8x10'' –– Arca Swiss F-Line Metric vs. Lotus View

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Hello from Besançon, France !

Being a happy Arca Swiss F-line user (6x9 cm and 4x5") and living close to the factory, It is impossible for me to give an advice without being biased.
A friend of mine living close to here has a 8x10" F-classic, actually he first bought a second-hand 4x5" F-line and eventually acquired the 8x10" bellows and back new. So at least I have an address in France outside Arca Swiss where you can manipulate a similar 8x10" F-line camera (my friend's model is not the F-metric, it is the F-classic).

In general, 8x10" field cameras of traditional design can be folded into something quite compact an portable in the field.
Traditional 8x10" monorail cameras were, at least in the past, mostly used in the studio, and they were big and heavy.
So the choice in terms of compacity for field use should be obvious.
But actually it is not so obvious when F-line cameras enter into the game

For example you can have a look at an Arca Swiss Oschwald 8x10" camera (pre-1984, before the F-line) on this "for sale" advertisement (seller is in France, but just across the Channel, the items are located in département de la Manche, in Normandy). (note that the seller includes in the lot a 4x5" Arca Swiss Reflex camera, an absolute rarity for collectors).

The 8x10" Arca Swiss Oschwald camera looks really big, and not very easy to carry in a back pack.
However since 1984, many improvements have been made, and among many improvements, folding rails and the very last compact model, the 8x10" misura (see below) have been introduced.
The Oschwald camera featured above is equipped with the telescopic rail.
The rails is made of 3 parts, a lower rails as a base, plus two halves sliding on top of the lower rail.
Current F-line models can be equipped exactly like this.
What 8x10" F-line users do with the telescopic rail is that they choose a short rail element in front and slide both function carriers to the short rail element and separate the rear rail element and base from the rest of the camera before packing.
Hence you do not have to disassemble the whole camera, you just have to slide-off the lower rail under the camera's front rail element, and pack something quite flat.
But instead of the telescopic rail, you can use the folding rail, named 'collapsible' in official A/S literature in English.
So for a 40 cm rail, you can fold it into 2 halves of 20 cm.
Another friend of mine who had bough a second-hand 8x10" Oschwald camera, had a shortened rail, the previous owner and simply cut the rail do make it shorter!

An evolution of the 8x10" F-line in terms of compactness and light weight is the 8x10" misura model. It is not really much cheaper than a F-metric 8x10", and not easy to see at dealers' stores, but the solutions proposed to make the camera really compact are interesting.
The 8x10" Arca Swiss misura, folded.
The rail folds into 2 unequal parts, the shorter in front and the longer in back, folding upward. So you take the whole camera out of your backpack using the rear rail as a handle, and in 30 seconds the camera is ready to use.
Note however that the misura has no tilts at rear. This saves a lot of weight, for landscape use you my not feel the need for rear tilts. For studio use, this is another story, the misura is not designed for such kind of traditional studio work with a lot of combined tilts and swings.
F-metric function carriers are heavier than F-classic function carriers, since they carry a rack and pinion control system for lateral shift, and they are much heavier than the simplified rear misura carrier, since it includes a tilting mechanism, this needs some metal to properly operate.
But a F-metric 8x10" fitted with a telescopic rail when collapsed to a 15 cm front rail element is almost as compact as the misura.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to the original question, actually the choice between field and monorail cameras is one of the most often asked questions on all photographic forums dealing with large format equipment.
Both kinds of cameras have a very strong character and it is hard to decide without manipulating them.
With monorails, movements are almost unlimited, applying movements is obvious and simple. And the smoothness & precision of Arca Swiss controls is legendary, even more: it is addictive
But if you do not need a lot of movements, for example in landscape photography, the field camera is perfect.

And since the proposed choice is between two excellent European manufacturers, being a Continental Euro-Patriot, I cannot say anything else that: "any choice between both cameras will be the good choice "

[StoneNYC]

Welcome to the forum, you already have your first argument between other members on your thread, so you must be one of us now... HAH!

[Sal Santamaura]

...If you read the comment preceding mine, I believe someone claimed that it was the Arca Swiss that required assembly...

Post #6 referred to the fact that many Arca Swiss cameras have monorail sections which must be screwed together prior to use.

...Regarding the assembly issue in the other thread, I'm not subtly denigrating anything, I'm simply pointing out a design feature of the camera. You may think it a very good design, I prefer a camera that can be put on top of the tripod and used immediately, such as the Arca Swiss...

Many Arca Swiss cameras cannot be used immediately; they require screwing monorail sections together first.

...Or whatever camera Adams used when he photographed 'Moonrise'...

I've never found a reference that identifies the specific camera Adams used to make his "Moonrise" negative beyond "8x10 view camera." Nor can I see what relevance that has with respect to the OP's question.

...The fact that the assembly issue is accepted by users of the Phillips design, and that I accepted the reasoning behind it as presented by another poster in the other thread would serve to prove that I'm not subtly denigrating anything...

On the contrary, your repetitive use of the word "issue," with its negative connotation, makes clear the subtle dig you're delivering each time. This doesn't seem as accepting as you appear to be of the reasoning that making Arca Swiss monorails from multiple pieces requiring "assembly" before use enables a smaller form factor for transport.

[jb7]

the subtle dig

Critique.

Read Emmanuel's post if you're interested in learning about how the Arca actually works as a field camera; all the rebuttals are contained within it.

[jeroldharter]

I had and Arca F-Line Metric 4x5 and it was outstanding. An 8x10 would be great so long as you had long enough rails and bellows for you lenses. For example, the standard equipment does not cover a Fujinon 600 if I recall.

Were I to buy a new field camera, I would get a Ritter. Very lightweight.

[evan clarke]

I have 2 Arca 8x10s and several smaller ones. I bought a Chamonix 8x10 convertible and it's the only 8x10 I use now.

[Rory_5244]

I think, once upon a time, I was the only person online with a review of the Arca-Swiss 8X10 F-Metric. I sold it last week after 11 years of use. The Arca required no assembly in the field unless I wanted to use an extension rail (which took all of 3 seconds to attach).

I have 2 complaints about the F-iteration of the 8x10 Arca. The first is that I came to the conclusion that the huge back standard, cantilevered off of a base attachment to the function carrier, was vibration-prone, especially in a stiff breeze. I also had to lock down the tilt controls a bit too much for my liking when I had the monorail inclined to prevent the back from slipping backwards or forwards. Secondly, well, not a complaint really, but the Arca is sort of boring. Everything works so well without a fuss. I must getting sentimental for more traditional cameras in my old age.

[Sal Santamaura]

...The Arca required no assembly in the field unless I wanted to use an extension rail (which took all of 3 seconds to attach)...

About the same length of time it takes to screw the front standard into the bed of a Phillips or Phillips clone.

[Rory_5244]

LOL, I don't doubt it, Sal. I didn't mention previously, but I use a Linhof Master Technika now for landscape, and for handholding. It's a compromise in many ways compared to a monorail but when I got it I stopped using the Arca, as weird as that may seem. I like that w.r.t. large format cameras: there is no 'best camera'.

[Dave Tolcher]

I had an Arca 10x8 'Oschwald' and it actually quite light with an amount of plastic parts. Can be packed reasonably small on a 15cm rail laid flat in a lowepro bag. Assembly on to the tripod is straightforward but nevertheless it is quite a heavy lump to align the 15cm rail into the lower rail. Its is a precise and easy to use camera and can be found cheaply in the UK with patience. My friend has the camera now and loves using it.
I now have a Phillips (now cloned by Chamonix). On weight and packability its a no brainer - this is so light, sturdy and easy to manipulate that we both agree starting from scratch the Phillips/Chamonix would be the way to go for field use. I happily pack mine a few miles over rough ground and can still walk at the end of it ! Fitness is more of a necessity with the Arca...
What I can offer - we both live in York/Harrogate district and I am sure we could work something out to look at both together as you wont find either in a dealer in the UK.
Best regards
Dave