PDA

View Full Version : Arca Swiss format frames



Byron Rakitzis
6-Apr-2004, 03:31
I'm thinking of replacing my 4x5 outfit with an Arca Swiss system to cover 4x5 and 8x10, and I had the following idea:

I am far more interested in geared front rise than geared shift, so I would like to combine an F-metric front format frame with F-classic function carriers. I thought I might accomplish the following by getting an F-classic 8x10 camera, and a 4x5 F-metric format conversion kit.

This would mean putting the F-metric frame from the 4x5 conversion on the front of the camera, and putting the front F-classic 4x5 frame from the 8x10 camera on the back function carrier.

Thus in both setups (4x5 and 8x10) I'd have the geared F-metric format frame on the front, while on the back I'd have the classic format frames (4x5 or 8x10).

Since I haven't had the opportunity to look at this equipment up close, are there any pitfalls involved with this maneuver? All I can imagine is that I'm moving some of the controls and/or spirit levels from right to left, but I thought I'd ask the list so anyone very familiar with the Arca Swiss product line could chime in with an opinion.

Many thanks...

Byron.

Emmanuel BIGLER
9-Apr-2004, 03:53
Byron : what you suggest, i.e. using a metric front frame and a classic rear frame is possible if you have a front metric
function carrier and a rear classic function carrier. The Arca Swiss conversion kits assume that you have
the corresponding function support which is an expensive part in the system. The kits are composed of a tapered bellows and a rear format frame and do not include the function carrier.
So if you are ready to purchase the front metric function support or the rear classic function carrier (depending from which camera you start, either a metric or a classic) there is only a very minor problem
in centering the frames since the metric and classic function carriers are not exactly of the same height. This is really minor problem for a 8"x10" camera since you have to raise up the front standard. There is an optional 'extender' part which is simply a piece of special rail with two dovetails to raise the front standard by a fixed value.
Otherwise, bellows are exactly the same and 100% interchangeable whether you use a F-line classic, Metric or Monolith post-1984 Arca Swiss camera (pre-1984 bellows are non-interchangeable with modern F-line standards). Actually there are 4 sizes for bellows attachments in the F-line
- the smaller one is used in the 6x9 camera, 110x110mm frames, on the 4"x5" 'field' and the new Misura,
- a new intermediate size represented by the rear bellows size of the Misura,
- the classic 4"x5" bellows size front or rear, lensboards 171x171mm,
- the rear 5"x7" (front 5"x7" are identical in size to 4"x5", 171x171 boards)
- the rear 8"x10" (front 8"x10" are identical to 4"x5").

Different bellows combinations are simple
- "square" bellows for 6x9 or 4"x5"
- tapered for the Misura (rear size is new, and intermediate between the 6x9 and the classic 4"x5")
- tapered for the classic field 6x9-4"x5"
- tapered with 4"x5" front for the 5"x7" and tapered with a 4"x53 front for the 8"x10"

Front and rear function carriers differ only by a symmetry in the controls for shifts. This symmetry is very important since it allows to reach very small bellows drag for wide angle lenses ; but since the bellows attachment and lens board attachments are identical, you can reverse a function carrier and still be able to attach the bellows perfectly. But a rear function carrier cannot be converted into a front one and vice versa except by a costly and not reasonable factory operation.

You can do some exotic part assembly if you wish to obtain some very strange cameras ;-). For example, it is perfectly possible to use a 171x171mm lens board, a "field" tapered bellows 4"x5"->6x9cm reversed and a 6x9 rollfilm holder and 6x9 ground glass. The camera would look very strange, but would deliver perfect 6x9 images. By swapping the front and rear function carriers, at least on the F-classic, you can turn a right-handed camera into left-handed one. This might be interesting for left-handed people who whish to get the best finger sensitivity for focusing with their left hand.

Byron Rakitzis
9-Apr-2004, 04:25
Emmanuel, thanks for your reply.

I'm right now hashing out this matter with Arca Swiss customer service and I'll post a note to the LF Forum when I am ready.

The part about your post that leaps out at me is that format frames must be mated to like function carriers. Arca says that any frame can fit on any carrier.

Since I'm not interested in geared shift, I'm happy to put metric frames on classic carriers and that was my plan initially.

If you know something different about this situation, please post a followup.

Thanks,

Byron.

Emmanuel BIGLER
9-Apr-2004, 04:34
Byron : you are right, I am too restrictive, the horizontal dovetail of classic frames is similar to the dovetail of metric frames. The Arca Swiss camera system is even more flexible than I tought !! So you can mount a metric frame on top of a classic function carrier losing the horizontal geared shift but with a perfectly usable "classic" manual 'clamped' horizontal shift. This is a solution I did not imagine (I am actually tantalized by some additional "metric"-style geared movements ;-). But double check with Arca Swiss either in Chicago or to Martin Vogt in Besancon (depending from where you are calling ;-). I am interested for me as well ;-)

Byron Rakitzis
9-Apr-2004, 05:05
Well,

As far as I'm concerned Mark at Arca Swiss has already confirmed that it's okay to mount metric frames on classic carriers, and vice-versa. I think I only have two more questions about the camera system I'm specifying:

Because of the limited choices in the price list, I thought I could make a 4x5/8x10 system with my hybrid classic-shift/metric rise by putting a "rear" frame on the front standard, so that I can put geared rise on the front of the camera. In other words, I'd get a "classic" 8x10 camera with a "metric" 4x5 conversion, and use the metric 4x5 format frame as my front standard for both 4x5 and 8x10.

Arca tells me this is okay, with the proviso that "rear" frames are mated to groundglass holders, and "front" frames are mated to lensboards, i.e., that there might be some slight difference in the machining. Now I'm not sure how this would affect the camera. Optical alignment, light-tightness, or the "feel" of the boards when they sit in the frames?

So my first question is whether I'm being an absolute idiot by considering putting a front frame on the back of the camera and vice versa. At the same time Arca says the frames are fully interchangable, this comment about machining tolerances doesn't make me feel good about what I'm doing. In the long run I know I'll be happier getting the right parts from the outset.

My second question is incidental to this: should I consider going with the metric function carriers anyway for 8x10? It looks like the wider metric dovetail clamp would afford more rigidity and maybe would stand up longer to wear and tear. Even if I never need the geared shift, it might be worth it for this reason alone. Do you have an opinion about this?

Regards,

Byron.

Emmanuel BIGLER
14-Apr-2004, 02:51
Byron : just a quick answer to the second question. To me there is no difference except in comfort and 'digital' ;-) sensitivity between the geared or non-geared shift controls. Shift movements do not generate as much wear as fine focusing on the rear standard. So both geared and non-geared shift movements will serve you faithfully for years. The simple and efficient dovetail self-clamping system of the "classic" Arca Swiss shifts is by design totally immune to mechanical play when clamped. For best comfort, manual non-geared Arca Swiss movements can be cleaned and re-lubricated upon request for those who insist on controls being always "super-silky-smooth" and not simply "silky-smooth" ;-) I recently manipulated a freshly manufactured Misura® at the Paris Photo fair, I found that freshly lubricated non-geared movements were a real joy to use because they are extremely quick and extremely sensitive as well.
Now a comment to your idea of a mixed classic/metric Arca Swiss camera. Fine tuning between the lens plane and the film plane does make sense to me ; you can tolerate that bellows side are sligtly out of alignment but you demand that when all movements are at the zero-click, parallelism is perfect between the front (lens side) and the rear standard (GG side). But the most critical adjustement to me is the registration between the GG and film plane. With the naked eye, I cannot see any difference on both sides of the standards of my 6x9 Classic ; when I received it as second hand equipement, it was mounted for a left-handed photographer and totally reversed. The camera was subsequently re-aligned by the Arca Swiss wizards here and I did not think about a possible fine asymmetry betwen both sides of the standards.
However from the conversations I had with the Vogt family, my understanding is that they are extremely stringent on those alignment issues. If your demand is high as it _should_ be, you should probably have your camera fine-tuned by the authorised Arca Swiss repair shop in the US, Precision Camera Works, http://precisioncameraworks.com. An essentially manual camera like an Arca Swiss monorail should be both perfectly aligned and perfectly smooth to use. Precision and joy of use combined, this is what we all like in top-class medium and large format cameras.
Good luck : I think that whatever your choice will be, you'll probably be happy ! Tell us the stories !! ;-);-)

Byron Rakitzis
14-Apr-2004, 04:23
Emmanuel:

Briefly -- to avoid the doubt of mating the wrong surfaces, I decided to order a conventional F-metric 8x10. It just didn't seem worth perturbing what seem to be strict design tolerances. I certainly look forward to getting lots of good use out of this camera, and I am sure I will come back to the LF forum from time to time with my questions.

Warm regards,

Byron.

sultanofcognac
30-Nov-2007, 04:34
Emmanuel,

Can you tell me where I can find a list of which post-1984 elements fit onto a pre-1984 Model C?

I just bought a "C" as my first LF and I'm researching the options to put together good lenses, backs, etc.

Thanks,

Johnny

evan clarke
30-Nov-2007, 10:55
Byron,
I have 5 Arcas and have both 171 generation and 141 generation. I have found that all parts are interchangeable with no problems. Three are metrics and two are classics but be aware that the classic rise operates so smoothly that I almost see no advantage to the geared rise. The geared shift is another issue and I would not be without it, especially on the rear. I am also addicted to the Orbix which is on two of my cameras..Evan Clarke