PDA

View Full Version : Arca-Swiss F line 'Field' or Ebony SW45s?



barryp
15-Jun-2007, 08:39
Hi all,

Firstly, apologies for another newbie 'which first camera?' thread.

I am deliberating between the Arca-Swiss F line 'Field' (which is an F-Line 6x9 with a tapered bellows and a 4x5" back) and the Ebony SW45s as my first LF camera:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/385415-REG/Arca_Swiss_012545_4x5_F_Line_Field_Monorail.html

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=2310

I am interested in these 2 cameras particularly due to their wideangle capability. I will be shooting landscapes only, with a plan to eventually have a 4 lens system (65, 90, 150, 240).

Questions:
1. In real world use, can either camera utilise full movements at both the 65mm and 240mm lens range?
2. Which would be easier to set up and which easier to focus?
3. The Ebony is appealing because it is relatively light but it only has front/back 'centre' tilt whilst the AS has 'base' tilt. Can I assume base tilt is preferable for landscape work?

Any advice or comments from those who are familiar with either camera, or both, would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Barry

ljb0904
15-Jun-2007, 09:52
Hi Barry, I'll help how I can.

First have you use large format before? I'll repeat what everyone says. Go rent a system first if you haven't. If you have, do you really want to spend that much money? You can drop less than a $1000 for a Tachihara, Shen-hao, or a used Toyo AX (at about $1000) and have lots of money left over for further photography expenses (scanner, drum scans, prints, printer, show displays, film, processing, etc). Unless you're going to do close-ups or shallow DOF work, I haven't found precision movements to be the limiting factor in using a LF camera.

That being said, I have the AS field and I love it. It's easy to use, not too heavy (considering I was thinking of moving to a 6 lb field camera) and the movements feel very good in the hand. The basic collapsable rail that comes with the setup is _just_ long enough to focus my Fuji 240 at around infinity. If you want closer you _will_ need to get an extension rail.

I also use a tachihara and can honestly say the two advantages of using the AS are: mental and back-focussing. Other than a couple of images I've made, the tachi is more than enough camera for most work in landscape. But for close up work, back standard focussing is really helpful.

I don't have any experience with the ebonies, except to say they are nice cameras and have more movements than you can shake a stick at. I think you would get used to axis tilt for near/far focussing.

Take what I say with a grain of salt, I've been using my 4x5s for only a year and got the AS a couple months ago.

Have fun
Laurent

JPlomley
15-Jun-2007, 10:10
I had an Ebony SV45TE for a few weeks, then swapped it out for the Arca Swiss F-Field camera. The Arca is more rigid, the focussing mechanism is smoother (and has friction control), when unlocked the standards can be moved and they stay in position-no need to focus-lock-tilt-lock-refocus...you can avoid the locking steps altogether (until the end), there is a scale on the monorail making focus spread determination straightforward, the OEM screen is MUCH MUCH better than the Ebony (prepare to replace the Ebony screen with a Maxwell for about $275), the MicroOrbix option gives a front axis tilt which is geared, the standard bellows on the Arca is almost a bag bellows which allows lenses from 45mm to 360 mm to be used (i.e. no having to swap bellows), and the swing and shift are decoupled. On the Ebony swing and shift were coupled such that when the lever was loosened, the entire rear standard would sag, meaning that after the swing movement was detemined, the focus would be lost when the standard was re-tightened. This drove me nuts and was a serious point of contention. There are several other issues I had with the Ebony, however, I do not wish to start a bashing session. There are a lot of users that seem to get on fine with them. They are a beatiful piece of craftsmanship, but in real world shooting, I found them to be just too finnicky to be practical.

O.K. I know I'm going to get nailed by all of the Ebony fanatics...:eek:

Ted Harris
15-Jun-2007, 10:21
Before the Ebony folks chime in let me add yo jeff's post that it will depeend a lot on what you want to shoot. Keep in mind that your first LF amera is very seldom your last and that eitehre one of the mentioned cameras is ery much overkill for most landscape shooters. I strees most because it isn't true for all. If you have never been out in the field with a LF camera then renting, if possible, is a great idea. Going to a workhop where you can experiment, is another.

Frank Petronio
15-Jun-2007, 10:44
smells like a troll...

Herb Cunningham
15-Jun-2007, 10:46
I have owned three Ebony's two Arca's. I still have the Arcas. the ebony RW would have to be my favorite for landscape IF I only wanted to use from 75mm to 250mm lenses. It would cover those with no problems, it is light, cheap (for an Ebony).

I suggest you get your hands on one or the other for a trial. Maybe a used one from one of the dealers who will take it back after 30 days-most will.

There is no perfect camera. You can drive yourself nuts with gear choices. Main thing is what kind of prints you make.

Jack Flesher
15-Jun-2007, 10:55
You've gotten good advice already above, but I'll add my two-cents since I own both an Arca and an Ebony. FTR, the Arca I own is the F-Metric with Orbix (front orbital/axial tilt) and the Ebony is the 45SU. My main lenses are similar to yours: 65, 90, 150 and 300.

Your questions,

1) The 65 SA allows like 3mm of movement before you run out of IC on 4x5. EITHER camera will allow for infinity focus plus 3mm of rise or the tiny bit of front tilt you can get on a NORMAL lensboard. HOWEVER the base-only tilt of the Arca classic combined with its thicker, stiffer 141x110 leather bellows (the 141x141 Metric has a very flexible synthetic bellows) will create problems as tilt also adds extension between the standards with forward tilt, and you have precious little room with the thicker bellows to move the standards back closer together. So IF you choose the Arca, I'd be sure to at least get one with Orbix, especially if you plan on using wide lenses and tilt a lot. Lastly, the 45S has the standard bellows and it is also stiffer than the 45SU's "universal" bellows, so it may inhibit front motion with shorter lenses. SO here I would suggest at the very least getting the Universal bellows if you choose the 45S. In truth, the 45SU is probably more ideal for your stated uses -- more on this in the next questions...

1a) The Arca or the Ebony will be fine with the 240, both allowing for reasonably close focus.

2) The 45S is already "set up" since you don't have to fold it, so it is fast. The Arca is fast too, especially if you leave you base clamp on your tripod and just slip the main rail into it. But the 45S/SU are the fastest here.

2a) Focus... Both focus similarly. Orbix on the Arca and the axial tilt on the 45S makes any tilt focusing a *lot* faster in the field over base tilt, IMO. You can get there with base tilt, just faster with axial since the standards stay at relatively constant separation. HOWEVERBUT!!! The 45SU (and all other assym Ebony's) with its assymetric rear tilt and swing make field focus an absolute breeze in the "real world" field environment. With it, there is no going back to fine tune focus after a tilt or swing -- used properly, you focus, tilt or swing, lock down and shoot, period. (For more detail on this, search the Ebony website.) By comparison, with axial or base tilt, there is almost always some touch-up focus adjustment required after the tilt or swing.

3) Not really, see above. However, base tilt has it uses... A common wideangle landscape scenario would have the camera angled down to include a foreground element along with the distant. Here you can focus on the far, then "pull" the top of the back toward you using base tilt. This accomplishes extending the PoF as with a front forward tilt and serves double-duty as bringing the rear standard back toward level, which in turn lessens perspective distortions. But it also spreads the standards a bit more than needed and requires a focus touch up. Regardless, pulling the back with base tilt is another viable field focus technique. Of course this same thing can be accomplished quite similarly with rear axial tilt, though it doesn't spread the standards enough and usually requires a focus touch up in the other direction. OTOH, again the Ebony assymetrical rear tilt when used properly eliminates the need for any focus touch up...

In conclusion, either camera will be a great first choice, but an Arca with Orbix or Ebony with assymetric rear movements will make your life easier and probably be a lot closer to your "ideal" camera.

Cheers,

JPlomley
15-Jun-2007, 13:07
Going to a workhop where you can experiment, is another.

I would like to add that specifically going to Ted's workshop helped tremendously in finalizing my decision about both camera and lenses. I learned more from Ted in two days than I ever would have learned on my own in probably two months. I also took a one day introductory workshop with Rob Skeoch and was hooked right away. I highly recommend both of these top drawer instructors. Sure workshops are a bit of money that might be hard to justify when first starting out since the temptation is to buy first and then learn. But the way I look at it is that I have saved money in the long term by not wasting as much film making newbie mistakes, and I nailed down the best equipment for my requirements early in the game. In my experience, workshops also help expedite getting over that initial steep learning curve so that one can get on with the huge enjoyment factor associated with LF imaging. Not to mention they are just plain fun!

JPlomley
15-Jun-2007, 13:24
One thing I did fail to mention is that Ebony support was first rate as I was trying to work through some of the issues I was having. In the end it was just not the right camera for me.

If you end up buying an Arca Swiss, I can highly recommend Rod Klukas at Photomark. For something specialized like this, deal with someone who knows what they are doing. Rod knows this product inside and out and is usually very well stocked. B&H is fine for buying digital phooey, but my dollars go to the smaller specialty shops where I can call anytime and speak with an expert. There's a lot to be said for building a good relationship with your dealer (Rod actually sent along with my camera a great article he wrote for students that attend his workshop-it was the best primer I have ever read).

Jack Flesher
15-Jun-2007, 13:55
I meant to add one more comment to my already too-long post above:

If I personally had to choose only one camera for field work with 4x5 film, it would be the Ebony 45SU.

/

barryp
16-Jun-2007, 07:37
Thanks to you all for your comments.

Unfortunately, there is not much opportunity here in Australia to try LF cameras before you buy and very few workshops so all your comments are much appreciated. I plan on buying from the US (probably BadgerGraphics) but I don't think many US stores would ship overseas with some type of 30 day trial deal (though I haven't asked!).

Jack Flesher, thanks to you in particular for clarifying some focusing issues for me. I didn't realise how helpful (though not essential) assymetrical tilt/swing could be to not have to refocus, especially for those times when you need to work quickly in the field due to the changing light conditions. For landscape photograhy, this would prove invaluable to me and perhaps sway me from purchasing something cheaper like a Shen-Hao (which previous threads suggest is a worthwhile purchase and a bargain!).

Re: folding cameras like the Shen-Hao or the Ebony RW45, are such cameras so much more time-consuming to setup in the field and can they for instance be packed with lens attached?

Any other comments in general also appreciated.

Thanks.

Brian Ellis
16-Jun-2007, 08:01
"Can I assume base tilt is preferable for landscape work?"

I can't help with your camera choice because I haven't owned either camera (I've owned two Ebony cameras, neither of which I cared for very much, but they weren't the model you're considering). But to answer your tilt question - you can use either but I find axis (center) tilt easier to use for landscape work because it usually requires fewer "compose - tilt - focus - recompose - tilt again - focus again" iterations.

Bob McCarthy
16-Jun-2007, 09:02
For field work, a folding camera is the "nuts".

Why not a late model Technika.

Tough, very well built and will handle your lens choices easily. Monorails are super, but for field work with a limited lens range, you can't beat a folder.

Bob

Scott Rosenberg
16-Jun-2007, 10:22
having owned ebony's, arca swiss f-lines, and technikas, i could not agree more with what bob said.

for field work i have found no better camera than the technika. if you're going to be doing backpacking, you'd be well served to look into a late model technika.

scott

Ted Harris
16-Jun-2007, 12:42
Jeff, thanks for the kind words above. If my rapidly filling fall schedule is any indication, you're in growing good company. Many of our colleagues, experienced and newbie alike, seem to feel that one-on-one or small-group workshop situations are the biggest bang for the buck they can spend on advancing their knowledge and skills. I personally love these sessions, because customizing them to my visitor's interests and needs means every one of them is unique in some fashion, and that makes them fun for me too.

Steve Penland
16-Jun-2007, 19:09
I'll second what Jack Flesher had to say about the asymmetric movements on the Ebony. I recently switched from a non-asymmetric to asymmetric (SV45U), and I'm very happy with the difference (despite the added cost).

barryp
16-Jun-2007, 20:38
having owned ebony's, arca swiss f-lines, and technikas, i could not agree more with what bob said.

for field work i have found no better camera than the technika. if you're going to be doing backpacking, you'd be well served to look into a late model technika.

scott

Scott, I don't know anything about Linhofs and whether they can handle a 65mm lens with movements. Do you recommend a particular Technika model?

Scott Rosenberg
16-Jun-2007, 22:39
lots of great info here... http://www.cameraquest.com/techs.htm

i would look for any model later than a mark III. my master tech 2000 can handle all my lenses... from a 58 on a flat board to a 360 on a flat board to a 450 on an extension board.

my previous tech, a super tech V, was also excellent, though couldn't go as wide. it could handle my 75, but much smaller required a recessed board or a special wide angle device.

feel free to shoot any more questions my way on or off the forum.

scott

Frank Petronio
17-Jun-2007, 10:03
Just to further complicate things, for real backbacking where weightreally is a critical issue, all of the camera mentioned have more heft than is necessary. It might be more practical and economic to get a superlight backpack camera like an Ikeda or a Toho monorail -- and to get a fully featured solid camera for studio, car, and general shooting. In which case a Sinar P or a nice Linhof monorail would be the bomb...

(I just use a Technika because it is bombproof but it is also quite hefty for hard backpacking.)

Jack Flesher
17-Jun-2007, 11:05
Again, it is all personal preferences, these are all very capable cameras. And like has been stated, there is no single, perfect solution. And another big second to what Ted said -- your first choice will not likely be your last!

Re Tech's, I like them, but I also like to use rear shift and rise to tweak compositions -- and it's pretty tough to do that with a Tech ;)

Scott Rosenberg
17-Jun-2007, 12:27
jack is 100% right... the Achilles heel of the tech is the rear movements. with practice, tilt and swing are simple but rise and shift are not possible. everything is a compromise, and for me the loss of these movements was a minor nit, as i never miss them. i happily gave up those movements for the other benefits of the tech - rock solid even when shooting a 450mm, very compact, quick to setup, all metal construction, virtually break-proof, etc. the tech has what i need and does all those things very well... where it's lacking are things i can easily do without (full rear movements). so for me, it's really the ideal solution for backpacking, but as they say, ymmv.

barryp
17-Jun-2007, 18:16
Thanks again to you all for your comments. This thread has really helped me. I have also read quite a bit since I posted this thread and have calculated costs... My original choices in this thread are great cameras but the costs involved in purchasing accessories (meter, film, lenses, darkroom equipment etc) to get started is skyrocketing. So I have no choice but to either buy used or cheaper...I may end up sacrificing assymetrical tilt/swing and buy a Shen Hao, which seems to have just about everything else going for it. I am also considering the Toho just for the weight issue though other threads suggest this camera is better suited for longer lenses only. I'll do some more reading before I put down the cash!
Thanks again.

Eric James
17-Jun-2007, 18:29
The RW45 or RW45E is a nice way to go but you'll struggle with the 65mm. I use my E with a 90mm, 110mm, 150mm, 240mm, and 300mm. It's light and small, and I wish I had the SV45U2 or the Arca of discussion only ~20% of the time.

Frank makes a good point about weight/size - the weight adds up very quickly with an extra kg here and there; the next thing you know the pack's too heavy to really enjoy your hike on the way to your tripod holes.

Lots to think about for sure...

Frank Petronio
17-Jun-2007, 18:39
FWIW you could get an awesome Sinar F2 outfit capable of handling any lens, for $1000 or so. And you can find a nice Ikeda wooden folder for $750 or so... so for the fraction of the cost of an Ebony or Arca...

neil poulsen
17-Jun-2007, 19:14
One thing I've found convenient with an Arca is that you can use lenses up to 210mm, or at least 180mm, with the bag bellows. Depending on how often you use your 240mm, selecting the Arca could reduce the number of times you need to swap bellows. The wide would work well for 65mm, 90mm and 150mm. On those occassions that you need the 240mm, you would need to swap.

Others know better at what focal lengths one needs to swap bellows for the Ebony. Can one get decent movements with a 90mm using the standard bellows?

AJSJones
17-Jun-2007, 19:45
Others know better at what focal lengths one needs to swap bellows for the Ebony. Can one get decent movements with a 90mm using the standard bellows?

Just happened to ask myself that question the other day - with my Nikon SW-90, I could easily get 50mm rear cross/shift in either direction with the standard bellows that come with the 45S. The back will do +/- 60mm but the bellows couldn't get out of the way with the 90. The lens is running out of covering power by then anyway, so instead of 4x10 coverage (like with my 210 or 300), I could only get 4x8 or so with the 90. For the front, I found the covering power limits the movements before the bellows with the 90 (covering power 105 degrees at f/22; image circle 235mm)
Haven't explored the 45SU yet, but maybe Jack can help

Andy

Scott Rosenberg
17-Jun-2007, 20:03
Others know better at what focal lengths one needs to swap bellows for the Ebony. Can one get decent movements with a 90mm using the standard bellows?

one of the things i love about the techs is being able to shoot from 58 to 450 without changing the bellows... i know changing the bellows on the arca takes but a second, but it's one more thing to carry and sure opens the camera up for all sorts of stuff getting into places when the wind is blowing.

barry, used technikas can be had very reasonalby. a super tech V should run you pretty close to $1kUS.

scott

Jack Flesher
17-Jun-2007, 21:46
Andy, I have not owned my 45SU much longer than you have owned yours, so a relatively new tool for me as well. I have not tested all of its limits directly, but have not run into any limitations yet either. However, I think I remember reading it has a slightly larger bellows than the 45S (or was it the the 45SW?), so it might allow a bit more shift with your 90SW.

Scott, a FWIW regarding the Arca standard bellows... On my version Arca with the new style 141x141 standard synthetic bellows, I can focus a 47XL at infinity and a Fuji 450 to about 15 feet using flat boards -- actually flat Tech boards in a stock Arca 141 to Tech adapter board. Granted, the 47 just makes infinity and would certainly be better in a 10mm recessed board or with the bag, but it will make it with the flat board/standard bellows. With my 65SA, I have enough bellows flex to add rise or shift to the edge of the IC (on both cameras); not very much movement required for that, but all I can use with that lens anyway... Never had a problem using my 90 SA either (again, either camera), but mine is the f8 version.

If I wanted to hit the edge of the IC with a 72 XL with either camera, I suspect I'd need to use the bag...

Cheers,

Scott Rosenberg
17-Jun-2007, 22:29
good info, jack. i've never used the newest synthetic arca bellows... sounds like it's capable of an incredible range!

just for barry's benefit, don't think i am down on arcas... quite the opposite actually. I’ve had three of them and i think they are the finest all around cameras available today. if i didn't do a lot of backpacking with my gear, the f-line that jack describes is hands-down the camera i'd use. however, I find that the linhof, albeit with limited rear movements, is a bit more compact and easier to hike distances with.

Ted Harris
18-Jun-2007, 04:46
Noe, Scott's coment on Technika rear movements. I find them a real PITA but that is just me.

turtle
18-Jun-2007, 08:03
Some not so accurate info being banded about here esp ref the Ebony...

This is the SW45 he is referring to Not the 45s. The SW has 180mm of bellows only and needs a top hat for a 200/210. It is therefore not an ideal combo to use a 240 on without the long top hat extension or extension back.

Shot lenses. The SW45 is as good as it gets for a fast ultralight field field camera, but it lacks all round qualities. The bellows are MORE flexible than the universal as they have very loose pleats and are ULTRA flexible along their entire length. more like skin than bellow and you can move them about however you like. I owned the RSW45 (same camera with front only movements and no swing). I could get a touch of rise and tilt with care using a 47 SA on a flat board. 65mm lens no problem!!!! The 45s is a touch more expensive but a far better allrounder IMO. 270mm bellows meaning the 240mm lens is fine. Still eats up wide lenses but prob not so hot with the 47s and 58s if you are looking for lots of movement. Bet it still has no trouble for 65mm and field use on flat panel.

The poster is coming new to LF. The wide angle non folding Ebonies are plenty rigid enough for field use, fast to set up, light, intuitive and have in general all themovements you need for landscapes. Nothing comes close in my experience in the reals of wooden cameras. I personally would not even remotely comtemplate a monorail at at double the size and weight for landscape use. More knobs, buttons, bits sticking out etc. The SW45/45s will fit in the small ORION TREKKER!!! I used my RSW45 with spotmeter, 3 lenses, Readyload holder, film, Ebony lightweigh darkcloth etc and it weighed very little. I could set it up in 15 seconds. If you like walking about lots without strain and sweat and sometimes like to work really fast look no further than the non-folding Ebonies. If you want ultimate rigidity and flexibility and dont mind carrying a lot more on your back, being slowed down get a monorail.

There are two sides to every argument, but I am looking to buy a 45S or 45SU as I miss my RSW45 so much for the ultralight set up and pleasure that gave me to be free of big loads. I got mad with the short bellows and so would recommend the 45S or 45SU. You can always order them in Mahogany if you want to bring the weight down even more....

Just remember, one thing that kills peoples love of LF is WEIGHT and SLOWNESS. The non folding ebonies suffer none of these qualities and I cannot recommend then enough.

ljb0904
18-Jun-2007, 09:09
Just two more cents.

The lightest cameras I know come in at just under or over 3 lbs. (My tachi is 3.8) The heaviest camera _I_ would consider for field work, which is all I do, would be 6-7 lbs. My arca comes in at 6-1/4 with the extension rod. The toyo AX is about 6. A wisner is about 6-7?. An ebony sv45u2 is about 7 lbs. I don't know about the technika.

The point is, there's a weight difference of about 3-4 lbs. Whoopty freaking doo. Buy a lighter pack than a lowepro and you'll shave 4-6 lbs. Carry 1 liter less water and carry purifying tablets, you'll save weight. Use QL instead of film holders, you'll save weight.

Unless you absolutely need to pack light for multiday backpacking, the camera is not going to slow you down unless you're hauling a 12 lb monster.

Setup time. If I need to, I can have my arca mounted with lens in about 45 seconds. Most of the time, I take my time and I'm done in about a minute. Get familiar with your camera, that will take care of your speed issue. My tachihara takes about the same amount of time, if not longer (as did my experience with a shen-hao), because you have to draw the front standard out and lock it in the tracks and center the thing. The arca is already centered (if you put it away properly).

Just pick a camera and go make pictures. If you run into limitations, sell it and get one that does the job. And have fun with it!

Jack Flesher
18-Jun-2007, 09:45
Some not so accurate info being banded about here esp ref the Ebony...

This is the SW45 he is referring to Not the 45s. The SW has 180mm of bellows only and needs a top hat for a 200/210. It is therefore not an ideal combo to use a 240 on without the long top hat extension or extension back.



Uh, to be perfectly accurate, the OP stated SW45s -- a camera that does not exist. Since he mentioned the 240, I suspect most of us assumed he meant the 45S -- I know I did.

To clarify my earlier points, the SW45 and 45S both use a smaller diameter bellows than the 45SU and SV45 cameras; ergo, a larger bellows should allow for a bit more shift movement before the bellows gets in the way. I am also unclear as to whether or not the bellows on the 45S and SW45 are even changeable to a bag -- and I don't see a bag bellows option listed for them -- while one most certainly is available for the 45SU. Not claiming this makes it a better choice, just a different one, especially when the assymetric rear tilt and swing are factored in. Add weight and cost to the calculation and one can better draw their own conclusion...

Lastly, there IS a very clean 45S for sale in our very own Buy & Sell forum at a good price from an honest member... Hard to get much easier than that if you're looking!

Cheers,

Eric James
18-Jun-2007, 09:50
Uh, to be perfectly accurate, the OP stated SW45s -- a camera that does not exist...

The SW45S does exist - it's a special order hybrid. See his Badger link.

Jack Flesher
18-Jun-2007, 10:16
Thanks for pointing that out Eric, my bad. But it appears to essentially be a 45S without rear swing or shift, so my comments re the comparison the the SU should hold...

turtle
19-Jun-2007, 01:25
With the SW45 and RSW45 the bellows allow for far more movement that you are ever going to need in the field. Even for architecture you are unlikely to run out. I could get enough rise using a 65 that the floor entirely vanished well before I had to stop...No bag belows is available because none are needed with the exception of someone wanting to make lots of movements with an original (non-XL) 45. Whack on a recessed panel with the 47XL and you have all the movements you could need. These cameras are specifically designed for wide angle use and the bellows are soft enough to move almost like a bag. I got no snagging due to size.

The arguments about weight saving suggest that one cannot make similar weight savings elsewhere while also carrying a lighter camera. I am 6ft 1, 30ish and military fit. I notice when out all day carrying an extra few pounds. Bags are bulker for bigger cameras. there is less room for survival kit etc if out in the cuds. One cannot suggest that the extra weight of the monorail is not an issue. It is there, altho everyone has a difference tolerance to it. This is not an issue for those working within a few miles from a car but for those who might walk 10 miles up and down steep gradients, 4llbs makes a noticeable difference by the end of the day. As for bulk, you can wander about cities all day with a handful of small lenses and an SW or 45S in a small bag that remebles everyone elses rucksack. It is therefore practical/unencumbering in a way that a monorail cannot ever be.

I am not saying that this option is better than the monorail, but please monorail users dont try to suggest that there is not much difference in portability, speed, convenience etc. It is equally obvious that the monorail has more flexibility in a multi task capacity. I hear people time and time again saying the same things.....the heavier camera is no issue if you strip naked to save weight, throw out half your lenses, only use readyload etc....Everyone is entitled to their opinion but we must compare like with like. Those paltry 4 llbs spoken of equate to a lot of other non -photo gear which some - not all - might find essential. It also equates to a lot of additional lenses, film, holders, more stable tripod etc, should the user wish to forgo the weight saving, which you can never shed if your only camera is heavier. Jack Dykinga (sp?) is a fan of the monorail, but then again he does not travel light with his either. when he wished to do so, he turns to a different camera altogether.

Jack Flesher
19-Jun-2007, 07:50
I am not saying that this option is better than the monorail, but please monorail users dont try to suggest that there is not much difference in portability, speed, convenience etc.

Turtle, please don't generalize about monorails -- it is clear you have never used a modern Arca monorail in the field and are not familiar with how they work... When used properly, it is a very fast camera to set up from out of the bag, to on the tripod, to lens mounted and ready to shoot. It accomplishes this faster than a typical field folder and essentially as fast as any non-folding Ebony with a QR plate mounted. As for portability my Arca 141 F-Metric is SMALLER in the bag than my Ebony 45SU.

Cheers,

PViapiano
19-Jun-2007, 09:19
Exactly my experience with the 45s...so quick to set up and very light in the pack. I love this camera...



Some not so accurate info being banded about here esp ref the Ebony...

This is the SW45 he is referring to Not the 45s. The SW has 180mm of bellows only and needs a top hat for a 200/210. It is therefore not an ideal combo to use a 240 on without the long top hat extension or extension back.

Shot lenses. The SW45 is as good as it gets for a fast ultralight field field camera, but it lacks all round qualities. The bellows are MORE flexible than the universal as they have very loose pleats and are ULTRA flexible along their entire length. more like skin than bellow and you can move them about however you like. I owned the RSW45 (same camera with front only movements and no swing). I could get a touch of rise and tilt with care using a 47 SA on a flat board. 65mm lens no problem!!!! The 45s is a touch more expensive but a far better allrounder IMO. 270mm bellows meaning the 240mm lens is fine. Still eats up wide lenses but prob not so hot with the 47s and 58s if you are looking for lots of movement. Bet it still has no trouble for 65mm and field use on flat panel.

The poster is coming new to LF. The wide angle non folding Ebonies are plenty rigid enough for field use, fast to set up, light, intuitive and have in general all themovements you need for landscapes. Nothing comes close in my experience in the reals of wooden cameras. I personally would not even remotely comtemplate a monorail at at double the size and weight for landscape use. More knobs, buttons, bits sticking out etc. The SW45/45s will fit in the small ORION TREKKER!!! I used my RSW45 with spotmeter, 3 lenses, Readyload holder, film, Ebony lightweigh darkcloth etc and it weighed very little. I could set it up in 15 seconds. If you like walking about lots without strain and sweat and sometimes like to work really fast look no further than the non-folding Ebonies. If you want ultimate rigidity and flexibility and dont mind carrying a lot more on your back, being slowed down get a monorail.

There are two sides to every argument, but I am looking to buy a 45S or 45SU as I miss my RSW45 so much for the ultralight set up and pleasure that gave me to be free of big loads. I got mad with the short bellows and so would recommend the 45S or 45SU. You can always order them in Mahogany if you want to bring the weight down even more....

Just remember, one thing that kills peoples love of LF is WEIGHT and SLOWNESS. The non folding ebonies suffer none of these qualities and I cannot recommend then enough.

ljb0904
19-Jun-2007, 09:39
Turtle, I think you misunderstand me. I actually don't care what camera you or anyone else uses. I'm just trying to tell my experience and my experience tells me I'd prefer to load up an extra 2.5 lbs to use the 6.25lb Arca over my 3.8lb Tachihara. I've carried the Arca for 50 miles in one week, and, yes, I was tired. I would have been tired with the Tachi too. My pack weight is around 35 lbs. If 2.5 lbs is going to kill me, I'm already carrying too much for a 10 mile day. I'm 5'10 and 160 lbs. I find the Arca just as easy to use as the Tachi and also the Shen-Hao I used.

I'm just giving my data points. If you are a fan of ebony, great. I like them too. All the models look to be fine cameras. I checked out the RSW45 at badger and was very pleased with it. I've played with a friends sv45ti and liked it enough that it was the camera I was going to buy until I played with an arca. My thoughts, and I don't expect them to be important to anyone but me.

Cheers, and good luck

Greg Miller
19-Jun-2007, 10:03
Turtle, please don't generalize about monorails -- it is clear you have never used a modern Arca monorail in the field and are not familiar with how they work... When used properly, it is a very fast camera to set up from out of the bag, to on the tripod, to lens mounted and ready to shoot. It accomplishes this faster than a typical field folder and essentially as fast as any non-folding Ebony with a QR plate mounted. As for portability my Arca 141 F-Metric is SMALLER in the bag than my Ebony 45SU.

Cheers,


I agree with Jack. I was faster with my Arca Swiss Field from bag to initial set up almost from day 1 (compared to my Horseman 45FA). And I am much faster with movements. So total set up time is much faster with my monorail. Convenience is also much better with the monorail because all movements are much more logical (to me) and with much greater range and flexibility.

Jack Flesher
19-Jun-2007, 10:34
Convenience is also much better with the monorail because all movements are much more logical (to me) and with much greater range and flexibility.

Great point Greg: What many folks fail to consider when comparing a monorail to a field camera, is most of the knobs/levers for the normal movements at one standard are identical to the knobs/levers and associated movements on the other end. They also tend to have more bubbles to confirm level from various locations and tend to have more generous movements in general.

I'm not saying this makes a monorail a better choice than a field camera, because other personal-choice factors enter into the equation; what is important to some may be frivolous to others and vice-versa. It's why Ted shared the sage, "your first camera will likely not be your last" and why a lot of us own more than one ...

Cheers,

Daniel Geiger
19-Jun-2007, 10:35
I own a newer F-line with 110 boards. First camera, never tried it before, love it, won't change it (3 years). Suggestions as to start with an intro camera may work for some, but it may be just an unnecessary intermediate step, i.e., a waste of money in the end.

The modularity of a monorail is a major asset. You want some different function? Get the piece that provides it. No need to buy a whole new system.

Portability is no problem, IMHO. Particulary if you rather specialize on short lenses than on long ones and close ups, so hardly any need for the longer (heavy) extension rails/bellows. See on the LF home page my pack for the AS 4x5 to get an idea.

Given that you do not have anyone to chat with down under, I trust you have read a few books on it. Drynska (however you spell him), Stroeble, Simmons come to mind.

turtle
19-Jun-2007, 11:04
Just two more cents.

...

The point is, there's a weight difference of about 3-4 lbs. Whoopty freaking doo. Buy a lighter pack than a lowepro and you'll shave 4-6 lbs. Carry 1 liter less water and carry purifying tablets, you'll save weight. Use QL instead of film holders, you'll save weight.

Unless you absolutely need to pack light for multiday backpacking, the camera is not going to slow you down unless you're hauling a 12 lb monster.

...
Setup time. If I need to, I can have my arca mounted with lens in about 45 seconds.



Your post above made it clear that you were making certain definitive statements which is what I responded to. I totally agree about many of the points many have made about the benefits of monorails and yes I have used them, but not the new Arcas. Personally I would not dream of using on in the field, but we all work differently.

I am not taking anything away from what your percieved benefits are but think the above post neatly disposes of the fact that there are differences in weight and speed as I mentioned, which you may compensate for. You suggest they are trivial but to many they are not. I had not attempted to do this with respect to the monorail benefits, merely to point out that you might not care about ditching water, changing bags etc to shave weight, but others may and your approach evidently is in response to the greater weight to which I refer. For many people, especially if you live somewhere where light changes lightning fast (like N wales) 15s vs 45 can make a LOT of difference.

The differences between the SW45 or 45SU and a monorail are unchangeable, only our perceptions. You shedding other kit does not change the fact, as I pointed out that the Arca does weigh more and does take longer to set up as you yourself admit.

Your methods may suit you, but if someone shoots mono and switches to packet film (to save weight), choices are so limited that unless shooting Tmax100 or Acros already he has to learn a new film...change bags...carry less water....

If one extends your argument ...Slightly more kit will only ever be slightly heavier.

I am sure the poster can decide how to pack and what he or she wishes to carry and the compromises on what to leave behind. The only way to keep things objective is to present the facts as they are without trivilising them. They are what they are.

Jack Flesher
19-Jun-2007, 11:09
The differences between the SW45 or 45SU and a monorail are unchangeable, only our perceptions. You shedding other kit does not change the fact, as I pointed out that the Arca does weigh more and does take longer to set up as you yourself admit.


Where does he say it takes longer to set the Arca up? I missed that...

Re weight, my Arca 141x141 is 1 pound heavier than my 45SU.

Eric James
19-Jun-2007, 11:14
I own a newer F-line with 110 boards...See on the LF home page my pack for the AS 4x5 to get an idea.

That's a great article and you certainly have a kit to envy. I wonder just how convenient it is to shoot with long lenses - with the long bellows, 25cm extension, extension support, bellows support, and added weight of carrying these things. The OP doesn't seem interested in long lenses - I'm asking for myself. If you go from shooting wide to shooting long, how long does the change over take? Do you find yourself opting for shorter lenses to avoid the change over?

Jack, How do you pack/protect your 45SU non-folder in the field? Do you believe that it is more-vulnerable to damage than a folder?

I'm a bit surprised at the price of the 45SU, compared to the SV45U2 for example. These camera are roughly the same price but I would guess that the materials used and work involved in producing the SV cameras is greater, despite the similar functionality. Maybe functionality is a major determinant in their pricing.

turtle
19-Jun-2007, 11:25
Oh come on this is getting silly. OK Jack, go on, pick the heaviest of the Ebony non-folders at 2.6 kgs, where the SW45 is 1.4 (nearly HALF the weight). The 45SU was also NOT one of the cameras the poster asked about.....If one wants to save more weight one can always get them in mahogany which brings the 45S to about 1.7kgs I believe.

If you really want to argue the toss....you can focus the Sw45 hyperfocally with a 90mm/110 and thump it straight on the tripod and go click...and pack it away the same way and repeat where time is pressing for a grab shot. This should not turn into a pissing contest but really....If you can do that with your Arca by all means keep aguing the toss...Do you need to change bellows for ultra wide (time)? You dont on the non-folder ebony. Again, this is not to say this should be important to you but it does exist a fact.

You can argue all you like that the Arca is really no heavier (despite being 2Kgs heavier than the SW45) and that it is really no slower to set up...despite the fact that the SW45 requires no unpacking because it does not fold....and despite the fact that users on this same thread say it takes about 45 seconds (where the SW45 is essentially instant). Maybe it was not the poster I referred to, but another.

BTW this is not because I am an Ebony devotee especially (I dont own one at present but may well do so again). I bought my Walker XL 5x7 non-folder precisely for the same reasons I am pointing out now. Te same reasons in fact that they were concieved and are selling so well to people who want speed and light weight (at the expense of versatility)

If Jack Dykinga finds all these issues so trivial, why does he use a wooden folder for his lightweight kit...he must be mad?

You are confusing opinion with objectivity. The weight and speed is fixed whether it matters to you or not. please continue to tell me that the Arca really is not heavier and no slower. I am happy - and have been all along - to concede that the Arca is more flexible because there is no point in arguing the inarguable is there Jack?

Jack Flesher
19-Jun-2007, 11:38
You are confusing opinion with objectivity. The weight and speed is fixed whether it matters to you or not. please continue to tell me that the Arca really is not heavier and no slower. I am happy - and have been all along - to concede that the Arca is more flexible because there is no point in arguing the inarguable is there Jack?

Uh, I was agreeing the Arca is heavier than the Ebony... !

But to be clear, set-up speed is no different at all, at least for me. Both cameras come out of the bag and need to be installed on a tripod, then extended to focus the lens on them. That is an equivalent action with either camera IF the Ebony has a QR plate and your tripod has a QR head (mine do). IF it doesn't, you will spend more time screwing your Ebony to the tripod head than I will mounting my Arca to the QR clamp. Furthermore, if the lens is not mounted, the Arca may gain an additional speed advantage as the lensmounting is a one-handed press-in snap-fit, while the Ebony requires two hands; one to hold the lens, the other to operate the lock. I respect however, that there may be some issue somewhere in that process that doesn't work for you.

:),

Jack Flesher
19-Jun-2007, 11:59
Jack, How do you pack/protect your 45SU non-folder in the field? Do you believe that it is more-vulnerable to damage than a folder?


Hi Eric:

I do feel the fixed Ebony is potentially more "fragile" in the pack than the Arca and certainly more than a folder tucked away in its clamshell. I say potentially because I have never had an issue with my 45SU. The issue is that the standards cannot be easily pressed close enough together to support each other unless you fully collapse the front 4th extension on the 45SU. In this, there is space between the standards where an impact or continued pressure could bend or otherwise cause damage to a standard. (The sw and s don't have that 4th extension and I do not know whether or not they can be compressed to the point where the standards support each other in standard trim.) I currently use my darkhood as a pad to help support the space between the standards when the SU is laid in the pack, and this has worked well for me so far -- but I make sure nothing is packed on top of it either. Alternatively, I often carry the SU in a normal Domke shoulder bag (the bigger J1), resting on its base with a lens attached. (FWIW, two additional lenses, holder, 20 sheets of readyload, spotmeter and loupe all fit easily.) In this configuration it is easy to access as I don't have to take off the backpack first; just set the bag down and go. (BTW, this works with for you Arca shooters too, I just store the Arca collapsed and top down instead of resting on the narrow base rail. Makes it easy to remove this way too...)

As a sidebar note, if I were to collapse that 4th stage on my SU for storage, I would need to extend it on use and that would very clearly make the Ebony 45SU a bit SLOWER to set up than my Arca (:D :D :D)

Cheers,

Eric James
19-Jun-2007, 12:01
Thanks for the detailed answer (and sidebar:)) - that's just what I was looking for!

turtle
19-Jun-2007, 13:06
As for protection, they are not that vulnerable, say unless you fell on your bag and it was not well padded and robust. I usually used a warm layer such as an additional fleece to drop on top, but to be honest it was not a majo concern. If travelling without a padded bag it is more of an issue.

When carrying my RSW45 3 lens kit in an Orion Trekker (the smaller version with soft top and padded base) the camera went in the top with fleece and light meter and readyloads, with the lenses and filters in the base. Perfect for hiking and wandering country lanes. because of the light weight the kit is in many repsects not very vulnerable as you dont find the bag heavy enough to be destabilising (like my 10x8 kit can be on uneven ground). I would consider getting the biger orion trekker variant if I get a non folder again for a slightly more extensive kit. Might even be able to fit in the 5x7XL....

The non folders are naturally stronger when fully compressed than when left focused, say for a 90mm. With the bellows compressed they are pretty solid, with the main issue being sharp things that could damage the (albeit compressed) bellows.

Miguel Curbelo
19-Jun-2007, 14:17
To the original poster: FWIW, I have an Ebony SW45 that I use professionally for architectural photography. Regardless of any comparisson to an Arca, it is (very) light, rigid and compact. When shooting landscapes, the SW45, three lenses, focusing bellows and quickloads take no more space and weigh no more than my Hasselblad + 3 lenses + prism outfit, and it only takes a few seconds more than the Hasselblad to have it on a tripod and focused. It focuses all the range of lenses from 47mmXL to 180mm on flat lensboards and with the widest lenses (47, 58mm) its their image circle, not the bellows, that impose any limits. A 65mm lens is easily used. Lensboards are the ubiquitous Linhof type. It really is a lovely architectural/landscape camera.
I'm sure Arcas are as well.

barryp
20-Jun-2007, 05:46
What a thread!

I certainly wasn't expecting such passionate (heated even) discussion! The 2 cameras I originally mentioned were not intended to generate a monorails vs woods/ arca vs ebony dichotomy. So apologies for this.

The decision I need to make is whether to start on an entry level camera (such as the Shen-Hao) to experiment with LF so I don't invest too much money initially and perhaps only consider a higher end camera such as the 45SU or an Arca down the track. It seems that many of you (but not all!) move on from the Tachi or Shen Hao to more 'refined' camera systems after a certain period of LF learning.

I started digital photography 4 years ago with a Canon 1ds, which was the digital flagship at the time. Not because I wanted the most expensive digital toy but I wanted particular features (such as a FF sensor, bright viewfinder etc) which didn't exist in other cameras. I bought used but it was still expensive. However, in the 2 years I had this camera I believe I learnt more about digital photography than I would have if I had started on a lower end model such as a Canon 10D.

With this argument in mind, I will do my sums and work out if I can afford a mid-high end Ebony (the 45SU looks to die for on paper, but more realistically the 45S based on your recommendations as a more all-rounder than the SW45) or the Arca Field. I don't think I could justify more than $3000 as my first LF camera, given that I need to purchase so many add ons (lenses, meter etc).

Thanks again. I love this forum! Very informative.

Barry

turtle
20-Jun-2007, 10:33
If you buy used and wisely you can get your money back and upgrade should you feel the need.