Re: Mamyia RZ or Fuji GX680...?

[Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Randy -

I’m sorry for your loss (sort of). Mine have worked fine since I bought them in 1995. I only use the film version, as in case nobody has told you yet, a lot of digital cameras rely on false advertising to sell their units.

On Nov 2, 2015, at 9:46 PM, Randy Little <randyslittle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

645 AF might be ok but the Mamiya 645 AFD are trash.  I would get a 645 pro TL maybe.   Lots of lens but no AF.  The lenses will work on AF cameras though.     They where a dying company until Phase one got evolved.   the 645 DF series are descent and I don't hate my afd's but they are all lemons.   Such batteries like water.  They gave me 3 of them before they said sorry we can't fix the issue and we aren't giving you  DF models.   So even over night I have to take the batteries out of the camera or it will be drained in the morning.    I can't even make it through a day shoot on 6 AA's or about 200-250 shots
 

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Adapting the 645AF for a digital back is easy. A few are almost the same size as true 645. No so for the RZ.

On Nov 2, 2015, at 6:14 PM, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If I were looking, I would look hard at the Mamiya 645AF III. 

I have a slew of RZ II’s and the hard thing to find for the Fuji’s are the lenses. For my RZ line I have 10 lenses (37 fisheye, 55, 75, 90, 110, 140, 150, 180, 210, 500) and I don’t know if Fuji has that many including everything. If anybody happens to run across a 43 or 45 for the RZ, I am looking.

On Nov 2, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Randy Little <randyslittle@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

either will do digital finding adapter for fuji might be a chore and require a machinist    Fuji does have front bellows.    Fuji not so many around and HUGE.  RZ zillions of them around and used.  RZ does have a tilt shift adapter but not has much movement as GX.    Fuji parts might be harder to find but fuji is WAY WAY cheaper then RZ. 

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Jonathan Turner <pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi all,

I'm looking to buy (second hand) a medium format camera and am thinking about either a Mamyia RZ or Fuji GX680. I know the RZ as I used it when I was an assistant years ago, but have no knowledge of the fuji GX680, although I like the look of it and the added attraction of tilt/shift lenses (something I use with my large format camera).

Both get good reviews, though the Fuji sounds cumbersome in terms of electronics and power issues.

Also, eventually will want to stick a digi back on it (though will just be shooting film for now) and have no experience of using MF digi backs with either of these cameras so curious to know if anyone has any thoughts on this aspect?

Many thanks for any input...

Cheers,
Jonathan
--
Jonathan Turner - Photographer M; 07796 470573 W; www.jonathan-turner.com

Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints

------

Art for Cars: art4carz.com

Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com

Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com

Camera Works - The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/battlefieldparks/front_qt.htm

ArtNet: http://www.artnet.com/artists/jan+w.-faul/

.

Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints

------

Art for Cars: art4carz.com

Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com

Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com

Camera Works - The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/battlefieldparks/front_qt.htm

ArtNet: http://www.artnet.com/artists/jan+w.-faul/

.

Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints

------

Art for Cars: art4carz.com

Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com

Greens: http://www.inkjetprince.com

Camera Works - The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/battlefieldparks/front_qt.htm

ArtNet: http://www.artnet.com/artists/jan+w.-faul/

.