View Full Version : Arca Swiss F-Metric Field C 4x5 - some beginner questions
hypermanual
23-Feb-2022, 05:12
Hello everyone,
I have a little bit of experience with wooden field cameras from photography school, but for all intents and purposes, I'm a beginner in large format photography. I'm currently planning to part ways with most of my digital stuff and invest into a 4x5 camera, dedicated mostly to architecture and cityscapes. The cameras that have caught my attention the most are monorails from Arca Swiss and Linhof (Technikardan). These things are obviously really expensive (and not that easy to find on the used market), so I would like to ask a few questions before I decide to commit to any of them.
The camera that's currently intrigues me most is the Arca Swiss F-Metric Field C 4x5. There's some info on the arca website, but I admit I have a little bit of trouble figuring out all the details of the system, hence I'm asking here.
First of all, from what I have read, the Arca F is a modular system with a lot of potential configurations, and the F-Metric Field C 4x5 is just a name for one of those, which I would be able to expand on in the future, if I so desire. This sounds pretty neat and an obvious advantage over the Linhof Technikardan, which I believe has limited customization options. A PC vs Macintosh kind of thing.
If I understand correctly, the F Metric Field C 4x5 consists of 4x5 inch rear standard paired with 6x9 cm front standard, wide angle leather bellows, a rail that folds in two and a 'metric' system of geared rise and fall movements. This 'metric' adds a little bit of weight to the package, but I remember non-geared shifts on a wooden flatbed being a bit difficult to adjust precisely, so I feel the geared movements might be worth it. However, there's also this thing that Arca calls 'orbix', coming in two versions - dynamic and micrometric - but I don't know what that does and if it's worth the cost...
Anyway, it looks like with a smaller front standard come some quirks. One is reduced movement range. Arca specs say it will provide up to 2,5 cm of front rise, which I expect is the type of movement I'd use the most. Linhof Technikardan (with obviously bigger front) has up to 5cm. I assume Arca Swiss non-field with 4x5 format frame in the front has more as well (unfortunately this information is a bit difficult to find on their website). I have mentioned that Arca is a modular system, so it's possible to change the f-field front format frame to a bigger one, but I'd rather avoid the cost of the new format frame and bellows (I don't think the f-field wide angle bellows will work with a different front, but maybe I'm wrong).
If you photograph architecture, how much of a front rise do you usually need? I admit my digital photos rely on post-processing to fix converging verticals. Also, will I have the whole range of movements available when shooting wide angle lenses (like 65 or 75mm, assuming big enough image circle)? What range of focal lengths in general I can use with the movements advertised? Maybe it's better to ditch the 'Field' configuration and go with 4x5-4x5 and wide angle bellows (plus some more weight)? What if I also want to shoot on roll film, beside 4x5? Will the 'Field' configuration be more useful then?
Speaking of shooting roll film. Arca swiss sells a "Format-Reduktionsplatte 4x5 - 6x9" which I assume is something I would need to shoot 6x9 without having to replace the rear standard. How do I use this? Does it require separate 6x9 ground glass? Will it accept Graflok-type backs from Horseman, or Linhof Super Rollex? If I have to get it with its own ground glass, will their binocoular 6x9 relfex viewer work in this arrangement? Also, what about 6x12 panoramic roll backs?
The last questions I have are about lens boards. F-field front frame takes 110mm boards. Those are arca specific and I don't really see many lenses on used market coming with them, and when they do come with Arca style boards, these are usually bigger. I guess I will have to learn how to change the lens boards eventually, but I would like to ask, are there adapters for more common boards? Also, Arca sells some 'recessed' boards, either 7mm or 15mm recessed. What are those for?
All the best
neil poulsen
23-Feb-2022, 07:21
Hello back. :)
I've been using Arca Swiss equipment for years and years, and I've ended up with much the same kit that you're considering. I photograph architecture, and the Arca Swiss camera you're eyeing would be excellent for your needs. (See a photo of my camera below which has the older 171mm rear format frame, versus the currently sold 141mm rear format frame.) Let me address some of your concerns.
The most important concern for architecture is the lack of rise with the 6x9 front standard. There are a couple of solutions. One is an attachment that can be purchased from B&H:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/101415-REG/Arca_Swiss_069000_Extender_for_Front_Format.html
When needed, it will add about 2.5" of rise to the front. By swapping this attachment in and out when needed, you'll have more than enough rise for all architectural situations. But, that could be almost all of the time, to the point of being very inconvenient.
One reason that the Metric camera in your configuration has so little front rise, is because the rear Metric function carrier adds height to the rear standard. (The higher the rear format frame, the less effective rise.) So, an option is to use a standard Classic F function carrier on the rear, instead of the Metric. If your camera could actually be configured in this fashion, it would save you money, the non-metric version being quite a bit less expensive. Doing this, you would give up geared shift, which is not that much of a loss. But, if you ever wanted to downsize to 6x9 with a conversion kit, you would want both front and back Metric standards. (From your description, your would prefer to use the 6x9 reduction adapter.)
My solution to this problem on my camera below was to find an Oschwald era (decades older Arca Swiss) type "A", rear function carrier and swap out the rear Metric function carrier. These are quite inexpensive on EBay (when listed), and they allow the rear format frame to sit even lower on the camera than the standard Classic F function carrier. (I believe.) They're also a silver color, so they don't quite match. (Mine is black, which is incredibly rare.) With my Oschwald era Type A rear function carrier installed, I have about 45mm of rise. But my camera has the 171mm rear format frame, versus the 141mm rear format frame on the camera that you would purchase. With the latter on your camera, you would see greater than 45mm rise. An Oschwald Type A rear function carrier has swing and shift, but no rear tilt. This is not a problem for me, because on the rare occasions that I need tilt, I can do that using the front standard. (In fact, I prefer not having rear tilt.) Being a simpler design, I believe the Oshwald Type A to be stronger than the modern function carriers, and it's less weight.
I'm not sure how much effective rise is possible using the non-Metric Classic F function carrier. But, it's greater than what's possible with both front and rear Metric function carriers.
Combining the extended rise attachment (above) with a lowered rear function carrier will give you all the convenient rise that you will ever need.
I've never had the Orbix capability, which gives one geared tilt on the front standard. Of course, geared (versus non-geared) tilt makes it possible to effectively use finer degrees of tilt. Many people who have Orbix on their camera really love it. I'm not sure about this, but I have a hunch that Orbix also adds a little height to the front standard; if so, then more effective rise. Again, not being familiar with Orbix, I don't know the difference between the "dynamic" and "micrometric" versions.
As for the 110mm lensboards, they can be found used on EBay or at used equipment retailers like igorcamera.com. The 110 boards are a nice size. I've seen Asian "reduction" lensboards for the 110mm front standard that make it possible to use Linhof Technika boards. But looking at photos of them, it doesn't appear that one could use a compendium lenshood. I have one that I customized that uses round, "bayonet" mount lensboards based on the very old MC lensboard system. All things considered though, I would recommend sticking with the Arca 110mm boards. They're great.
Recessed lensboards make it possible to use very short focal length lenses without having to cramp the bellows as tightly as one rolls the front standard back towards the rear standard. But the leather bag bellows like that shown on my camera makes a recessed lensboard unnecessary, at least down to a 75mm focal length lens. But, recessed boards are worth considering for 47mm, 58mm, or possibly for a 65mm lens. There are Asian lensboards for sale that recess the lens as much as 22mm, versus those sold by Arca that recess the lens by 7mm or 15mm's. Based on experience with my camera, a 15mm recessed board would be sufficient for a 47mm focal length lens.
The 6x9 front standard is a very nice size. It's less weight than the 141mm size, and it requires a smaller compendium lens hood.
mhayashi
23-Feb-2022, 07:29
There are so many questions but I recommend you to contact Rod first if you are in US.
https://www.rodklukas.com/about.html
IMO,
I recommend you to buy a normal 141mm front frame.
As a set, I recommend you to buy a simple metric model with 30cm optical bench.
If you plan to buy old brass lenses that weigh more than 2kg, I recommend you to buy a F-classic model without an orbix function.
Micrometric orbix is geared and self lock and dynamic orbix is manual.
I am a user of Arca-Swiss F for half of the year only. I switched from a wooden field camera to the Arca-Swiss system for similar reasons as you. I bought a used pre-2004 non-metric kit consisting of 6x9 front and rear standards, 4x5 rear standard, leather bellows for 6x9 and 4x5-to-6x9, synthetic bellows for 4x5-to-6x9, folding 30cm rail, and monocular view attachment for 6x9.
I found ungeared rise/fall and shift movements on Arca are precise enough and easy to use (in the field), and unless you do tabletop photography you can save a chunk of money and weight, but I do prefer to use my Sinar P in the studio.
The rise on 6x9 standard is about 30-32 mm, my standard does not have zero marks from the factory, but a previous owner added his own. If it is not enough and the lens has big coverage I use indirect movements. Also please keep in mind that most of the wide-angle lenses have limited coverage, i.e. - my 58XL allows only ~12 mm of lateral movements. And my 58XL came mounted on a 7 mm recessed board.
Orbix is Arca-Swiss implementation of asymmetric tilt. Good to have, but not absolutely necessary, at least it can be added later, but you need to send your standard to the factory.
neil poulsen
23-Feb-2022, 11:53
One caveat regarding the 6x9 front standard, is that the compendium lenshood that fits on that standard can be too small for some lenses. One in particular is a 90mm Schneider Super Angulon XL, which has a huge 95mm front element.
Mhayashi above recommends the 141mm front standard. That will give you a relatively compact camera, and I'm sure that Arca sells a reduction lensboard for Technika boards for that front standard. But should you ever want an Arca 6x9 camera, you'll need to purchase both the front and rear standard, versus just the rear standard and the associated bellows for the version you described above. And of course, with the 141mm front standard, you'll have all the rise that you'll need without any modification to the camera.
Frankly, I think that the non-Metric, Classic F Camera with both front and back 141mm standards would work great, and this camera is far less expensive. But, geared rise for architecture is really sweet (for me, it's essential), and it works just fine to mount a Metric front format frame (with the geared rise) on a non-Metric, Classic F function carrier. What you miss when doing front shifts is the centimeter scale that can tell you how far you've actually shifted. You instead would have two vertical lines (one on the format frame and one on the function carrier) to line up when centering the front standard on the rail. Of course when shifting, these lines are separated, and to determine the distance shifted, one can measure the distance between these vertical lines.
So in the above configuration, one would order a Classic F camera (versus the Metric camera), but specify that the front standard have the Metric format frame. That gives you the best of both worlds.
Bernice Loui
23-Feb-2022, 12:02
Better question would be what lenses (focal lengths and type) are planned to be used with any view camera for architecture and cityscapes?
This determines what any view camera and related accessories will be forced to support the needs of any given lens for a given image making situation.
This view camera stuff is very different than fixed box cameras which is the typical for digital and roll film cameras. Few of those box camera conventions carry over to a view camera which is a box camera that is flexi in the center and adjustable at the ends.
As for "not enough rise-fall, it can easily be compensated by using tilt fall or tilt rise as illustrated with a Technikardan 23s.
224964
224965
Same applied to a 5x7 Sinar Norma.
224966
224967
Less $$$ and often equal to riser block accessory. Fine adjustment of rise/fall can then be tweaked as needed using the cameras rise/fall movement at the front or rear standards as needed.
For wide angle lenses, some cameras demand a recessed lens board to allow placing a short focal length within the limits of the camera's shortest distance between front to rear standards. Know recessed lens boards are often a hassle adding a barrier to accessing lens shutter controls. It is highly preferred to pick a view camera system that does NOT need a recess lens board with the shortest possible focal length lens. In the case of 4x5, 47mm lens would be it. Yes, a 47mm Super Angulon XL just covers 4x5 and near nil camera movements, still not needing a recessed lens board to support a 47mm lens is no small advantage. Bellows also figures into this as the typical standard accordion bellows greatly limits camera movements as it's length is reduced/compressed. This is where a bag bellows nicely and easily solves this problem. If needed, what is the $ to obtain a good bag bellows and what is the availability of the bag bellows?
With longer focal length lenses, does the camera have enough camera extension and bellows to support lens focal length needed? Most 4x5 fixed monorail cameras can extend to 300mm/12" or 480mm/19" which is often enough, but not always. Other solutions would be to use a Tele-Photo design view camera lens which results in a bigger/heavier lens for a given full lens aperture compared to a non Tele-Photo lens design and there are optical performance trade offs with the Tele-Photo lens designs compared to non Tele-Photo lens design.
Camera extension and bellows capabilities come into reality for macro images in much the same way.
That said, the Linhof Technikardan 23s is tolerated due to it's telescopic bed with enough extension for a 2x3_6x9 camera, compact size, reasonable stability-rigidity and percision/accuracy of build, durable, reliable and overall nice to use with few camera limitations within it's abilities. Accessories like bag bellows, lens boards and others are $$$$ new and not easy to obtain used in good working condition.
Sinar Norma is a completely different kettle of camera, it is modular like the Arca Swiss but FAR easier to obtain at lower cost and more important accessories-add ons like bag bellows, accessory standards and much more are not that difficult or $ to obtain. Having been and done the Arca Swiss thing, these are the factors that caused the need to move on from the Arca Swiss system. It IS a very nice camera to use in every way. It's prime attraction, precision-accurate and very nice user feel, very stable, very reliable and durable, most of all it is one of the lowest weight monorail cameras for what it can do. The foldable rail results in a light weight and compact monorail camera to travel with.
Any of these view cameras, Arca Swiss, Linhof, Sinar when they are in proper condition do not have the vague and iffy feel common to many wooden field folder cameras. This can be a serious issue for some, a complete non-issue for others.
There was a time many years ago when Arca Swiss transitioned out of the original Oschwald era cameras into what they are today with their "Discovery" series of cameras. This was their basic intro view camera to allow new Arca Swiss users access to what Arca Swiss cameras were about. If you're set on Arca Swiss, this could be a good place to begin. DO consider accessories like bag bellows, rail options, lens boards and more as they will come into serious need driven by lenses to be used and the given image situation needs.
As for the Orbix asymmetric tilt, often not needed for architecture and cityscapes. Orbix was Arca Swiss's answer to Sinar's implementation of asymmetric tilt, time saver for studio stuff like table top and related, does add complexity, weight, cost and all related and not always needed or "better". It goes back to image making needs and lenses required to support these needs/goals.
Get in touch with Rod Klukas, he does post and read stuff on LFF, Rod is the USA rep for Arca Swiss and really nice to deal with.
Other monorail cameras to consider, Horseman L series, Linhof Kardan in it's various offerings over the many decades, Toyo view, Cambo and others. Most are not modular like Arca Swiss or Sinar thus enforcing specific camera limitations with limits on lens support and image making situation demands.
As for roll film backs, there are 4x5 graflok back (often industry standard) which fits on to the graflok back once the ground glass frame/holder has been removed. These come in 6x6 to 6x12 made by Horseman, Linhof, Wista and others. The other variety slides in to the graflok back near identical to a sheet film holder. Examples are Linhof Rapid Rollex, Sinar Roll film back, Toyo and others. Avoid the Calumet version, not had good experiences with these.
Bernice
There was a time many years ago when Arca Swiss transitioned out of the original Oschwald era cameras into what they are today with their "Discovery" series of cameras. This was their basic intro view camera to allow new Arca Swiss users access to what Arca Swiss cameras were about. If you're set on Arca Swiss, this could be a good place to begin. DO consider accessories like bag bellows, rail options, lens boards and more as they will come into serious need driven by lenses to be used and the given image situation needs.
When Philippe Vogt purchased Arca-Swiss from the Oschwalds he made design changes and named the new cameras "F-Line" cameras. The Discovery was an F-line camera that was marketed at a relatively attractive price to photography students. The only mechanical difference between the Discovery and other F-Line cameras is that the Discovery's function carriers, which are used to adjust the length of the bellows, aren't geared. They work via friction. They are lighter than the geared carriers, and the friction and geared carriers are interchangeable.
About 15 years ago, Arca-Swiss stopped selling the Discovery. It also made the F-Line standards and lens boards smaller, changing from 171mm˛ lens boards to 141mm˛ boards. The 171mm˛ boards are available second-hand and from at least two independent manufacturers, as well as from S.K. Grimes (https://skgrimes.com) in Rhode Island. Precision Camera Works (https://www.precisioncameraworks.com) sometimes has 171˛ boards as new old stock. Some people prefer the 171mm˛ boards, partly because they have more surface area for larger lenses.
It's worth noting that recessed lens boards are the default in the Arca-Swiss system and are more common than flat boards. My understanding is that this has to do with the functioning of Orbix, which I don't have.
Due to forum limits on uploading photos, I'll be adding a second post with two more photos and some further comments.
This is from an old B&H catalogue page on the Discovery:
224975
This is a Discovery outfitted with geared function carriers. The geared carriers are nice to have, but they're only necessary if one needs precise focus control, such as for macro photography. The B&H catalogue page above shows the friction carriers.
224976
This is a rear view of the same camera:
224977
Here are two additional photos of the Discovery. I have an errand to run, but I'll add some comments later in a separate post.
This is the Discovery with a leather bag bellows and a 75mm lens (Rodenstock Grandagon N MC, f/4.5):
224979
Finally, this is the same Discovery configured for 8x10 with a 150mm lens (Schneider-Kreuznach Super Symmar XL, f/5.6). The Discovery's rail, at 300mm, is twice the focal length of the lens. The rail will get the lens to 1:1, but Schneider recommends that this lens be used at a magnification ratio of not more than 3:1. As a practical matter, I'll never use this lens, which at 8x10 is about 21mm in 35mm full frame terms, as close as 3:1, let alone 1:1. The 4x5 rear standard has been changed out for an 8x10 standard, and the 4x5 bellows has been changed out for an 8x10 bellows.
224981
Further to posts #7 and #8...
Hi HyperManual,
The only reason that I can think of to purchase an Arca-Swiss 4x5 camera with a 6x9 front standard is that the smaller front standard will save you some weight and some bulk. It's a personal decision whether the weight/bulk saving over a 4x5 front standard, and the cost new or used compared to a standard 4x5 F-Line, is attractive. I would also want to assess what the smaller standard and 110mm˛ lens board mean for lens choice and for rise/fall and shift. Unlike me, Neil Poulsen (post #2) has experience with this configuration, and is well-placed to address these questions. Neil will correct me if I'm wrong, but I see it as a niche configuration for people with quite specific requirements.
My read of your post is that you plan to use wide angle lenses. Great if there's no mention of centre filters because you already know all about them, and they aren't germane to your post. Otherwise, I suggest that you spend some time, before you purchase a camera and a lens, learning about centre filters and how they may affect your choices of wide angle lenses and budget for the new camera. Forum opinions on centre filters are all over the map, so even with a good deal of reading you'll have to make a personal decision. I only started using wide angle lenses myself recently. To explore the subject, I revived the thread Alternative Center Filters for Rodenstock 75/4.5 Grandagon N (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?147126-Alternative-Center-Filters-for-Rodenstock-75-4-5-Grandagon-N), starting at post #27. In that thread, I suggest that you pay attention in particular to posts by Bob Salomon, Bernice Louie and Oren Grad. More generally, you might find the following thread useful, which benefited from posts by several knowledgeable people: Wide Lenses for 4x5 and 8x10: 90mm to 165mm (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?165798-Wide-Lenses-for-4x5-amp-8x10-90mm-to-165mm).
Like you, I also got interested recently in making 6x9 and 6x12 photographs. Having looked at all of the options, I've settled for the moment on using 4x5 sheets of film for these formats. I've decided that it makes sense, including financially, to waste some film until I know how serious I am about these formats and how often that I'll use them. It's possible that you'll find the following thread helpful: Masking a Ground Glass for Cinema Aspect Ratios (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?166341-Masking-a-Ground-Glass-for-Cinema-Aspect-Ratios).
In my earlier posts (#7 & #8), I elaborated on Bernice's comments on the Arca-Swiss Discovery. The problem is that Arca-Swiss no longer offers a comparable camera, and the Discovery is uncommon on the used market. As noted above, the only mechanical difference between a Discovery and any other F-Line camera are the function carriers, and these are interchangeable. I suspect that a lot of the people who purchased a Discovery added additional components and aren't interested in selling the original configuration by itself. As should be clear from the photos above, if I sold mine I'd be left holding the bag on several components, including some pretty expensive ones. I've seen a couple of Discoveries come up on the used market in the last year, but you're much more likely to come across a standard 171 or 141 camera, which in some cases may have started life as a Discovery.
Bernice Loui
23-Feb-2022, 18:59
Other view camera outfit basic needs.
Camera/lens aside, the other and often neglected basic item for this view camera stuff is:
~Tripod and proper tripod head. A GOOD tripod & tripod can make ALL the difference when using a view camera. Often not given very serious consideration for small digital and/or roll film cameras, Tripod and head can be a source of remarkable grief or ease and pleasure with the view camera image making process. IMO, lowest weight tripod is not always ideal due to stability, rigidity and all related to that. It is not just the weight rating of the tripod legs, how good vibration control figures into the basic requirements for what makes a GOOD view camera support system. Add to this, the tripod head which tends to discounts the ability and stability of the tripod legs. A really good set of tripod legs can easily become iffy due to a flimsy tripod head. Know a tripod with an adjustable center column further discount the stability of the tripod camera support system. Might come as a surprise, high quality wood tripods can be absolutely excellent, then composites. Both of these tripod leg materials often have good vibration damping and vibration control properties not found in aluminum or similar metal tripod legs. Weight is another consideration, lightest weight camera with a lightest weight tripod/tripod head is a recipe for camera/lens instability resulting in blurry images and more. Ponder what might be to discover what would have been an expressive image ruined by a bouncy camera/lens? Weight saved on the camera alone does not add up to what the entire view camera system could be. Or, why focusing on lightweight camera only is myopic.
~Film holders, often neglected basic requirement. Get a GOOD set, take care of them, keep them clean, do not beat the up as few new film holders are made today (they are still made, not low cost as they once were). A spanky clean vacuum cleaner with spanky clean brush is your good friend for de-dust, de-dirting film holders. Once clean and tested light tight store them in a open end folded over plastic baggie to keep them clean. If the film holder flap tape is knackered, use black book binders tape as the replacement.
~Focusing loupe, get a GOOD one. 4x might be on the lowish side, IMO 7x is good, more mag tends to cause other issues.
~GOOD light meter, these light tight boxes that are flexi in the middle do not have a light measuring device, Thus the need for a proper and good light meter.
Suggest, Minolta Spot F or the current Kenko KFM-2200 which is a combo incident-spot meter (not low cost).
~Focusing cloth that works for you.
~Good cable release, this was once easy, not so simple these days due to how electronic cameras have caused the change from metallic cable to electronic wires or wireless often used on digital cameras today.
~Tape measure, to get some measure of bellows extension -vs- lens focal length needed to figure out lens bellows factor if needed.
~GOOD case to pack and haul around the view camera outfit. This is often extremely important as safety and security of the entire view camera outfit travels
and lives in this home.
Curious, how did the interest in view camera happened?
Bernice
Some comments on Bernice's post...
Tripods
I'm part of the carbon fibre generation. Gitzo sets the standard specs, adopted by other manufacturers, which is why I say that I won't use less than a Gitzo Systematic Series 3 or equivalent. As a result of advice that I got from B&H staff a long time ago, no centre column. Only an old geezer would use wood. Then I tried a Ries Wooden Tripod (https://www.riestripod.com) on a whim. Unless I need to shave a few ounces, my Ries tripod is a pleasure to use. Unfortunately, mine is currently 1800 miles away in another country.
Tripod Heads
Christopher Broadbent is an American commercial photographer, based in Rome, who used to participate in this forum. At his suggestion, I started using a levelling base instead of a tripod head. With the Ries tripod, I do use Ries's Dual Tilt Head. More recently, as a result of working with video, I use Miller's CX6 Fluid Head (https://www.millertripods.com/us/cx6-fluid-heads.html). If weight isn't an issue, the Miller has become far and away my first choice. It's in the photos in posts #7 and #8, but for most still photographers it makes no sense financially.
Christopher Broadbent posted a good number of photographs to this forum, but it looks like none of them are available anymore. They'll come up in a Google search.
Light Meter
In addition to Bernice's suggestions, I'd be on the lookout in the second-hand market for a Sekonic L758. They come up a lot because Sekonic sold a ton of them. Why was the L758 so popular? Because it's a great incident and reflective light meter.
Cable Release
For years, I used Nikon's US$20 cable release. It's inexpensive and has never let me down. Recently, I misplaced mine. B&H said that Nikon's was out of stock, so I purchased a Linhof. Also works well, but it's significantly more expensive.
Focusing Cloth
If you're willing to spend the money, I think that Wanderer (US) and Paramo/Joe Cornish (UK) are great. See the threads Harrison vs Wanderer Dark Cloth (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?166928-Harrison-vs-Wanderer-8x10-Dark-Cloth) and Paramo/Joe Cornish Dark Cloth (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164624-Paramo-Joe-Cornish-Dark-Cloth). Wanderer made the dark cloth in the second photo in post #8.
Film Holders
Of all the large format subjects, this is the one where you can get into trouble by expressing a preference. Last week, there was an entire thread about buying film holders cheap. On this question, I'll agree with Bernice but otherwise keep my mouth shut :)
hypermanual
24-Feb-2022, 14:17
Hello again,
Thank you all for the replies, I'm pleasantly surprised by the amount of helpful advice!
It seems like people here are mostly in favour of the 4x5-4x5 format frames configuration, with a geared shifts in front and without the orbix. However, as @Bernice pointed out, the choice of lenses is very important here.
When shooting digital, I'm lazy and use zooms. The standard set of 15-30, 24-70 and 70-200 mm (in 35mm sensor format). My most used one is the 24-70, followed by the wide zoom. The telephoto zoom I use rather occasionally.
I would like to start my large format kit with a wide-ish normal and a super wide. I'd strongly prefer maximum aperture that doesn't make focusing on ground glass a pain (F/5.6 and brighter) and also working well on roll film 6x9/6x12 formats, where I don't plan to close down the aperture as much (I assume diffraction on F/22 won't be a big deal on 4x5, but on something smaller it might be). I have been thinking about starting with 75mm for the super wide, 125 for the 'standard', and in the future, adding something longer like the 270 telephoto Nikkor - if I recall correctly, telephotos don't require as long bellows as the non-tele of the same focal length, so maybe I could use all three lenses without changing bellows... additionally, the image circle is something to consider here, as well as the size, weight and center filter for the wide angle (thanks @r.e for reminding me of those). I guess the 25mm rise limit won't be much of a problem if a lens gives 15mm range of shifts:P
I will have to think about it some more, decide whether I can sacrifice some movement range for the compact form factor of the F-Field (I'm drawn to this just like @niels, and the trick with tilts that @Bernice showed might be enough for me to live with the limitations of smaller front). The best option would obviously be to rent such camera and play with it a little. My friends that shoot on LF have wooden field cameras, like Chamonix and Wista... However, one of the camera gear shops in my city has a used Toyo VX125 monorail for sale (over 3000 EUR without a lens and ground glass protector, sounds like a lot to be honest...). This obviously isn't the same as Arca, but it looks like something that could give me the general idea of how much movement range I would need. I wonder if I can convince them to rent me this pretty expensive piece of gear for a weekend :P
Thanks for the reminder that camera and lenses aren't the only things I have to include in the budget. Tripod, yeah, I definitely need to get something without the center column like my current one, and not cheap out on it, so probably either a Gitzo or RRS; that wooden tripod from Ries looks pretty awesome and it isn't as heavy as I thought it's going to be. Unfortunately it's in the US, and I'm an ocean (and a really clueless customs office) away from there. Tripod head, I was thinking about the Arca Leveler - any opinions maybe?; Lightmeter, I admit my initial plan is to rely on my digicam as a polaroid of sorts, but considering giving the Reveni spot a try, anyone here used this? Cable release, I have one from Kaiser, used that on my small format film cameras, I hope it's good enough for LF shutters too... Film holders, a camera shop I buy film in has brand new Toyo holders, I think those are going to be good enough? Sure, being new they won't be cheap, but I don't need a ton of them... at least I assume so ;) Focusing cloth and loupe, yeah, need to remember that too! Damn, this whole endavour just got quite a bit more expensive :P
Last but not least, @Bernice asked where does my interest in LF come from. Well, when I was at photography school few years ago, I really enjoyed the analog workflow and working with those old film cameras, which are often mechanical marvels. First was small format, which I still enjoy shooting to this day and printing under the enlarger. Then a brief adventure with Pentacon Six medium format, that gave nice results, but also lots of headache. I have been thinking about saving for a 'proper' medium format like the Rollei or Hasselblad, but I don't feel these bring to the table much more than the bigger negative. Large format photography, on the other hand, is entirely different process, with a specific set of creative possibilities. I feel it could bring a change in the mindset that would make both my analog and digital photography much better.
All the best
I have been thinking about starting with 75mm for the super wide, 125 for the 'standard', and in the future, adding something longer like the 270 telephoto Nikkor - if I recall correctly, telephotos don't require as long bellows as the non-tele of the same focal length, so maybe I could use all three lenses without changing bellows... additionally, the image circle is something to consider here, as well as the size, weight and center filter for the wide angle (thanks @r.e for reminding me of those). I guess the 25mm rise limit won't be much of a problem if a lens gives 15mm range of shifts:P
I have Rodenstock's f/4.5 75mm lens as well as its f/4.5 55mm and f/6.8 90mm. I'm attaching a spreadsheet that has data on all three. It helps illustrate that the issue of centre filters can get a bit complicated. Rodenstock sold, and I have, a single 67/86 centre filter that can be used for all three lenses. In other words, I was able to kill three birds with one stone. However, as Bob Salomon has pointed out in a number of posts, some versions of Rodenstock's 67/86 centre filter don't cover all three lenses, so you need to know what version you're buying.
In any event, the ability to use a centre filter that I already had is the main reason that I purchased the f/6.8 90mm rather than the f/4.5, which requires a separate centre filter. A related consideration is that my centre filter's front thread is 86mm, whereas the front thread of the centre filter for the faster 90mm is 112mm. The resulting need to use filters larger than 100mm raises its own set of issues, starting with cost.
For example, if one is set up for Lee Filters's Lee100 filter system, as I am, one can forget about using it with Rodenstock's centre filter on its f/4.5 90mm lens. Lee's SW150 filters are large enough, but Lee doesn't make a 112mm adapter for the SW150 holder, and nor do any of the other makers of 150mm filters. That means a custom made holder or adapter. Very few companies are making 112mm filters, and the price of the filters that are available, at least new, are liable to give one a heart attack. Like you, I prefer an f/4.5 lens. In this case, I compromised. I think that it's helpful to be aware of this kind of thing before going out to buy lenses. I should also mention Dan Fromm's article at Galerie Photo, in which he organises and summarises what's available in the way of Centre Filters for Large Format Lenses (https://galerie-photo.com/center-filters-for-large-format-lenses.html).
If you decide to consider Rodenstock's f/4.5 75mm lens (you'll find that comments on the forum about this lens are very positive), it's worth being aware of the various versions. There's a lot of confusion on the internet about the versions, and it can be frustrating to figure out what's correct and what isn't. What it comes down to is that there are four versions:
Grandagon (single coated)
Grandagon MC (multi-coated)
Grandagon-N MC
Grandagon-N MC with Green Stripe
My understanding is that the "MC" and "N MC" lenses are the same lens. In 1994, Rodenstock added a green stripe. Some sellers want a premium for the stripe. Bob Salomon has confirmed that the addition of the green stripe was cosmetic (it does look good) and does not signify a difference in lens quality. My own copy is the Grandagon-N MC without a stripe. It's on my camera, with the Rodenstock 67/86 centre filter, in the first photo in post #8. If you want to know what I paid for the lens, send me a personal message.
Here's my Rodenstock wide angle spreadsheet. The data comes from Rodenstock documents, not second-hand sources. I include the rear barrel diameter because one can use gel filters on the rear, even though it's unthreaded, which is one way to address an issue involving the diameter of a centre filter front thread. On this, see the recent discussion Using a Neutral Density Filter on a Rear Lens Element (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?166701-Using-a-Neutral-Density-Filter-on-a-Rear-Lens-Element).
225019
I have been thinking about starting with 75mm for the super wide, 125 for the 'standard'...
Although 150mm is probably the most common "normal" 4x5 lens, a fair number of people choose 135mm. The forum's 4x5 Lens Comparison Chart (https://www.largeformatphotography.info/lenses/LF4x5in.html) shows five choices of f/5.6 135mm lens. The only f/5.6 125mm lens listed is Fujinon's. If you aren't already aware of it, there are a number of versions of the Fujinon, and it's worth doing some research on them before buying one. There have been many discussions about the Fujinon versions on this forum.
Film holders, a camera shop I buy film in has brand new Toyo holders, I think those are going to be good enough? Sure, being new they won't be cheap, but I don't need a ton of them... at least I assume so ;)
I think that Toyo makes very good film holders. It's the brand that I had in mind at the end of post #11 :) Toyo holders aren't cheap, but you can save some money by purchasing second-hand.
It seems like people here are mostly in favour of the 4x5-4x5 format frames configuration, with a geared shifts in front and without the orbix.
I don't think that anyone is actually recommending against Orbix. Ben Horne made a video about his Arca-Swiss 8x10 with Orbix. He talks about Orbix at 7:54. Note that most of what Horne says about his camera also applies to an Arca-Swiss 4x5. Apart from lens board size (141mm˛ vs 171mm˛) and Orbix, there are no significant differences between his camera and my Discovery configured for 8x10 (post #8, second photo). For long 8x10 lenses, I change out the Discovery's 30cm rail (which is perfect for Schneider-Kreuznach's 150mm Super Symmar XL) for the longer rail that Horne talks about in the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJMt13PNGhQ
Bernice Loui
25-Feb-2022, 13:05
There are Very Good reasons to begin this LF view camera stuff at 4x5, it is the most common for film and processing availability, lenses, camera and all related. Sheet film size large enough to reveal what sheet film is capable of.
IMO, having used plenty of geared and non geared view cameras over the decades, there is NO clear advantage to either, it is all a trade-off for what is needed.
If pressed for efficiency in an indoor or studio environment with images that demand combined camera movements on front and rear camera standards, a geared movement camera is highly preferred. Yet identical can be achieved using a GOOD non geared camera. The FAR more important item here is fully understanding how to fully used and apply camera movements. Geared or non geared camera movements will make ZERO difference unless there is a full and complete understanding of how to best apply them and the specifics to when within the limits of the lens being used directly tied to the image goals and expectations. This repost examples from a Linhof LF book gives some examples of view camera movements. Again, geared or non-geared, understanding camera movements is the key.
https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?164126-Importance-of-camera-movements-gt-Alan-amp-others-long-amp-Linhof&p=1634512#post1634512
IMO, digital and roll film camera zoom lenses tend to promote a image making laziness factor by the image maker applying the zoom function to "frame" from the currently standing image maker and camera/lens position. As piles of images are made, this often produces Meh, compositions with snap shot pix style images. Have plenty of zoom lenses to use, but the highly preferred is fixed focal. One thing using a view camera can teach is how to see, then enforcing the need to alter camera/lens position as needed to achieve the image in mind. Not just camera/lens position, height and all related camera/lens position figures into what the image outcome will be. Once highly practiced and skills learned from using a view camera in this way, these skills and knowledge can and often does transfer to other image recording devices including Fone-Cameras with a tendency to retard, "spray & pray" image recording ways so common today.
Large full aperture lens might help with focusing the ground glass image, learning to focus the ground glass image is FAR more complex then simple brightest image on the ground glass. Bright ground glass does help but it should NOT be the sole criteria for view camera lens selection. Ground glass image brightness is not determined by lens aperture alone, angle of light projected by the lens makes more difference in the brightness of the GG image than might be expected. The GG image brightness for a 65mm f4 wide angle on 4x5 will be dimmer than a 800mm f14 APO process on 4x5 due to the light ray angles involved. Better to learn how to focus and view the ground glass image instead of focusing on largest lens aperture alone as a focusing aid.
From the view point of using the Hasselblad V system for over two decades, no thanks and never again. Good but not THAT good and not a good value for what they cost. IMO, the better 120 roll film camera choice would be "Texas Leica" Fuji GSW690 and GS690 as a pair. They have very good value with excellent optics with a 6x9 film image which has significant advantages over 6x6. These days, the 120 roll film camera is a 2x3_6x9 Linhof Technikardan with a variety of lenses.
It is all a trade off, lightweight_compact = strict limits imposed on the camera limiting it's ability to fully support specific lenses and image making situations.
Big heavy geared movement cameras can be very nice to use, then try hauling a camera like this around which is no fun at all.
As for camera choice, knowing there is a preference towards wide to normal focal length lenses and creating images of architecture and cityscapes a monorail camera with a short rail and bag bellows is likely the better choice for these needs. That noted, any camera to be considered demands the availability of a bag bellows, shorter rail. Camera like the Toyo VX will be curious to try finding a bag bellows for it, same applies for any camera to be considered. In this specific case, using the bag bellows will likely be a great advantage due to the need for wide angle lenses. A good monorail will easily support any wide angle lens to it's limits with ease and no recessed lens board needed.
Replies from RE notes the very real world realities of using view camera wide angle lenses, lots of good information posted.
125mm focal length significantly limits lens choices, going to 135mm opens up many more lens choices. Suggest this as a first lens, Starting with a 75mm might not be idea due to the quirks of view camera wide angle lenses. Suggest learning how to view camera with the 135mm then adding the 75mm or other wide angle lens.
Do a LFF search on tripods as there has been PLENTY of discussion on this topic. Don't discount high quality wood tripods as they are far better than most would want to believe until one is used lots and used often.
Will be curious to know where your view camera journey takes you, Thanks for sharing.
Bernice
Hello again,
Thank you all for the replies, I'm pleasantly surprised by the amount of helpful advice!
It seems like people here are mostly in favour of the 4x5-4x5 format frames configuration, with a geared shifts in front and without the orbix. However, as @Bernice pointed out, the choice of lenses is very important here.
When shooting digital, I'm lazy and use zooms. The standard set of 15-30, 24-70 and 70-200 mm (in 35mm sensor format). My most used one is the 24-70, followed by the wide zoom. The telephoto zoom I use rather occasionally.
I would like to start my large format kit with a wide-ish normal and a super wide. I'd strongly prefer maximum aperture that doesn't make focusing on ground glass a pain (F/5.6 and brighter) and also working well on roll film 6x9/6x12 formats, where I don't plan to close down the aperture as much (I assume diffraction on F/22 won't be a big deal on 4x5, but on something smaller it might be). I have been thinking about starting with 75mm for the super wide, 125 for the 'standard', and in the future, adding something longer like the 270 telephoto Nikkor - if I recall correctly, telephotos don't require as long bellows as the non-tele of the same focal length, so maybe I could use all three lenses without changing bellows... additionally, the image circle is something to consider here, as well as the size, weight and center filter for the wide angle (thanks @r.e for reminding me of those). I guess the 25mm rise limit won't be much of a problem if a lens gives 15mm range of shifts:P
I will have to think about it some more, decide whether I can sacrifice some movement range for the compact form factor of the F-Field (I'm drawn to this just like @niels, and the trick with tilts that @Bernice showed might be enough for me to live with the limitations of smaller front). The best option would obviously be to rent such camera and play with it a little. My friends that shoot on LF have wooden field cameras, like Chamonix and Wista... However, one of the camera gear shops in my city has a used Toyo VX125 monorail for sale (over 3000 EUR without a lens and ground glass protector, sounds like a lot to be honest...). This obviously isn't the same as Arca, but it looks like something that could give me the general idea of how much movement range I would need. I wonder if I can convince them to rent me this pretty expensive piece of gear for a weekend :P
Thanks for the reminder that camera and lenses aren't the only things I have to include in the budget. Tripod, yeah, I definitely need to get something without the center column like my current one, and not cheap out on it, so probably either a Gitzo or RRS; that wooden tripod from Ries looks pretty awesome and it isn't as heavy as I thought it's going to be. Unfortunately it's in the US, and I'm an ocean (and a really clueless customs office) away from there. Tripod head, I was thinking about the Arca Leveler - any opinions maybe?; Lightmeter, I admit my initial plan is to rely on my digicam as a polaroid of sorts, but considering giving the Reveni spot a try, anyone here used this? Cable release, I have one from Kaiser, used that on my small format film cameras, I hope it's good enough for LF shutters too... Film holders, a camera shop I buy film in has brand new Toyo holders, I think those are going to be good enough? Sure, being new they won't be cheap, but I don't need a ton of them... at least I assume so ;) Focusing cloth and loupe, yeah, need to remember that too! Damn, this whole endavour just got quite a bit more expensive :P
Last but not least, @Bernice asked where does my interest in LF come from. Well, when I was at photography school few years ago, I really enjoyed the analog workflow and working with those old film cameras, which are often mechanical marvels. First was small format, which I still enjoy shooting to this day and printing under the enlarger. Then a brief adventure with Pentacon Six medium format, that gave nice results, but also lots of headache. I have been thinking about saving for a 'proper' medium format like the Rollei or Hasselblad, but I don't feel these bring to the table much more than the bigger negative. Large format photography, on the other hand, is entirely different process, with a specific set of creative possibilities. I feel it could bring a change in the mindset that would make both my analog and digital photography much better.
All the best
Regarding geared vs non-geared movements, and Orbix:
For rise/fall/shift movements I have my eye farther back, looking at the whole composition. Focus doesn't change with these movements, so I don't need to be looking through a loupe while adjusting them. I'm fine using two hands to do the movement and lock operation typically required with non-geared mechanisms.
For focus, tilt and swing, these affect the focus. I like to have these movements geared so one hand is on the knob, the other is holding the loupe as I see the changes in detail.
In the Arca F-line, that means I value geared 'Micrometric Orbix' more than the 'Metric' frames that only gear rise/fall/shift. You have to get into the M-line cameras (which are less portable) in Arca to get geared swing.
neil poulsen
26-Feb-2022, 10:55
. . . IMO, having used plenty of geared and non geared view cameras over the decades, there is NO clear advantage to either, it is all a trade-off for what is needed.
For film, I agree for geared shift and geared swing. I can take them or leave them. But for architecture, geared rise is very nice. One can be holding the darkcloth, or focusing with a loupe using the left hand, while simultaneously adjusting rise using the right. This is so much more convenient. Especially with longer lenses, it's awkward holding both arms forward at the same time to adjust rise.
Versus the configuration shown in the photo of my camera, I've instead combined a Metric rear format frame with an Oschwald Type "A" camera for my 4x5. This gives me axis tilt on the front, which I prefer to base tilt, and I have geared rise on the back. Adjusting rise on the front to an inch or a little more (with both hands), I can use rear geared rise (with one hand) on the back to fine-tune rise/fall. (Note that I have both old and new frames on all my 4x5 bellows.)
If one is using a 6x9 view camera camera along with a digital back, then geared shift is very nice for stitching. It's also more precise, and one has the scales on front and back to gauge the extent of the shift.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.