PDA

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



audioexcels
22-Nov-2007, 06:11
Still no luck finding an Arca, but I've decided to post a little question to help me about the history on these cameras as well as the one that will suit me the best.

NOTE: If there is "any" other camera to be recommended that would be the equal of the Arca, please feel free to chime in!

I want a "very light" setup. My format will be Whole Plate or something around there...I may even decide on 5X7 in spite there's an amazing surge of 8X10 interest happening as of late. I have decided 8X10 is going to weigh too much as a hiking format unless I find that lonesome Toho I gave up buying way back...uhhh...I think it's the only one I'll ever see so past, present, forward looking, Toho doesn't look too hot as an option.

I know Arca systems can be made light. I have spoken with many knowledgeables on the camera system and by using a custom back and the smaller front standard, one can really trim down the pounds. Afterall, isn't that what we are all trying to do in the good ole' US of A?

Cameras I have been looking at include the Discovery, F-Line Classic, F-Line Compact, and the 6X9 that has the F-line accessories.

My requirements are these:

1) NEEDS to be as light as possible

2) This camera is going to be built out with a custom back, so I want to start with the very best option for me based on what I can afford and so forth.

3) I'm willing to use "any" other camera that would be the equivalent to an Arca with respect "only" to my essential needs=similar weight to Arca, similar movements/precision/control/etc....So if you have a camera in mind that would do the job equally well and fit the budget, that would be great!


So onto the Arca questions and these also apply to any other camera, if they can be applied to it (see requirements above).

1) What are the primary differences between the older Arcas which include anything other than-vs. the newer F-line Classic, Compact (is this the 6X9?) and the 6X9 models?

2) I have heard many discuss the Discovery as being most of what an Arca F-line B model is. However, this B model is also outdated. Where does the Discovery fit into the equation when comparing it to "any" of the newest models mentioned above?

3) I ask question 2 because "if" I were to select the Discovery, as some have mentioned, I will soon be wanting to go with the F-line Classic or the Compact, etc. What exactly do these newer cameras do that the Discovery or even the older F-line B model does not do and given I do want to keep a budget, but can splurge enough on the used market to go with one of the newer models, which would be the best choice...again, keeping all things in consideration=needs to be very light for field/travel use, excellent versatility/movements/precision. Just want to make the right choice the first time so I do not regret later.

4) This is somewhat in reference to question 3 and it may even answer questions I am asking, but at the same time it does not. I still feel it is a relevent question: I see Kerry upgrading and upgrading over time his Arca cam...first it starts out with the old school style Arca stuff...then proceeds to an F-line type Carrier on the front along with the smaller standard...then proceeds to the Monolith line...He explains that it may seem overkill, but that he also loves the feel of all these upgrades. In spite I am requiring a cam that is going to be one I will live with for a long long time, I am also on the budget system and I believe the Monolith system is much heavier than my goal anyhow, so I didn't bother to mention the Monolith cam. So I suppose this question here is in line with question 3 too much that it is asking the same thing and my ultimate question=

What is the RIGHT system for ME? I am not super picky about having the latest and greatest things such as the Orbix, but at the same time, if I am paying say, $500 more to have a Compact over an F-line B model, then it's not something I am concerned about. If I am paying 2X the price of a $1000 cam (all used market pricing being discussed throughout this thread), then I need to know that $1000 cam is that much inferior to the 2K cam...say, for example, an F-line B model was going for $800, and the New Style Compact/6X9 or even F-Line Classic was going for $1500...would it be worth it to spend 2X the cost of one of these newer models?

I suppose the ultimate question has to be answered, that being, which will be the lightest cam of them all with a custom Whole Plate or 5X7 back on the rear in place of the regular Graflex back, which will be the most bang for the buck without sacrificing critical features I would be willing to pay a little more to have, and then figures can come into the equation.



Thanks all and I hope I didn't make this too congested.

Norm Buchanan
22-Nov-2007, 08:07
Is there any reason you haven't included the F-field in your choices? It is certainly light and as reconfigurable as any other new Arca. It's ideal for backpacking.

audioexcels
22-Nov-2007, 09:28
Is there any reason you haven't included the F-field in your choices? It is certainly light and as reconfigurable as any other new Arca. It's ideal for backpacking.

I think that's the one I meant instead of Compact. Compact is just 6X9 right? If so, The F Field would be in the list, yes.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!!!

Walter Calahan
22-Nov-2007, 12:27
http://www.precisioncameraworks.com/Pages/arca_core.html

Read and learn. I have an Arca Swiss 4x5, but I can't tell you which one YOU should buy.

This is the model I use: http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=11

neil poulsen
22-Nov-2007, 13:10
According to Kerry Thalman in a ViewCamera article, or possibly in a thread, the older models rely on a light seal (foam?) to prevent light from improperly entering into the camera. There are also some incompatibilities, like switching bellows, etc. Although, some lens boards can be used on both the older and newer systems.

If lightness is a consideration, how about a Toho? You can check them out at BadgerGraphic.com. I have an Arca and like it a lot. It's easy to backpack. But, it's not the only camera that's available.

evan clarke
22-Nov-2007, 14:31
I think that's the one I meant instead of Compact. Compact is just 6X9 right? If so, The F Field would be in the list, yes.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING EVERYONE!!!

The cameras are modular with all pieces of the new cameras interchanging. Compact means the configuration is furnished with a folding rail and small tripod mount...EC

Kirk Fry
22-Nov-2007, 15:28
Check this out for light weight view cameras. If weight is the primary concern this is it.
http://www.petergowland.com/camera/ There is a "lite" 8X10 down a bit on the page.
No idea if they still sell these things now that Peter is no longer with us. Check out the photo at the bottom of the page.

K

Kirk Fry
22-Nov-2007, 15:36
OOPS wrong dead photographer, Peter seems to be very much alive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gowland

Sorry,

K

audioexcels
22-Nov-2007, 19:37
OOPS wrong dead photographer, Peter seems to be very much alive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gowland

Sorry,

K

LOL!

audioexcels
22-Nov-2007, 19:40
According to Kerry Thalman in a ViewCamera article, or possibly in a thread, the older models rely on a light seal (foam?) to prevent light from improperly entering into the camera. There are also some incompatibilities, like switching bellows, etc. Although, some lens boards can be used on both the older and newer systems.

If lightness is a consideration, how about a Toho? You can check them out at BadgerGraphic.com. I have an Arca and like it a lot. It's easy to backpack. But, it's not the only camera that's available.

Toho is one as I mentioned in all that cluster of a first post that I wish I purchased when it was on the market (regret it so much still). Toho is a decent option, but not sure how well it can adapt a 5X7-Whole Plate back?

I'm considering any and all cameras that can fit the bill for packing/travel/etc. Just to put more things into perspective, I will use light lenses, or just two-three max for lenses. I am not a person to take 5-10 holders with me unless it is on a trip.

Daniel Geiger
22-Nov-2007, 23:02
It seems you are all over the place. Your target is full plate = 6.5 x 8.5 inches, but you consider anything from 6x9 cm(!) [~2.3 x 3.3 inches] to 5x7 inches, but have ruled out the only solution that could actually accommodate full plate, i.e., 8x10 inches (unless you want to get a custom format frame and custom bellows).
The second question is, why monorail? If you want to use small lenses, this usually also entails small coverage = little movements. So why not a field camera; certainly lighter.
It is pretty straight forward that larger format = more weight. In terms of how rigid you want your system, it may depend a bit on your style. I am quite happy with the classic level. Metric will weight a bit more, and you will gain a couple of geared movements, but certainly a viable outdoor option. Monolith series for outdoors seems a bit overkill. Discovery may save a few ounces, but not sure whether it is worth it.
I do carry an AS 4x5 classic compact outfit with 141 mm frames and quite a bit of add-ons, weighing about 50 pounds without water. You may get it down to 40 pounds, maybe 35 if you go bare bones (3 small lenses, no filters, no extension rails, no tripod head, ...). If you are fixated about the AS as a camera, but have trepidations about the weight, this is a good reason to get into better physical shape. I started hitting the gym and the pool to get more out of my camera hikes.
I think a major advantage of the AS is the modularity. See what you like, modify it if you don't. Let the system grow with your own development. I started with a compact version, but now also have a telescopic rail for longer lenses. I did not go for orbix, and after using it for a few years, do just fine with base tilt. But have been toying with getting the 8x10 conversion kit. Although I also did quite a bit of freeting about the "perfect" set-up when I purchased my starter kit, rest assured, it WILL change. I think the AS is a wonderful system. It was=is my first LF camera, and although most people will say that one will switch cameras particularly early on, I have not seen any need to do that. I have upgraded lenses (e.g., SA 90 to XL), but not the camera.

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

Capocheny
23-Nov-2007, 01:38
Audioexcels,

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

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

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

Cheers

audioexcels
23-Nov-2007, 05:45
Audioexcels,

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

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

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

Cheers

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

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

audioexcels
23-Nov-2007, 06:09
In terms of models, I visualize the AS system as follows:
first, decide on which format (4x5, 5x7, 8x10 ...)
Then think about how rigid you want your system (Discovery, classic, metric, monolith)
Then think about the rail support: compact (= folding), straight rail, or telescopic rail and how long, which needs to be according to focal lengths and magnification.
Then think about potential optional accessories: orbix, different bellows, viewfinder, shade system. Misura and some of the newer models are outside of this type of consideration.
Once you dissected the various components, then the number of available options becomes much more manageable. Also remember, whatever you decide, you CAN change it later.

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

Here's some answers:

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks again!

Ted Harris
23-Nov-2007, 07:14
Surprised there has been no mention of the Toyo VX125. Has all the features of the Arca and perhaps even more flexibility.

audioexcels
23-Nov-2007, 08:23
Surprised there has been no mention of the Toyo VX125. Has all the features of the Arca and perhaps even more flexibility.

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

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

David Karp
23-Nov-2007, 09:27
I went through this decision process recently and purchased a Discovery. The camera I purchased was outfitted with the telescoping monorail, a definite plus over a standard monorail. This allows the user to use one of the 6" sections of the monorail to store the camera in a backback. To use the camera, just slide the short section on to the rail and mount the camera to the tripod head. Another way to store the camera with a standard Discovery with a 30cm rail might be to purchase a 6" extension and leave the camera on it while stored. Mount the standard rail on the tripod and connect the extension.

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

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

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

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

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

Sheldon N
23-Nov-2007, 10:42
Thanks for the kind words Henry, but I'm fresh out of Arcas for sale! I did keep myself an Arca 4x5 Field with 141mm rear standard, telecsoping rail, and Orbix. It's a wonderful camera and I really enjoy shooting with it.

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

There are good reasons to go with an Arca:

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hope this is of some help!

Capocheny
23-Nov-2007, 13:16
Those Canucks are finally starting to show some life;)! I think the Discovery is a nice choice, but I cannot help but think about the other options, especially the Compact that the above poster and another mentioned.

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

Hi AE,

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Apologies for the rant! :>0]

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

Sheldon,

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

Cheers

David Karp
23-Nov-2007, 13:30
One thing to consider: One of my buddies who had an Arca Swiss F-Line (171 version) (and misses it) mentioned that if you ever want to use old brass soft focus lenses the larger size of the 171 lensboards is a plus.

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

audioexcels
23-Nov-2007, 14:23
Thanks for the kind words Henry, but I'm fresh out of Arcas for sale! I did keep myself an Arca 4x5 Field with 141mm rear standard, telecsoping rail, and Orbix. It's a wonderful camera and I really enjoy shooting with it.

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

There are good reasons to go with an Arca:

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hope this is of some help!

This is exactly the response I was looking for, as well as what others have said so far. A question about the rail: What is the telescoping rail and/or what does it look like? One camera I was looking at on the used market was an F-line, but it is not a Classic model. However, when I saw Adorama and this other person's auction, these two F-line models were similar, but different to the one I have been looking at. But when comparing it to the newest ones, and after knowing what the lensboard size is (171), it seems to be something that was just prior to the Classic series as it seems to almost have pieces of the Classic, but does not look entirely similar. Let me show a photo of the rail section and maybe with this poor shot of it, you can make out what exactly it is. See photo attachment.

Thanks Sheldon and others!!!

audioexcels
23-Nov-2007, 14:58
Hi AE,

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

Cheers

Just like the Sharks...they'll likely pick up some key players and try to win it OR just be cheap (I think they have the lowest cap in the league or close to it) and play to lose. This team is a 2nd or possibly 3rd rounder at best. Canucks barely making it looks like a 1st rounder;).

I agree about the scarce nature of Arca stuff and that service for a 5X7 conversion is absurd. I have seen some amazing outfits go on auction in Europe this past month, but the EUR is crazy high and it totally kills any possibility of me contending with the Europeans. They love their Arcas and they bid extraneous amounts in US dollars. And now the EUR is basically 1.5 to the dollar which is 20 cents up from only 3 months ago. Dunno why anyone would consider coming here to live when even the Canuck buck is worth more!!! I don't know what is more amazing to me, the Canuck buck or the AU Buck...they are amazing to me in how much shift they have had...one can say the EUR has done the same and then some, but go back not very long ago and the CAD has really smoked the house on the market.

I think I have to just wait it out and find that Compact or go the Sheldon route and find my pieces as I go. I have plenty of time to find the parts so I can wait.

For anyone interested, there's a Monolith on Ebay right now...But it looks choppy, and has a missing knob. May be good for those looking to upgrade to the Monolith blocks...

audioexcels
24-Nov-2007, 17:34
Anyone want to give it a shot as to what this railing is and what model in the F-line evolution this one would be?

Eric James
24-Nov-2007, 19:32
Sheldon, Thanks for the informative post! Would you mind elaborating on your bellows choice for your 141-110 rig? If I remember correctly you shoot with 90-300mm lenses. I use the same focal-length range, but I would like to extend that range from 75-450mm. Would I need two or three bellows? Can you shoot 90-300mm with a single bellows? Anyone's input is appreciated.

David Karp
24-Nov-2007, 20:10
That rail in the photo looks just like my 30cm telescoping rail.

Norm Buchanan
24-Nov-2007, 20:17
Sheldon, Thanks for the informative post! Would you mind elaborating on your bellows choice for your 141-110 rig? If I remember correctly you shoot with 90-300mm lenses. I use the same focal-length range, but I would like to extend that range from 75-450mm. Would I need two or three bellows? Can you shoot 90-300mm with a single bellows? Anyone's input is appreciated.

Hi Eric,

I have the F-Field (141-110) and I shoot 90-300 with the bellows that came with the camera. I use a 15cm extension rail in addition to the 25cm collapsible rail. I think I am at the limit for focal length for that bellows.

N.

Eric James
24-Nov-2007, 20:41
Thanks Norm,

If I buy an AS 141-110 I think I will get the rail that Sheldon recommends.

Are these 141-110 cameras pieced together or, as you suggest, purchased as a kit?

Could you point toward the product number for your bellows, and where it was purchase?

Eric

Norm Buchanan
25-Nov-2007, 08:21
Hi Eric,

I purchased mine as a kit, but the Arcas are designed to be quite modular, which is one of the reasons I bought one. If you want to piece one together it would be possible, but it might be much quicker to get a kit. I bought mine from Badger Graphics:

http://www.badgergraphic.com/store/cart.php?m=product_detail&p=11

The part number for the bellows was not on the invoice but Jeff at Badger is very knowledgeable and will be able to tell you exactly what you want to know.

Hope this helps,
N.

Robert Fisher
25-Nov-2007, 08:35
Eric, although Jeff at Badger is a great guy to do business with, Rod at Photomark in Phoenix is THE Arca expert (IMO) in the USA. He also actually has Arcas in stock (sometimes).

FWIW, I have had numerous Ebony cameras but my F (141) Metric Orbix is IMO vastly superior in countless ways. Arca's are a joy to work with in the field.

Sheldon N
25-Nov-2007, 09:20
audioexcels -

That rail is the 30cm telescoping rail (as David indicated). You flip the levers show in the photo and each small upper 15cm segment slides in the lower rail track, allowing you to quickly create more extension and then re-lock into position.

The "Compact" designation refers to a camera using the 30cm folding rail, which is limited to maybe 260mm of extension (unless you buy a separate extension rail).

F-Line Classic is the official term, but is often interchanged with just plain "F-Line". The Classic, Basic, Metric designations all refer to the function carriers. Check out the Precision Camera Works website for detail photos of each function carrier. By looking at a picture of the function carrier you can tell what model it is. The one you are looking for (Classic) is the one with the duck-bill style clamp for the shift - same as shown in your example photo.


Eric - I have the stock 110-141mm leather field bellows. They are good for lenses from ultra-wide (47/58mm) all the way out to a 360mm lens. I've measured almost 380-390mm of extension if you go straight with no movements. It would handle a 360mm with limited movements and only distant focusing. A 300mm lens can use basically full movements and focus reasonably close.

The 110-141mm bellows come with 11 pleats/folds in the leather. The older 110-171mm leather "Field" bellows comes with 7 pleats, and is really only good for about 260-280mm of extension.

If you wanted to use a 450mm lens, you'd need to get the 50cm long synthetic "Field" bellows, and swap back and forth in the field. Or, you could get a top hat board made that would give you the little bit of extra extension you needed and use the leather 110-141 bellows.

The 110-141mm field comes with a 30cm folding rail as part of the package. To get enough extension to use a 300mm lens, you need to purchase the 15cm Monorail Extension II for roughly $300. I find that the folding rail + rail extension option is actually less preferable to the 30cm telescoping rail. Read this thread for all the pros/cons and some photos of the rails.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=27514

If you are buying new, I would ask if they will include the telescoping rail instead of the folding rail. Pricing should be very similar, if not identical. I bought my camera from Rod @ Photomark, and he should have both rails in stock.

If you can swing it, be sure to add the Micrometric Orbix to your order. It is a dream!

:)