Arca Swiss=WHICH ONE TO CHOOSE??? Alike Cameras to an Arca, please let me know!

[Daniel Geiger]

It seems you are all over the place. Your target is full plate = 6.5 x 8.5 inches, but you consider anything from 6x9 cm(!) [~2.3 x 3.3 inches] to 5x7 inches, but have ruled out the only solution that could actually accommodate full plate, i.e., 8x10 inches (unless you want to get a custom format frame and custom bellows).
The second question is, why monorail? If you want to use small lenses, this usually also entails small coverage = little movements. So why not a field camera; certainly lighter.
It is pretty straight forward that larger format = more weight. In terms of how rigid you want your system, it may depend a bit on your style. I am quite happy with the classic level. Metric will weight a bit more, and you will gain a couple of geared movements, but certainly a viable outdoor option. Monolith series for outdoors seems a bit overkill. Discovery may save a few ounces, but not sure whether it is worth it.
I do carry an AS 4x5 classic compact outfit with 141 mm frames and quite a bit of add-ons, weighing about 50 pounds without water. You may get it down to 40 pounds, maybe 35 if you go bare bones (3 small lenses, no filters, no extension rails, no tripod head, ...). If you are fixated about the AS as a camera, but have trepidations about the weight, this is a good reason to get into better physical shape. I started hitting the gym and the pool to get more out of my camera hikes.
I think a major advantage of the AS is the modularity. See what you like, modify it if you don't. Let the system grow with your own development. I started with a compact version, but now also have a telescopic rail for longer lenses. I did not go for orbix, and after using it for a few years, do just fine with base tilt. But have been toying with getting the 8x10 conversion kit. Although I also did quite a bit of freeting about the "perfect" set-up when I purchased my starter kit, rest assured, it WILL change. I think the AS is a wonderful system. It was=is my first LF camera, and although most people will say that one will switch cameras particularly early on, I have not seen any need to do that. I have upgraded lenses (e.g., SA 90 to XL), but not the camera.

In terms of models, I visualize the AS system as follows:
first, decide on which format (4x5, 5x7, 8x10 ...)
Then think about how rigid you want your system (Discovery, classic, metric, monolith)
Then think about the rail support: compact (= folding), straight rail, or telescopic rail and how long, which needs to be according to focal lengths and magnification.
Then think about potential optional accessories: orbix, different bellows, viewfinder, shade system. Misura and some of the newer models are outside of this type of consideration.
Once you dissected the various components, then the number of available options becomes much more manageable. Also remember, whatever you decide, you CAN change it later.

[Capocheny]

Audioexcels,

You SHOULD have just purchased that Discovery camera that Sheldon N. had listed on here on this forum a short while ago... it wasn't that expensive and would have suited your needs more than adequately!

Secondly, it's a fine camera that you can build upon as your finances improve.

He might still have it and if you ask him real nicely... he might sell it to you!

Cheers

[audioexcels]

Audioexcels,

You SHOULD have just purchased that Discovery camera that Sheldon N. had listed on here on this forum a short while ago... it wasn't that expensive and would have suited your needs more than adequately!

Secondly, it's a fine camera that you can build upon as your finances improve.

He might still have it and if you ask him real nicely... he might sell it to you!

Cheers

Those Canucks are finally starting to show some life! I think the Discovery is a nice choice, but I cannot help but think about the other options, especially the Compact that the above poster and another mentioned.

Need to answer to the above poster. BTW, what AS are you using? Don't you have that sweet one from Don Hutton?

[audioexcels]

In terms of models, I visualize the AS system as follows:
first, decide on which format (4x5, 5x7, 8x10 ...)
Then think about how rigid you want your system (Discovery, classic, metric, monolith)
Then think about the rail support: compact (= folding), straight rail, or telescopic rail and how long, which needs to be according to focal lengths and magnification.
Then think about potential optional accessories: orbix, different bellows, viewfinder, shade system. Misura and some of the newer models are outside of this type of consideration.
Once you dissected the various components, then the number of available options becomes much more manageable. Also remember, whatever you decide, you CAN change it later.

Thank you for the help and the rest of your response that I deleted. It is very much appreciated.

Here's some answers:

1) Format=6.5X8.5. I don't feel 8X10 is worth the large size for me. I have decided that inconvenience of holders at this time is worth the wait for them to come out. I am not eliminating 5X7 just yet, but for now, it will be 6.5X8.5 via wood back and making a light metal piece that will come around the frame of the 6.5X8.5 standard and lock onto the rear block. I know Kerry had his 4X10 weigh in at something like 6lbs?, and so I think I can get a 6.5X8.5 back on there at around that weight mark, and maybe less if I am lucky. I will have custom bellows made.

2) Rigidity is important, but weight is more important...so a compromise or maybe not even one by going with the Compact, since as you said it, it is really not much different weight wise than the Discovery.

3) Folding rail would be nice for transport. I plan to use a lens no longer than the Nikkor 300mm. I may even have a lens linup of say, 72mm/150mm Claron if it covers/Fujinon 240/9. If the Claron does not cover, I know the Fujinon 180 will, though I'd like to have a nice compact lens that is somewhere in the 120-150mm range, though there's not much for choices here. So these three lenses "maximum" is what I would use. It could turn out something like, 110/210/300.

4) No need for bellows since the primary one will be what I use along with reducing back/s. No need for Oribix or any other future glamour stuff...No need for shade system, finder, etc.

I think I answered the questions. Do you feel the Compact is the correct model for me?

Thanks again!

[Ted Harris]

Surprised there has been no mention of the Toyo VX125. Has all the features of the Arca and perhaps even more flexibility.

[audioexcels]

Surprised there has been no mention of the Toyo VX125. Has all the features of the Arca and perhaps even more flexibility.

How is weight to weight on the Toyo VX125 and can I do what I propose by replacing the rear standard with a wooden Whole Plate one?

Thanks Ted for any information and thoughts on this one vs. the Arca for what I am looking for.

[David Karp]

I went through this decision process recently and purchased a Discovery. The camera I purchased was outfitted with the telescoping monorail, a definite plus over a standard monorail. This allows the user to use one of the 6" sections of the monorail to store the camera in a backback. To use the camera, just slide the short section on to the rail and mount the camera to the tripod head. Another way to store the camera with a standard Discovery with a 30cm rail might be to purchase a 6" extension and leave the camera on it while stored. Mount the standard rail on the tripod and connect the extension.

For me, after reviewing many threads on this forum, and corresponding with a few A-S users that I know, the Discovery got me most of what I wanted at a price much lower than other versions of the F-Line. I will use a Technika adapter board, so the smaller size of a 141 or 110 front standard is not so important to me. The advantages of a micrometric orbix are great, but so is the price. I have lived without it on every camera I ever owned, so no problem there. It is not really necessary, since each Discovery standard offers the full range of movement. If I ever win the lottery, I can add Orbix to my camera.

Another advantage of the Discovery is that the front standard does not have fine focus. It easily slides on the rail to the desired location and locks down securely. I move the standard for rough focus and lock it. I always focus using the back, so no problem there.

In answer to other potential concerns, the camera is very well made. The telescoping monorail is rigid.

I thought about buying an F-Line in various flavors. When I looked at the differences in price between them and the Discovery, I could never justify the difference. I think Kerry mentioned somewhere in the Forum that the Discovery is 90% of the camera for 50% of the price of an F-Line, and that is plenty darn good for me. I am sure that the missing 10% is nice, but certainly not necessary for making excellent photographs with a fine piece of machinery.

The difference in price between my used Discovery and some of the used F-Lines I considered buying would be more than enough to pay for the WP back you are considering.

[Sheldon N]

Thanks for the kind words Henry, but I'm fresh out of Arcas for sale! I did keep myself an Arca 4x5 Field with 141mm rear standard, telecsoping rail, and Orbix. It's a wonderful camera and I really enjoy shooting with it.

However, if the goal is to shoot just whole plate or 5x7 in a lightweight package, I think one would be better served with a wood field camera - Chamonix would be my first choice. This assumes that weight is the primary concern.

There are good reasons to go with an Arca:

- Stability/weight ratio. It's not lighter than a wood field, and it's not sturdier than a big studio camera, but it represents an excellent compromise between the two.
- Precision movements, tactile quality in use.
- Ease of access of movements, no little knobs or fiddling, everything falls right to hand
- If you plan to shoot multiple formats, the Arca is a great platform to build onto due to its modular design.


So, if you are going the Arca route, I'd recommend the following choices...

Use the current F-Line (not the older Basic/Model A/B/C) function carriers and rails. The older cameras are nice, but the F-Line components are just better and worth it if you're going to the trouble of building your own camera. The F-Metric carriers are nice too, but add weight and price just to gain geared shift. The Discovery function carriers are ok, but it would likely be easier to source the F-Line function carriers and rail together on an existing camera and the F-Line carriers are preferable.

Use the 30cm Telescoping rail, not the folding rail. The telescoping rail is good for 425-450mm of extension while the folding rail is only good for about 260mm of extension. The telescoping rail is also lighter and more rigid than a folding rail + 15cm rail extension combo. I like the newer flip lock version of the telescoping rail, it's really slick in operation.

Use the 6x9 (110mm) front standard. The size/weight difference between that and a 171mm standard is pretty significant. Plus, you have to figure in that there will be a lot of extra bellows to go with that larger frame. I had a 171-171 square camera and my 110-141 Field camera side by side, and the size/weight difference is dramatic. A 141mm front standard would be a good compromise, but you'd have a heck of a time finding one of these used.

Now the problems of sourcing all this, and the pricing....

To get the Telescoping Rail + Function carriers, you might as well buy a full camera and sell off the extra parts. A 171-171 square camera with telescoping rail will run you about $1200-1400. Sell off the frames/bellows as a "4x5 Conversion Kit" for $400-600. That will get you your function carriers and rails for around $700-800.

Add a 6x9 Front standard - $700 or $800 new, probably $400-450 used if you could find one. You may be forced to buy a 6x9 compact camera, keep the frame and sell the parts, which wouldn't really be any cheaper.

If you decide to keep one of the 171mm frames to use, add the cost of a Linhof Tech board adapter ($150) and figure that the parts cost would be roughly similar to the 6x9 approach due to having only a bellows and rear frame to sell rather than a full "coversion kit".

Then you need a blank bellows frame for your bellows builder to attach to so that the custom bellows will clip onto the front standard. You could get the actual part or use a lensboard and have it cut out to use as a frame.

Add lensboards ($50 used, $75 new each for 6x9 boards), the cost of your custom bellows ($250?), the cost of your custom build WP back (?), plus the cost of aircraft aluminum dovetail + machining so that the rear standard will clip into the function carrier.

I'd be surprised if you could do it for less than $1500 with a LOT of legwork. And the camera will still weigh in the vicinity of 7-9lbs depending on the construction of the WP back. It makes sense to go with the Arca if you're going to shoot 4x5 and WP with two different back/bellows. However, if you're looking for a light camera just to shoot WP the Chamonix will be lighter, comparable in cost, and much easier to source.

Hope this is of some help!

[Capocheny]

Those Canucks are finally starting to show some life! I think the Discovery is a nice choice, but I cannot help but think about the other options, especially the Compact that the above poster and another mentioned.

Need to answer to the above poster. BTW, what AS are you using? Don't you have that sweet one from Don Hutton?

Hi AE,

Yup, the Canucks are "starting" to show some element of life... but, when the playoffs come along, they'll fall back asleep! :>)

Yes, I bought Don's 4x5 F-Metric with Orbix from him... it's a terrific camera!

Keep in mind (though) that (in theory) you can always build on the Discovery when your resources are able to do so (notwithstanding my comments below.) That's the beauty of a systems-oriented design. The Sinar and Linhofs are other brands with the same expandability philosophy and, personally, I think it makes a LOT of sense.

The unfortunate problem with A/S is that they take a very, very LONG time to provide a special order product. For example, to get a 5x7 Conversion Kit (even pre-paid) will most likely require a decree from God. I understand from one of the dealers that they've had one on order for over 2 years... that's 24 months!!! IMHO, that's mind boggling for a consumer item.

[Before anyone gives me a hard time about this... yes, I understand re-tooling a production line takes time, supply-demand, etc, etc. However, if that's the case... then, they shouldn't offer it as a "standard" item in their catalog. That only makes good sense to me.]

Secondly, unlike Sinar or Linhof, you can't/won't find their products on the used market all that frequently. Go to the auction site and, with a bit of patience, you'll find conversion kits for the Sinar from 8x10 to 4x5 pop up from time to time but seldom will you see the same with A/S.

[Apologies for the rant! :>0]

But, having said the above... it's still a great camera line.

Sheldon,

Hope all is going well for you and I'm glad to hear you've managed to find good homes for those orphans you didn't need.

Cheers

[David Karp]

One thing to consider: One of my buddies who had an Arca Swiss F-Line (171 version) (and misses it) mentioned that if you ever want to use old brass soft focus lenses the larger size of the 171 lensboards is a plus.

Also, I think that there are a couple of Discovery kits for sale on this forum. Maybe one or both is still available.