Ebony RW810 or Arca Swiss F Series

[Craig Tuffin]

I have the opportunity to get either of these cameras and I've been debating that choice for a while. The Ebony second-hand has been offered to me at about the same price as a new Arca Swiss.

I realise they are very different cameras and I have to admit that I haven't used either. I do need stability for large lenses so anyone that owns the Ebony please feel free to chime in your opinion of the stability at full (or close to) extension. I can see that the Arca has a larger lens board which is nice and it seems rock solid being a monorail. Both offer asymmetrical front tilts. The Ebony is a beautiful camera (I've owned the RW45 in the past) so that contributes to its charm. At the end of the day whichever camera I get will be worked frequently so as pretty as they are, I need them to do a job.

I've used 8x10 in Chamonix, Deardorff, Toyo and Sinar in the past and know what they have to offer (especially their cheaper price). I really just need some first hand information on these two.

Thanks!

[r.e.]

What do you mean by "the same price as a new Arca-Swiss"? For the Arca, it would be helpful to know basic specs: rail length, bellows length and whether you're talking about a 171 or 141 camera.

You might find it helpful to watch this 2017 Ben Horne video about his Arca-Swiss 8x10:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJMt13PNGhQ&t=476s

[Craig Tuffin]

Yes I've seen the video and it's this camera (the F Series) that I'm measuring against the Ebony (I had already mentioned that it's the F series in the title of the thread). But thank you for including it as it does have a good explanation of all the advantages that particular camera can provide.

On the other hand, an Aussie sold his Arca F 8x10 to buy and Ebony 8x10 where Ben Horne did the reverse.

I also mentioned the lens board on the Arca is larger than the one on the Ebony with the Arca at 171mm and the Ebony using standard Sinar boards which are 141mm.

Any first-hand experience with either would be wonderful. I keep bouncing from one to the other.

Thanks

[r.e.]

If you've already seen Ben Horne's exhaustive video about his Arca-Swiss 8x10, it would make sense to ask whatever specific questions you have. What is it you want to know?

Sorry if you think that I'm a bit thick. There were reasons for my questions. I didn't make them up for the fun of it. Arca-Swiss has made large format cameras that it calls F-Line ever since Philippe Vogt purchased the company from the Oschwald brothers in 1984, 38 years ago. It is a completely modular system and there are many variations. Your camera is very similar to Ben Horne's, but it is not identical. His camera was made about four years ago. If the camera that you're considering has a 171mm² front lens board, it was probably made before 2005.

There are some good threads about Arca-Swiss cameras on this forum, and the company's catalogue, showing all of the modules, is on the internet. If you read some of the threads, and check out that catalogue, you'll know why I asked some questions. For example, there are various options when it comes to rail and bellows length.

Good luck with your decision. By the way, this is my 171 Arca-Swiss 8x10, with a 150mm Schneider-Kreuznach Super-Symmar XL wide angle lens on a 30cm rail:

225548


This is the same camera, configured for 4x5 and with a bag bellows and a 75mm Rodenstock Grandagon-N. Like I said, it's a modular system:

225549

[Craig Tuffin]

I apologize if I’ve insulted you, I certainly didn’t mean to. I appreciate the time you’ve taken to reply. You’ve actually answered a couple of my questions as I’ve thought the more modern F line had the other lens board. Absolutely my mistake.
I haven’t actually seen the camera and was ignorant to the many variations of the F series over the years. I’ll do more research as you suggest but I was considering buying the latest release new directly from B&H. It would end up costing the same as the mint Ebony RW810 with an extra custom 9x11 back and 4 film holders in each of the formats.

[mhayashi]

Hello Craig.
I recommend you to buy a used 171mm F line classic 8x10.
I assume you want to use old brass lenses with the new camera to buy and to do wetplate in the field??
I don’t recommend the current 141mm system if you want to use large fast brass lenses which have 100mm or larger diameters of lens elements.

But 171mm system is discontinued so if you can’t find a 171mm f classic then 141mm f classic is the next buy imo.

Neither dynamic nor micrometric orbix hold heavy brass lenses upright, say heavier than 1.5kg.
F line classic has the rear rise but metric models don’t.
I think the rear rise is convenient for 8x10 portrait.
Another model which has the same rise is 8x10 misura but the set comes with the short optical bench meaning less bellows extension and no tilt/swing/shift? on the rear and it has dynamic orbix.
The misura is great for compactness and rear frame rigidity to assure both frames parallel to each other. It’s a compromise model and it is offered only with 141mm front frame.
Other rear frames with classic or metric function carriers have weaknesses in this respect, which are wobbly and you have to be careful with the bellows extension is well enough with bellows draw when using long focal length lenses.

If you use the camera with modern lenses mostly then the current 141mm f line metric model with micrometric orbix is nice and you can buy the f classic front frame later as you need for heavy brass lenses.

I don’t have any experience with Ebony 8x10 cameras.

[Mark Darragh]

G’day Craig,
My first suggestion regarding Arca-Swiss cameras would be to get in touch with Rod Klukas at Arca-Swiss.

I’ve used an 8x10 Arca in various configurations over the years using a 171 front standard. While the company continued to offer 171 components for sometime after they switched to the 141 standards, it would be wise to check whether any 171 components are available from Arca-Swiss. Older Arca-Swiss gear seems to have become quite sought after in recent times and correspondingly the asking price for secondhand gear has risen while availability has decreased.

I can’t comment on the relative merits of the 141 vs 171 standard in terms of rigidity but if I was personally looking at a replacement I’d be looking for a camera with the current 141mm standard.

All the best


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Craig Tuffin]

G'Day Mark!

Thanks to you and mhayashi for all of that great information on the Arca system. Although the majority of work I'll do with this camera is with film, I would still like the opportunity to use some of my large fast lenses and therefore need the stability in the front standard.

I can get by with the Sinar sized board on the 8x10 because I fabricate step up flanges (similar to a top hat design) for some of my large diameter lenses. Anything where the barrel of the lens comes close to 140mm, I simply shoot 8x10 plates on my Chamonix 14x14 camera (it takes an 8" lens board).

I guess I just need to know how stable the Ebony is at full extension now if anyone has some experience.

[neil poulsen]

I've used Arca Swiss for years and years and had an Oschwald era (older style) 8x10 that I thought was excellent. It was also very stable. Front and back, it was designed for 8x10.

But, I would definitely recommend against the currently sold 8x10 in any form. (Metric or otherwise.) Arca has tried to adopt a 4x5 front format frame and front and back 4x5 function carriers to 8x10. I currently have the two metric function carriers, and I've had and used many of Classic F standards. They're fine for either 6x9 or for 4x5. (Maybe 5x7?) But in my opinion, they're not up to supporting 8x10, and that's especially true for the Metric function carriers.

As for the 4x5 front format frame, take a look at that video above and you will see that you can only get about an inch and a half of rise. Most of the rise goes into bringing the front format frame up high enough to be on axis with the rear 8x10 format frame. Once you reach whatever limited rise of which the front standard is capable, you have to simulate additional rise by using front and back forward tilt. It's a PITA.

Arca sells an accessory that raises the format frame by about 2.5 inches. If it's possible to leave it installed all the time, it might (?) work. (I have one, and it's kind of smallish. For 8x10, I would feel more comfortable having two of them installed side by side.) But if one or two has to be inserted every time, it's a PITA. And even then, one is still left with the designed for 4x5 function carriers.

I'm not familiar with Ebony 8x10 cameras. So, I can't say whether they're up to the task. But if not, I would look further than currently sold Arca Swiss for something that is.

[Torontoamateur]

I use the Arca Swiss F Line with 171 . It is light and portable . Very stable I have Sinar F and P2 and Wisner and have had Cambo, B&J and Deardorf. ALL in 8x10 My go to camera is the Arca Swiss. Hands down.

[Torontoamateur]

The Arca Swiss does well in the studio and in the field, It is just a fantastic camera. The P@ is for extreme studio work when movements are needed. I kept the Sinar F just because. The Wisner is for showing off for formal portraits . People like the wooded an brass with Burgundy bellows for show. Generally I use the Arca Swiss as much as all the rest put together. I have the basic set up F Metric without the special adjustment thingy. It works just fine. Well actually Fantastically. I have had this 20 years and have no complaints. I use it for the 120MM Nikkor up to the 480mm Rodenstock. My fave is the 240mm Rodenstock. With that it is like a giant but friendly Leica with 35mm Summicron. Best to get one and try it out. They are rare and definitely hold value. The Ebony has far fewer movements but is elegant. If you do not li thkee Arca Swiss I am sure you can resell it easily.

[John Layton]

I would find this choice impossible...and would sell a kidney to have both!

[r.e.]

It sounds like the actual options that you're considering are a used Ebony and a new Arca-Swiss, and that the price for each is about the same. On the face of it, the price equivalence doesn't make a lot of sense, which was the reason for the first question that I asked in post #2. You've since clarified that the used Ebony comes with additional components that interest you and that you're talking about a new Arca.

I would suggest that you phone Arca-Swiss in Besançon, France. The phone number is readily available. Ask them whether there's an Australian dealer, and whether they can give you the name/co-ordinates of one or two Australian photographers who have one of their 8x10 cameras so that you could check one out in the flesh. With respect to any reservations about 141 standards for your needs, I would suggest that you contact Ben Horne. He's in a position to give you some additional, hands-on advice.

Re Mark Darragh's post... There isn't much on a 171 camera that is both unique to that camera and that can go wrong. There are at least three makers of 171 lens boards, and the boards are also pretty readily available second-hand and sometimes as new old stock. Arca-Swiss is out of the business of making 171 parts, but it will make some. I don't think that parts availability is a significant issue.

That said, I don't understand the idea, floated in later posts, of passing on the Ebony, a brand that you know and apparently like, in the hope of finding a used 8x10 Arca. It's not like they come up on eBay every week. I don't think that an 8x10 F-Line has been offered on this forum for ages. There is what appears to be a very active German dealer who might have a line on one, as might the U.S. Arca-Swiss dealer Rod Klukas. Given that you live in Australia, it's probably also worth finding out about possible sources in Asia if second-hand is the route you want to go.

[Tin Can]

The Ebony will increase in value

[Rod Klukas]

Hello Craig.
I recommend you to buy a used 171mm F line classic 8x10.
I assume you want to use old brass lenses with the new camera to buy and to do wetplate in the field??
I don’t recommend the current 141mm system if you want to use large fast brass lenses which have 100mm or larger diameters of lens elements.

But 171mm system is discontinued so if you can’t find a 171mm f classic then 141mm f classic is the next buy imo.

Neither dynamic nor micrometric orbix hold heavy brass lenses upright, say heavier than 1.5kg.
F line classic has the rear rise but metric models don’t.
I think the rear rise is convenient for 8x10 portrait.
Another model which has the same rise is 8x10 misura but the set comes with the short optical bench meaning less bellows extension and no tilt/swing/shift? on the rear and it has dynamic orbix.
The misura is great for compactness and rear frame rigidity to assure both frames parallel to each other. It’s a compromise model and it is offered only with 141mm front frame.
Other rear frames with classic or metric function carriers have weaknesses in this respect, which are wobbly and you have to be careful with the bellows extension is well enough with bellows draw when using long focal length lenses.

If you use the camera with modern lenses mostly then the current 141mm f line metric model with micrometric orbix is nice and you can buy the f classic front frame later as you need for heavy brass lenses.

I don’t have any experience with Ebony 8x10 cameras.

Actually the Metric does have rear rise now, though not geared. The 141 series also there are adapter boards for smaller lenses as well. We make 141 to 110x110 lens boards, and SK Grimes makes fine 141 to Linhof Tech, etc, though the tech boards are small for 8x10. The rear light trap hole is quite close or too small for many 8x10 lenses. I am not sure what wobble Mr Hayashi is speaking of , but if the focus locks are locked after adjustment/focusing, there should be no wobble. If you have questions I am always available for email, Zoom, etc.

[r.e.]

The Ebony will increase in value

How many people want a custom 9x11 back and four 9x11 holders?

[neil poulsen]

I've had many 8x10 cameras that include Sinar, Burke and James, Oschwald (older style) Arca Swiss, Kodak 2D, and even a Bender Kit camera, a Kodak Master, etc.

The best 8x10 that I've owned was an Oschwald era Arca Swiss that was designed from the ground up as an 8x10. It had an oversized rear function carrier to support the extra weight of the 8x10 format frame. (In fact, it was one solid piece.) The front risers were extra tall, so that after raising the format frame to be on axis with the rear 8x10 format frame, there was length remaining for plenty of additional rise. Let me say that this camera was rock solid. I sold it, because I've generally been downsizing in 8x10, and I didn't need a camera with bag-bellows capability. Here's the listing.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?165704-Custom-Arca-Swiss-quot-A-quot-8x10-Camera-w-Bag-Bellows&p=1617761#post1617761

I should clarify a little. The front standards sold with these cameras were designed for 8x10 (unlike the currently sold version), but I purchased mine with a front standard intended for 4x5. So, S.K. Grimes custom made the risers for the camera shown above, and they did a stunning job. Their risers were even better than those originally sold by Arca, because Adam made them 50% thicker. They worked beautifully. Strong, and very smooth. They were a bit expensive, but worth it.

If I were in the market for the type of camera that you've described, this is the direction that I would pursue. And, probably at substantially less cost than the two options you're considering now.

[John Layton]

Hmmm...maybe both kidneys - and kick some of the funds back for a portable dialysis machine! :rolleyes:

[Bernice Loui]

This plus how and where these larger lenses will be used should be one of the prime requirements that drives camera choice. Will the camera of choice have enough stability and rigidity to properly support the largest lens in mind or in the future? Will the camera of have enough bellows and camera extension to accommodate all lenses to be used?

If these larger lenses are in barrel, what kind of shutter? Could be as simple as the lens cap to a Sinar digital that goes 1/500 sec to seconds.

What about camera accessories like bag bellows, filter system, extensions for camera/bellows and ease of availability. One thing to see a catalog item, can that item be had and with what effort and cost?

Then comes camera support ala Tripod and tripod head. Stability and adjustability are as if not more important than camera alone.

There is definitely a user experience tied to camera and all combined with producing the image and the experience tied to producing that image.


Bernice




I do need stability for large lenses.

[agregov]

I have an Arca F-line C 4x5 (110 standard/orbix) with 5x7 and 8x10 conversion options (171 front standards/non geared). I would agree with the notes on rigidity, that in comparison to the 4x5 and 5x7 setups which are rock solid IMO, I find the 8x10 setup not as rigid. The Arca 8x10 rear standard is heavy and has a higher center of gravity (given its size), so the rear function carrier has a tougher time keeping the rear standard as rigid than smaller format Arcas. Note, I am using collapsible rails, so they may not be quite as sturdy as a telescopic rails setup for 8x10. Also, do think about how much rise you might need. For example, 4x5 C model doesn't have enough rise for architectural subjects with the 110 front standard (141 would be better in this example). If you did need a bigger front standard, I do not believe finding a 171 front standard for 8x10 would be that difficult. Then all you would need is the right bellows to attach to the 171 front frame. I would talk to Arca directly if you have specific needs. While they may not make new 171 parts any longer, they may be able to track down a used 171 front frame for you. And if they no longer sell the right bellows, I'm sure Custom Bellows in the UK could make you one. One final note, depending on how you like to work, the geared 8x10 version in the Arca line can be nice when working with long lenses under the darkcloth. Rise/fall/tilt can be done easier one handed with 450mm+ lenses. Note, the geared option will be heavier camera. As always, it's about tradeoffs.

I do not have experience with the 8x10 Ebony. One thing that hasn't been noted in the thread yet, if you plan on using the camera mostly in the field, the Ebony would likely fit more camera bags. The Ebony folds up into a square. The function carriers + rail make the Arca have a larger footprint collapsed which makes fitting it in some backpacks more difficult. Also, one bonus to using a smaller front format frames with the Arca, is lenses are easier to pack. I use 110 lens boards (since I need them for my 4x5) with an adapter for the 171 boards on the 5x7 and 8x10 conversions. S.K Grimes made me a 171 board converter, works great. Note, I use lighter lenses which cover 8x10. I don't have experience using heavy lenses with smaller lens boards.

Ben Horne would be great to chat with 1:1. He has a lot of experience with both cameras in the field. I do agree with others in the tread, it would be great to try out each camera before buying.

[r.e.]

if they no longer sell the right bellows, I'm sure Custom Bellows in the UK could make you one.

A participant in this forum was able to order a 171 bellows from Arca-Swiss last summer. Custom Bellows can certainly make an Arca-Swiss bellows, but you have to supply the bellows frames. It doesn't make or sell frames. There's also a Hong Kong maker of 171 bellows with frames. Bernice Loui started a recent thread about this company's bellows. One person who ordered an Arca-Swiss bellows from Hong Kong has told me that he's quite happy with his. The company sells via eBay and from its website eTone Photo (https://www.etonephoto.com).

[Rod Klukas]

The 171 series are OK, but they are a little heavier. No new bellows from Arca-Swiss or 171 frames are still available.

Also almost as hard to find a 171 series 8x10, as it is to find a 141.

I do have the cameras in stock like I sold to Ben Horne with a 15cm and 40cm rail, and MicroOrbix tilt.

Again any questions I am around.

Rod

[r.e.]

No new bellows from Arca-Swiss or 171 frames are still available.

You told me the same thing last summer when I asked you about a 171 leather bag bellows. A few days later, a European participant in this forum told me that Arca-Swiss was making him one. Fortuitously, I was able to purchase one second-hand (photo below) and didn't have to pursue it.

225593

[alan_b]

Don’t let availability of bellows in a particular size combination turn you off Arca, if it turns out that’s what’s most suited to you. Bellows are available from other parties as noted above. Frames aren’t exactly rocket science - I’ve made them with a router from a sheet of ABS plastic. A machinist or 3D print service would have no problem.

[Jim Becia]

Craig,

As someone who used an Ebony 8x10 RW I can give you my thoughts on it. I used the RW for over ten years and it was my go to camera. I loved the ease of set up and use. If ease of use and a quick setup are important, the Ebony will beat the Arca Swiss. I know, I have photographed next to a few photographers using the Arca Swiss and it simply takes more time to set it up and break down. (That certainly doesn't mean the Ebony is better, it's just the Ebony is easier to set up.) It is rigid enough for lenses up to the 450/480 length. It easily handled my 3 pound Nikkor 150SW. Never any problems at these lengths. That being said, I really never had a problem using my Fuji 600C with the camera either. Yes, you have to be careful in the wind when the camera is fully extended, but I would think that fairly normal with any 8x10. The main reason I sold my Ebony last year simply came down weight. I think the Arca Swiss has the Ebony beat on this and is lighter. Having just turned 70 I thought shaving several pounds off of my camera pack made sense, so I bought the Chamonix Alpinist which is a great camera in its own right, lightweight, rigid, did I say lightweight? Loved my Ebony and was sorry to see it go, but the Alpinist is slowly making me forget about the Ebony. Jim

[mhayashi]

Hello, Rod!
Good news to know the metric models now have the manual rear rise!!
I pm’d you about the part by FB.

[Rod Klukas]

Neil,
The cameras did lose some rise when the 141 8x10 was designed. However, first, an indirect displacement would cure that issue except with the misura. However, we have now produced a front block after discussions, as mentioned by Neil above, that can be inserted under the front frame and give back the formerly lost rise ability. So no issues any more with losing rise. The block can be left installed.

I have used up to the 360mm Apo-Sironar-S, a large lens, to say the least, with no issues.

As of 2021 this block has been included with the camera.

I hope this helps.
Rod

[Rod Klukas]

You told me the same thing last summer when I asked you about a 171 leather bag bellows. A few days later, a European participant in this forum told me that Arca-Swiss was making him one. Fortuitously, I was able to purchase one second-hand (photo below) and didn't have to pursue it.

225593

If that really happened I stand corrected, as I was told that the 171 frames were no longer available and there are no 171 Leather bellows or any 171 bellows available. Your European friend must have some pull.

Rod

[r.e.]

If that really happened...

If you like I'd be happy to post the e-mail exchanges that I had about this with you and the forum member in Europe. In any event, @alan_b makes a good point (post #24), and there are third party makers (post #21).

[Rod Klukas]

NEW Notice.

The 072050 was a leather bellows 171 series and it is available on request ( price $593 ) but only in Synthetic bag style.

072050 and 072051 catalog numbers were merged but i don't know when (see attached picture)

072050 folded leather as depicted, in the 171 catalog is no longer available.

See link below.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/q6bjszt11n0wozz/Arca-Swiss%20171%20wide%20angle%20bellows.pdf?dl=0

This should clarify.

Rod

[Drew Wiley]

Such different animals! I personally can't imagine being without BOTH a 4X5 basic RW Ebony folder and a full monorail system (Sinar in my case). When it comes to 8x10, however, the problem became more narrowly defined because I've been a backpacker my whole life, and portability-wise, an 8X10 folder has just made more sense, plus the fact I bought a very early Phillips 8X10 remarkably cheap. If it were later on, I would have no doubt pounced on the RW Ebony 8X10 when they were briefly offered at quite reasonable cost; but I simply don't need two 8X10's. If I did, I'd simply add 8X10 conversion components to my Sinar Norma system. But I'm not a studio photographer, and approaching 73, don't think I'll be upping the ante in backpack weight. Happy with the Phillips.

So far, I haven't seen a clue exactly how the two camera options in question might be predominantly used. Field and travel logistics can be quite a bit different from studio applications. Also, what about repair and maintenance issues down the line? Monorails get repaired mainly through component replacement (if such parts are still available when needed); repair of wooden cameras is more analogous to a skilled cabinet shop task.

[Rod Klukas]

If you like I'd be happy to post the e-mail exchanges that I had about this with you and the forum member in Europe. In any event, @alan_b makes a good point (post #24), and there are third party makers (post #21).

R.E.

You are correct. I went back in the email and found the thread, but they did not clarify fully to me until today. So there is a current, though bag type, 171series, wide angle bellows available.

Thanks for catching for me. If I had not asked again, I might not have gotten the answer we need.

Be well,

Rod

[neil poulsen]

The 171 series are OK, but they are a little heavier. . . .

One reason I like the 171mm, is the extra side-to-side distance that it offers around the 4x5 format. There's less likelihood that light can reflect off the bellows onto the film and cause flare. I find that reassuring . . . . . because, I HATE FLARE!

[neil poulsen]

I've had many 8x10 cameras that include Sinar, Burke and James, Oschwald (older style) Arca Swiss, Kodak 2D, and even a Bender Kit camera, a Kodak Master, etc.

The best 8x10 that I've owned was an Oschwald era Arca Swiss that was designed from the ground up as an 8x10. It had an oversized rear function carrier to support the extra weight of the 8x10 format frame. (In fact, it was one solid piece.) The front risers were extra tall, so that after raising the format frame to be on axis with the rear 8x10 format frame, there was length remaining for plenty of additional rise. Let me say that this camera was rock solid. I sold it, because I've generally been downsizing in 8x10, and I didn't need a camera with bag-bellows capability. Here's the listing.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?165704-Custom-Arca-Swiss-quot-A-quot-8x10-Camera-w-Bag-Bellows&p=1617761#post1617761

I should clarify a little. The front standards sold with these cameras were designed for 8x10 (unlike the currently sold version), but I purchased mine with a front standard intended for 4x5. So, S.K. Grimes custom made the risers for the camera shown above, and they did a stunning job. Their risers were even better than those originally sold by Arca, because Adam made them 50% thicker. They worked beautifully. Strong, and very smooth. They were a bit expensive, but worth it.

If I were in the market for the type of camera that you've described, this is the direction that I would pursue. And, probably at substantially less cost than the two options you're considering now.

I believe the above to be the best Arca Swiss option.

However, it should be considered that the only Oschwald era 8x10 bag bellows that I've run across on EBay is the one shown in the images. They're rare. An alternative is to find a standard Oschwald 8x10 bellows for the frames and send them to Custom Bellows to have a bag bellows made.

The primary difference between Oschwald and currrent Arca Swisss cameras is that the former cameras rely on seals to maintain a light tight camera. It's not really an issue, other than a little extra care needs to be taken to maintain their integrity.

[Craig Tuffin]

Thank you everyone for your input!

You're correct that I didn't add any information as to the cameras primary application because it changes from field to studio quite often.

The bellows availability isn't a concern. Keith from Custom Bellows in the UK has been making bellows for my cameras and enlargers for many years, so I can reach out to him if I need to.

Just to round off this thread, I've decided to go with the Ebony. I can always move to the Arca later if I want/need to but the Ebony cameras tend to be kept by photographers that own them, so I don't think I'll have the option to buy one in the future. I've had some great personal experiences shared with me via PM with no negative feedback in regards to the Ebony system.

The Ebony comes with the standard 8x10 back as well as the custom 9x11 (with film holders). The 9x11 format intrigues me for my urban landscape daguerreotypes. If I later decide the format is not for me, well I can simply sell of the back and holders.

Once again, thank you all for the experiences you've shared.

Craig

[Rod Klukas]

Such different animals! I personally can't imagine being without BOTH a 4X5 basic RW Ebony folder and a full monorail system (Sinar in my case). When it comes to 8x10, however, the problem became more narrowly defined because I've been a backpacker my whole life, and portability-wise, an 8X10 folder has just made more sense, plus the fact I bought a very early Phillips 8X10 remarkably cheap. If it were later on, I would have no doubt pounced on the RW Ebony 8X10 when they were briefly offered at quite reasonable cost; but I simply don't need two 8X10's. If I did, I'd simply add 8X10 conversion components to my Sinar Norma system. But I'm not a studio photographer, and approaching 73, don't think I'll be upping the ante in backpack weight. Happy with the Phillips.

So far, I haven't seen a clue exactly how the two camera options in question might be predominantly used. Field and travel logistics can be quite a bit different from studio applications. Also, what about repair and maintenance issues down the line? Monorails get repaired mainly through component replacement (if such parts are still available when needed); repair of wooden cameras is more analogous to a skilled cabinet shop task.

Drew,

The great thing about the Arca-Swiss 8x10 is that it does pack well. While also lighter than the Sinar, or the Ebony, it also can be collapsed on a 15cm/6" monorail for back packing or storage or shipping. and the rest of the camera is about 3" thick. It is modular down to 4x5, so that is why the front is smaller as the 4x5 would be bulkier to pack with extended front frame rails. Contrary to Neil's assertion that the 171 front was an 8x10 design it was just that size carrying over from the ABC cameras. The 4x5 classic had the same front and rear,. The 141 series 4x5 carries the design philosophy over with the classic 141 Camera, or 4x5 Metric, as well.

Remember that design wise the standard lens board for the geometry to be correct with movements is the 13mm recessed 171 lens board. Not the flat board of the Oschwald/ABC Arca-Swiss cameras.

But all of us has our personal needs, so one camera does not necessarily fit all.

Be well,

Rod

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks, Rod. I admit I rarely ran into Arcas in the field, if ever. Sometimes other Sinar users, but of the ridiculous Sinar P mentality fumbling around five yards from their van, saw lots of 4X5 wood folders; nowadays, almost nobody else with large gear. I'm personally a long lens type, and seldom shoot wide, in LF at least. So even with 4x5, I consider 18 inches of rail my norm; but that of course can be reconfigured if needed. Unfortunately, with climate change issues causing a lot of weird wind storms in normally calm seasons, it's been difficult to use the 8X10 many instances I've been out in the past two years.
I've been forced into quickie MF gear quite a bit, ironically atop an 8x10-worthy tripod to prevent the whole thing blowing over. Have several nice shots of that nature in the print washer right now. Might try again with the 8x10 tomorrow. Thanks for helping folks with their needs. And it's nice to know Arca is still in the game.

[r.e.]

Great that Craig has made a decision. I just want to make a general comment on 171 and 141 Arca-Swiss cameras.

I have a 171 Arca-Swiss F-line, but I don't feel religious about it. As a practical matter, if you want a new F-line, it's going to be a 141. If you want a second-hand camera, they are not plentiful on the market. I wouldn't approach purchasing one on the basis that it "must" be 171 or "must" be 141, at least not unless that question is so important to you that you're prepared to pass on an Arca-Swiss camera indefinitely. That's also why I said (post #13) that I didn't understand the idea of passing on a real offer of an Ebony, a camera that Craig has used and likes, against a theoretical offer of a second-hand Arca-Swiss. Both cameras are uncommon on the market, and if I thought that I'd be happy with either, I'd purchase whichever comes up first.

[Ari]

Thank you everyone for your input!

You're correct that I didn't add any information as to the cameras primary application because it changes from field to studio quite often.

The bellows availability isn't a concern. Keith from Custom Bellows in the UK has been making bellows for my cameras and enlargers for many years, so I can reach out to him if I need to.

Just to round off this thread, I've decided to go with the Ebony. I can always move to the Arca later if I want/need to but the Ebony cameras tend to be kept by photographers that own them, so I don't think I'll have the option to buy one in the future. I've had some great personal experiences shared with me via PM with no negative feedback in regards to the Ebony system.

The Ebony comes with the standard 8x10 back as well as the custom 9x11 (with film holders). The 9x11 format intrigues me for my urban landscape daguerreotypes. If I later decide the format is not for me, well I can simply sell of the back and holders.

Once again, thank you all for the experiences you've shared.

Craig

Hi Craig,
I agree with your choice, and I would never opt for wooden cameras.
In this case, given the two cameras up for grabs, I'd have chosen the one that opens and closes quickly: the Ebony. I don't know if that was part of your decision.
I've never owned an Ebony, but I have owned an 8x10 Arca. It was a combination of some older and newer components.
While it was a great system and camera, very steady, I had to build it each time I took it out of the bag, then take it apart when I was done.
Some parts had to be stored separately, other parts could fold up with the camera. In the end, it got annoying.
I now use a Wehman, which folds up into a clamshell, and setting up takes seconds, as does tear-down. No extra parts to keep handy or forget.
Use the Ebony in good health!

[Rod Klukas]

With an Arca-Swiss 8x10 collapsed onto a 15cm/6" rail, it was way faster than any would 8x10 for a ful featured and full lens range camera to setup. You set your tripod where you want to shoot from. Mount the base rail. pick up camera on 6" rail and slide in and lock. Scroll front forward ont to other 40cm rail in my setup and mount lens ---ready!