera.

Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Reply to this Message

Dan Beaty - 25 Aug 2008 01:02 GMT

> >> I would keep the RZ system, and sell off the 645 now while it still has
> >> some value. The RZ should hold its value better, since it was really
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Hardly addressing wannabes at over $20,000 per camera.

645 format has been strong among professionals in my area as well. The 6x7
will offer the next size enlargement at the same quality but at a great cost
in convenience and size/weight.

With Mamiya, however, the later more electronic bodies do seem less sturdy,
while the RZ is close to the RB in sturdiness. Just my opinion.

Reply to this Message

Alan Browne - 25 Aug 2008 02:32 GMT

> With Mamiya, however, the later more electronic bodies do seem less sturdy,
> while the RZ is close to the RB in sturdiness. Just my opinion.

Damn near bought a used RZ and 180 f/4.5 (think it was /4.5) with tubes.
Came very close and still sort of regret not getting it vice the 'blad.

The 'blad is a bit smaller thought and a recent hike to Angels Landing
in Zion NP at 106F was bad enough with that and a digi, never mind the RZ...

Signature

Reply to this Message

Dan Beaty - 25 Aug 2008 00:56 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Patric" <not@thisaddress.com>
Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.medium-format
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: Which system to sell? M645 or RZ67?

> I would keep the RZ system, and sell off the 645 now while it still has
> some value. The RZ should hold its value better, since it was really
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Stef

My main concern about waiting for MF digital backs is the size of the
sensor. Mamiya already has a sensor for the 645, and it is not full frame.
There seems to be the possiblity that a FF 645 will be much sooner and at
much less cost than a 6x7. Hence my hesitation to sell the lenses anyway.

But considering the quality of FF 35mm sensors, I can only image how great a
FF medium format one would yeild.

The smaller sensors need wider lenses, which are seriously expensive and
hard to find in MF. Even so, I can still get great film images (with
somewhat extra time, and effort over both 645 and 35mm), so I hesitate to
let it go.

Reply to this Message

Alan Browne - 23 Aug 2008 16:00 GMT

> Lately I have been enjoying the advantages of a Pentax k20d dslr, but I have
> great hesitation to sell my MF systems just yet. The RZ quality is awesome,
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> wondering if my Mamiya equipment might later become valuable again. Or
> should I unload it while film is still holding on?

I was chatting with a pro last week and she _never_ uses her MF gear for
jobs anymore. Totally digital. And her 'ignorant' (her words)
customers insist on digital even if she believes a job is better done on
MF. She only uses MF for personal work now.

If you're going to keep a MF system, go with the largest format, IMO, so
the RZ67 if you have it already. (Almost bought same a few years ago
but ended up with a hassy system instead).

I hear some people say that there is resurgent interest in MF film, so
prices should not drop. (No proof seen,...). In one California store a
few weeks ago they had plentiful stocks of MF film (color & B&W), so it
looks like a viable format for the near term.

As I bought a Nikon 9000 scanner a couple years ago, it is a long way
from having done enough scanning to justify it ... though a recent dozen
rolls have yielded about 20 great shots. Maybe 5% of the way there...

FF 35mm format cameras (Canon, Nikon and soon Sony) at 20+ Mpix yield
clean, sharp images, however and I have a better lens system for my
Minolta/Sony system than for my Hasselblad... it will be harder and
harder to shoot MF just for the cost of film and processing and the time
scanning.

I have no idea if Pentax will go FF. Sony have supplied sensors to
Pentax in the past. I personally hope Sony get a lot of sensor demand
as it creates competition for the bodies while reducing Sony's costs due
to volume.

Cheers,
Alan.

Signature

Reply to this Message

Toni Nikkanen - 23 Aug 2008 17:41 GMT

> I hear some people say that there is resurgent interest in MF film, so
> prices should not drop. (No proof seen,...).

While this may be true, there are also reasons that make prices go up, for example,
increased cost of materials and shipping. I read somewhere that Fuji is
raising their prices 10-15% for these reasons, for example.

> In one California store
> a few weeks ago they had plentiful stocks of MF film (color & B&W), so
> it looks like a viable format for the near term.

Last Tuesday Adorama in NYC had plenty of 120 film, of which 33 rolls
are now happily sitting in my home, some in exposed but undeveloped
state, some developed and some unexposed :)

Reply to this Message

Alan Browne - 23 Aug 2008 17:54 GMT

>> I hear some people say that there is resurgent interest in MF film, so
>> prices should not drop. (No proof seen,...).
>
> While this may be true, there are also reasons that make prices go up, for example,
> increased cost of materials and shipping. I read somewhere that Fuji is
> raising their prices 10-15% for these reasons, for example.

I phrased that badly, I meant (in reference to the OP) prices for used
equipment.

>> In one California store
>> a few weeks ago they had plentiful stocks of MF film (color & B&W), so
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> are now happily sitting in my home, some in exposed but undeveloped
> state, some developed and some unexposed :)

Yeah, I've got a dozen rolls of 120 developed and waiting to feed the
scanner.

Signature

Reply to this Message