Looking for feedback on the Arca Swiss 4x5 F-Metric

[neil poulsen]

I guess I'm not seeing the "distortion" to which is being referred. The need on a front standard is the ability to place the lens axis at any desired position, and at any desired 3-dimensional direction. The Arca, and similarly designed cameras, enable this capability.

I directly compared a Sinar Norma standard (base tilt above shift/swing) with a Sinar F (base tilt below shift/swing), and the worst I observe is that the latter rotates the lens a bit. But obviously, this does not cause distortion of the image, since lenses are axially symmetric. (Round.)

As for whether or not tilt is on axis, or at the base, it's always possible to use the focus knob in conjunction with other movements, to achieve the same position/orientation of the lens axis with base tilt that can be achieved with axis tilt.

[Mark Darragh]

Peter Hello,
I use both a Linhof TK 45 and an Arca Swiss F Line Field with orbix (although not the Metric). For what it's worth the majority of my work is field based and often on multi-day backpacking trips. Both cameras are very well engineered and extremely capable. I'll make a few general comments on the two but if there is something specific I don't address, please ask.

The most common complaint the I've seen regarding the Technikardan is it's unique folding design. Compared to using my Arca for instance, it does require more care when setting up to position the standards and to ensure the bellows has not been pinched when packing up but overall it is quite straightforward. Still, the Arca is certainly simpler and quicker to setup and pack away.

Where the TK does win out the bi-conical standard bellows which allows you to work with a wide range of focal lengths without changing the bellows and needing extension rails. I have used a SA 47mm XL on a recessed board (tight but usable ) through to a 450mm lens using the standard TK bellows. Having said that, at longer extensions I do find the Arca with an extension rail to be more rigid.

If you need extra movement for wide angle use, the TK wide angle bellows is cloth with velvet lining. Great for movements but a sponge if you are working in wet weather. The leather wide angle bellows of the Arca is much more weather proof.

In terms of movements, the major difference as has been mentioned are the axis tilts of the TK vs the base tilt of the Arca. There are probably as many different opinions as to the relative merits of the two as there are LF photographers, I personally don't find a overwhelming advantage of one over the other.

In the end, both are fine cameras and I'm sure you would not be disappointed either way.

All the best

[12pmc]

Mark thanks for the practical comments - is there much weight difference between the TK and the Arca Field ?
Peter

[Mark Darragh]

The weights are quite comparable between the two.

My TK weighs 3080 grams with standard bellows attached and an Arca style quick release plate. The wide angle bellows adds about 150 grams.

The F Line Field (older 171 rear standard btw) is 3090 grams with the leather conical bellows and 30cm telescoping split rail. The Arca long bellows adds 235 grams. Using the long bellows with the split rail gives you similar maximum extension to the TK.

I recently carried the Arca on a 7 day trip using the 30cm folding (or compact) rail and leather bellows which came in about 2850 grams.

As as been covered on the forum in the past, there are many potential combinations with the Arca Swiss system depending on whether you choose the field or standard 4x5 versions, 141 or 171 standards, metric or classic, whether you decide to add Orbix or not. The newer versions of the cameras based around the 141mm standards are all obviously a little lighter and more compact. For all practical purposes the differences in weight only come down to a few hundred grams.

The new Arca Universalis 4x5 might also be worthy of consideration although it has more limited movements on each standard.

One other point I forgot to mention regarding the TK relates to the Linhof recessed lens boards. Imho they are very fiddly to work with especially if you are using a lens with a center filter in place or filter holders like the Lee system. The Arca 110mm boards are a little more user friendly to get to the shutter controls. No issues with the larger Arca 141 or 171 boards if you went down that path.


M

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

I'm re-posting here a detailed weight budget current A/S 6x9 and 4x5" "field" F-classic and F-metric with Orbix® in front.
(was posted some day here in 2004, but I did not find the message yet)

Summary:
The 6x9 A/S F-classic weights about 2.2 kg / 4.8 lbs with ground glass & attaching dovetail (short 8.5 cm bracket) but without lens.
The 4x5" F-metric "field" 141 (front 110 -> rear 141) weights about 2.4-2.5 kg / 5.5 / 5.5 lbs with GG & attaching dovetail, without lens and without any film holder; weigth is almost identical to the 6x9 F-metric.
Choosing the metric model instead of a classic adds about 275 grams = 0.6 lbs to the weight.

-------------------------

In detail:
Weights in grams. Exact conversion factors are : 1 ounce = 28.35 grams ; 1 pound = 16oz = 453.59 grams
Arca Swiss F-metric compact 6x9-6x9, 300 mm (12") folding rail, optional Orbix® in front. Current model as of 2004.

Front "metric" format frame including 6x9 Orbix® : 341
Rear "metric" format frame : 281
(Additional weigth of the 6x9 Orbix® : 60)
Standard 75-150 6x9-6x9 bellows, 110x110 frames : 95

6x9 ground glass & Fresnel lens : 150

300 mm (123) Folding Rail type II : 314
Connecting bracket to quick release clamp, 8.5 cm type II : 123

Functions carrier "metric" w. geared self-locking shift, front : 583
Functions carrier "metric" w. geared self-locking shift, rear : 603

Additional compendium rod holder : 27

Typical lens mounted on a 110 board ; 400-600 grams, heavier for telephotos of course.

Total weight of the 6x9 metric : about 2.5 kg / 5.5 pounds, slightly more than the misura w/o leather case but with baseplate. Clearly, metric functions carriers add bout 100 grams each w/respect to classic non-geared models. Metric frames are probably similar within a few grams to a classic non-geared frame. I had measured 1700 grams for both classic 6x9 standards, function carriers and bellows. Subtracting 100 grams for the bellows yields 800 grams for a non-metric functions carrier plus a non-metric frame. Classic non-geared functions carrier are therefore about 520 grams each. To be confirmed, I no longer have them handy ;-)

Other Comments.

The 6x9 manual Orbix mechanism adds only 60 g to the weight and virtually nothing to the height of the frame. Truly amazing. The 4"x5" (141 or 171) model is probably bigger, I do not know.

Misura bellows = the same bellows is used for the current F-field 4x5" 110-141.
Same kind of molded leather bellows as 6x9 wide-angle bellows, but with more pleats, front size 110x110, and rear size 141x141. Maximum extension about 270 mm.

The rear metric functions carrier has an additional overhanging platform to shorten the length between both standards.

The 8.5 cm connecting bracket represents 30% of the weight of the 30cm rail+bracket assembly!
The simplified misura clamping dovetail saves weight.
Nowadays, current Arca Swiss quick-release clamps feature a twin-dovetail system, hence the short 8.5 cm bracket is no longer necessary to clamp the camera directly by its rail ... at least if you use an A/S clamp.

The front misura standard is the same as a 6x9 non-metric with orbix so about 340 grams.
A 6x7-6x9 Horseman/Arca rollfilm holder weights about 600 grams; this is heavy!

[Mark Darragh]

Thanks Emmanuel.

That's the thread I had in mind.

M

[Oren Grad]

I guess I'm not seeing the "distortion" to which is being referred. The need on a front standard is the ability to place the lens axis at any desired position, and at any desired 3-dimensional direction. The Arca, and similarly designed cameras, enable this capability.

I directly compared a Sinar Norma standard (base tilt above shift/swing) with a Sinar F (base tilt below shift/swing), and the worst I observe is that the latter rotates the lens a bit. But obviously, this does not cause distortion of the image, since lenses are axially symmetric. (Round.)

As for whether or not tilt is on axis, or at the base, it's always possible to use the focus knob in conjunction with other movements, to achieve the same position/orientation of the lens axis with base tilt that can be achieved with axis tilt.

Extended general discussion raised by this post has been moved to a new thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.in...age-distortion