PDA

View Full Version : strengths/weaknesses of Arca Swiss Field and Ebony 45SU?



sung
7-Aug-2007, 07:12
Hi all,

Yet another newbie post. Apologies.

I've narrowed down my first camera purchase to an AS Field or Ebony 45SU (expensive taste, I know!).

From my readings, both cameras can handle similar focal length lenses and weigh about the same. I will be using the camera for landscape mainly and some architecture/ urban landscape.

My preferred lens range is 72-240 (300mm if possible).

Questions:
1. Does the Micrometric Orbix on the AS function in the same way as assymetrical movements on the Ebony?
2. Is it correct that this function is on the front standard of the AS but on the back of the Ebony? Does this make a difference?
3. Is it easier to focus using one system or the other?
4. Which camera would handle the wider lens better? Does the Ebony need a bag bellows for this? I'm assuming the AS doesn't.

5. Is the camera weight an issue for daytrip backpacking? If so, would I be better off with my alternative choices (a Toho or Wista DX)?

Thanks.

Sung.

Walter Calahan
7-Aug-2007, 08:02
I own an AS field, and have never used the Ebony 45SU.

Both are wonderful cameras. Each solves problems in their own unique way. Other one is better than the other is a long winded discussion that probably has no end.

I highly recommend you look over these cameras in person if you can. What I like with the AS may piss you off.

For day trip backpacking, the way the AS disassembles for packing is a real plus. You can pack it in many ways. But that means you must reassemble it in the field. The Ebony stays in one piece, so is ready quickly in the field.

The AS can be extended beyond the Ebony for very long glass by adding rails and extended bellows. But since you are shooting with a 240mm (300mm possibly) this is not a feature that is important.

There are many cameras far lighter in weight than both these cameras for backpacking.

Good luck. Best to try them out before buying if this is an option.

Jack Flesher
7-Aug-2007, 08:20
Hi all,

Yet another newbie post. Apologies.

I've narrowed down my first camera purchase to an AS Field or Ebony 45SU (expensive taste, I know!).

From my readings, both cameras can handle similar focal length lenses and weigh about the same. I will be using the camera for landscape mainly and some architecture/ urban landscape.

My preferred lens range is 72-240 (300mm if possible).

Questions:
1. Does the Micrometric Orbix on the AS function in the same way as assymetrical movements on the Ebony?
2. Is it correct that this function is on the front standard of the AS but on the back of the Ebony? Does this make a difference?
3. Is it easier to focus using one system or the other?
4. Which camera would handle the wider lens better? Does the Ebony need a bag bellows for this? I'm assuming the AS doesn't.
5. Is the camera weight an issue for daytrip backpacking? If so, would I be better off with my alternative choices (a Toho or Wista DX)?

Thanks.

Sung.

Answers:

1) NO! 2) Yes and yes. 3) Yes and no. 4) The Ebony will handle the 72 a bit better with the standard bellows than the Arca, though either camera really needs the bag bellows for full movements with that lens. 5) Both cameras are of very similar size and weight, and I have packed both easily; both are fast to set up, though the Ebony is faster.

First off, congratulations! You have picked two very capable cameras, really the best of the breed for 4x5 and my personal favorites, though they are very different to use in the field. Also, I would STRONGLY recommend the Arca classic or F-Metric over the field, but definitely get one with Orbix. The Arca Field (and Misura) camera has it's total rise capacity severely impaired by the smaller front standard compared to the standard "classic" or F-Metric. The weight savings is trivial compared to the advantage of the added movement IMO. (For folks that primarily do landscape or don't need the added rise, or can live with doing indirect movements to get it when needed, the lighter weight is probably a large enough benefit to consider the Field.) In either case, the Ebony has a lot more rise, which can be beneficial for architecture.

Orbix is a front standard axial movement and Ebony's assym is a rear standard movement. They are very different to apply in use. The Ebony is easier to get accurate scheimpflug movements with fewer iterations right out of the gate. However, if the back is anything but perpendicular to the ground, you will have projection distortions which are a bad thing in many images, like architecture (though you rarely use tilts in architecture, more often swing and rise). So the fix with the Ebony is to transfer the tilt angle on the back after the initial scheimpflug to the front standard and return the rear to zero, then check total focus. With the Arca, you would add the tilts initially up front, and with experience it is not much slower than with the Ebony, but generally requires at least one additional iteration. Before you gain experience however, front or rear axial tilts can be frustrating ;)

All that said, given the range of lenses AND applications you described, I would think the 45SU a slightly better choice than the Arca. (FWIW, the 45SU has enough extension to easily handle a 300 and focus it close. It will even handle a 360 to about 30 feet.)


Cheers,

Doug Dolde
7-Aug-2007, 08:47
A couple observations from someone who has owned both, I prefer the Arca Swiss Field and that's what I have now,.

I find the geared focusing of the Arca Swiss much more precise. The Ebony is a littlle sloppy as are most wood fields.

For Scheimflug movements, I like the Arca's Orbix better than Ebony's assymetric back tilt. I found the Ebony to "stick" a little when tilting the back..there's one spot where it doesn't want to work right. By comparison the Arca's geared Orbix is Smoooooth.

Unless you want to replace the fresnel/ground glass with a Maxwell, the Arca Swiss screen is much better out of the box. I had a Maxwell on the Ebony and have one on the Arca as well. It does even out the playing field for that aspect.

I use a 300mm lens on my 141mm Arca Swiss Field by plugging in a 15cm rail extension. To go any longer I'd need to get the 50cm bellows and an even longer rail. But 300mm is long enough for me as I don't really like ultra long lenses on 4x5.

The Ebony is probably a little lighter and a tiny bit faster to set up though in real world use the difference in set up time is not an issue. Weight might be though if you are into long treks with it on your back.

Sheldon N
7-Aug-2007, 11:02
Here's a recent thread that discusses many of the issues surrounding the Arca and the Ebony (both 45SU and other models).

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=26496

I personally have an Arca Swiss 4x5 Field, and enjoy it tremendously. I considered the Ebony, but decided that my tastes lined up more with the ethos of the Arca's modular monorail design. I upgraded from a wood field (Wista DX) so the idea of another wood field camera was less appealing to me.

Rory_5244
7-Aug-2007, 20:23
I have an Arca F-metric 4x5 with an 8x10 conversion set. I only use the 8x10 these days. I kinda wish that tilt was geared (I don't have Orbix) but that's my only complaint. I think the Arca is my first 'transparent' camera. That is, it is so well designed and easy to use that it's almost like it's not there. I just concentrate on getting the picture right without fumbling around trying to operate the camera. I don't know how else to explain it. At the opposite end of the spectrum is my Canon EOS 3. No matter how I try, that camera is always getting in the way of my taking pictures. I hate that blinkin' camera.

nicol_verheem
7-Aug-2007, 20:43
I have an Arca F-metric 4x5 with an 8x10 conversion set. I only use the 8x10 these days. I kinda wish that tilt was geared (I don't have Orbix) but that's my only complaint. I think the Arca is my first 'transparent' camera. That is, it is so well designed and easy to use that it's almost like it's not there. I just concentrate on getting the picture right without fumbling around trying to operate the camera. I don't know how else to explain it. At the opposite end of the spectrum is my Canon EOS 3. No matter how I try, that camera is always getting in the way of my taking pictures. I hate that blinkin' camera.

Funny; I have both the AS 4x5 and the EOS3. The first for about 2 years, the second for it seems like 6. I find the EOS3 very transparent, much easier than wifey's digital rebel thingy. The two things I still repeatedly screw up on 4x5, polaroids or not, is rise to much on WA lenses, and bellows factor on macros. D'oh !! On the EOS3 I arrived at 0 mistakes (not to be confused with 0 bad pictures!) after about 3 years. Guess I need another year...

sung
8-Aug-2007, 05:36
Thanks for your helpful comments. :)

I am leaning towards the Arca, mainly because so many people comment on their precision.

If I may, two final questions:
1. Does one of these cameras better handle a 6x9 RFH with the lens range 58-180mm? Or am I better off purchasing a 6x9 camera (AS 6x9 F Metric Compact) instead for this purpose?

Thanks again.

Sung

Herb Cunningham
8-Aug-2007, 06:02
I have had both, prefer the Arca. I did not need the asymmetric feature of the 45su ver much, and I found the arca easier to work with.

I think the only drawback for Arca is it is bulkier in a backpack. Both weigh the same. I also prefer the 171 fronts to the smaller ones.

Buy used if you can. I have an old 5x7 that I dearly love.
The orbix is very nice. I added that to my used F line.