8x10 Arca Swiss?

[Dave Wooten]

Any users with a review? thanks, Dave

[pepeguitarra]

Any users with a review? thanks, Dave

This man here has a review. He is a user here.

[angusparker]

I tried one out and so wanted to like it but in the end it didn’t meet my needs - corner cut outs on ground glass too small, bail system on the back wasn’t intuitive, and the weight distribution didn’t work well with the Arca Cube. So I’m likely going to sell it soon. So now I have a Chamonix 8x10 and a Ritter from before.

[Eric Leppanen]

I owned an Arca 8x10 F-Classic for several years, which I purchased as a lighter weight replacement for my Ebony 8x10 (the basic Arca configuration weighs about 9.5 pounds if I recall correctly). The Arca is very smooth and precise, reasonably fast to set up, supports extensive movements, has a fine fresnel ground glass and is very expandable (the optional extra long bellows can support a Nikon 1200T lens with ease).

The Arca is essentially a single architecture that can be configured for 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 formats. This flexibility incurs some compromises. The function carriers (which connect the standards to the monorail) are optimally designed for 4x5 format, for which the design is rock solid and very resistant to wind vibration. Larger formats are less solid since the function carriers are smaller in proportion to the rear standard, resulting in more potential for vibration. Also, as format size increases the front standard must be progressively raised to remain centered in the image circle, reducing the amount of front rise available unless one uses "indirect" front rise (tilt the entire monorail upwards, level the front and rear standards). For my 8x10 F-Classic I purchased an optional spacer block (Arca part # 069000) which elevates the front standard back to a neutral starting point; this additional part theoretically reduces stability but in practice I found stability to be adequate.

Arca Swiss uses its own lens board form factor, the latest version of which (141mm) is similarly sized (but not compatible with) Sinar boards. Arca also makes their own Arca-to-Linhof Technika lens board adapter, which I found to be very solid and precise, but also demanding of lens board tolerances. I had to replace a number of my cheap third party Linhof-style lens boards (which had worked just fine with my Ebony) due to incompatibility with the Arca adapter.

The monorail architecture will also require a somewhat larger backpack compared to a folding field camera design.

The Arca is a great camera for those folks who just enjoy the feel, precision and durability of a metal camera, or who can really take advantage of its extensive movements and expandability. In today's market I would argue that the Chamonix 8x10 offers similar weight and rigidity at a much lower price, while adequately supporting the most common focal lengths. But I have to admit that there is nothing like geared metal controls; operating an Arca after fiddling with light weight field cameras can be like a breath of fresh air.

[Dave Wooten]

Thanks

[Dave Wooten]

I tried one out and so wanted to like it but in the end it didn’t meet my needs - corner cut outs on ground glass too small, bail system on the back wasn’t intuitive, and the weight distribution didn’t work well with the Arca Cube. So I’m likely going to sell it soon. So now I have a Chamonix 8x10 and a Ritter from before.

Thanks

[Dave Wooten]

This man here has a review. He is a user here.

Thanks, great review

[Mark Darragh]

David Hello,

I have been using Arca-Swiss cameras for many years and found them to be very well engineered and functional cameras. Before the 8x10 Arca, I had a Horseman L series metal monorail and a Wista wooden field. The modular nature of the Arca-Swiss system was one reason I decided to standardise to one main camera system.

If you decide to go down the Arca-Swiss path, I would suggest looking at the Metric version. I’ve run the 8x10 in both F Classic and Metric versions and have found the configuration of the Metric standards to be more rigid. The Arca-Swiss M line cameras are even more stable with full geared movements on front and rear standards but with a significant amount of additional weight.

Robert Polidori, who is one of my photographic heroes, uses an Arca-Swiss M Line in 8x10 and 11x14 configurations.

All the best

[Dave Wooten]

David Hello,

I have been using Arca-Swiss cameras for many years and found them to be very well engineered and functional cameras. Before the 8x10 Arca, I had a Horseman L series metal monorail and a Wista wooden field. The modular nature of the Arca-Swiss system was one reason I decided to standardise to one main camera system.

If you decide to go down the Arca-Swiss path, I would suggest looking at the Metric version. I’ve run the 8x10 in both F Classic and Metric versions and have found the configuration of the Metric standards to be more rigid. The Arca-Swiss M line cameras are even more stable with full geared movements on front and rear standards but with a significant amount of additional weight.

Robert Polidori, who is one of my photographic heroes, uses an Arca-Swiss M Line in 8x10 and 11x14 configurations.

All the best

Thanks Mark

[agregov]

I started with an Arca Field 4x5 (with orbix) and have shot quite a bit with that before venturing to 810. Several years ago I picked up a used 810 conversion kit (non-metric) and concur that the larger Arca back and front standards of the 810 are not as solid as in the 45 setup--standards are a little wobbly. The 45 is a very solid camera. Here are some things I learned since picking up the Arca 810 conversion:

-For contact printing, 810 is great. In some ways, it's one of the most simple ways of printing images. A contact printing frame, light bulb and 3-4 8x10 or 11x14 trays and you're making images. It's a very small footprint to setup in a home and cheap. While many in the forum really enjoy the quality of the silver chloride graded papers, I found standard VC papers like Ilford Warm Tone make really excellent quality 810 contact prints.

-For enlarging, 810 requires a significant investment. 810 enlargers (many threads in the forum) are extremely large. Also, you need a much larger sink to make up to 20x24 enlargements. Much much larger investment. In terms of quality, I've put 45 and 810 20x24 enlargements side to side and yes, the 810 is a bit better. But I'd bet most viewers would never see the difference. You'll see the biggest difference with 810 enlargements once you get into the 30x40 range and above. How often do we make images that large? Not often. Setting up a 4x5 enlarger in a darkroom is MUCH easier (cost and footprint) than the 810 world and the results for prints up to 20x24 are really excellent.

-Working with 810 over 45 in the field is like an order of magnitude more difficult. 810 camera is heavier, bigger, more difficult to backpack (in the case of Arca with the rail adding extra vertical bulk) and film holders are very heavy. And of course film is much more expensive. If you like shooting with long lenses, you'll need a very long bellows draw with 810 which makes it much more difficult making movements as you often have to get out from under the darkcloth. The metric version of the 810 Arca with geared rise/fall/tilt would help but you'll still need to get out from under the darkcloth more than with 45.

-With respect to the Arca line of cameras, the 45 cameras allow you to shoot with roll film backs. So you can shoot 6x7, 6x9, 6x12 and 4x5. That's super flexible. And one interesting advantage not often mentioned in the forum is using the Arca leather Viewing Bellows (instead of a darkcloth). You can then ditch the darkcloth (great for city shooting) and the built in 2X magnifier in the viewing bellows allows you to see the ground glass more clearly when shooting roll film formats (you see the smaller part of the ground glass easier). The footprint of the 45 camera is much easier to backpack and travel with.

A bit long winded there but I would recommend if you want to enlarge negatives, go with a Arca 45 setup. It's really a super system. For 810, before dropping $8K for a new Arca I would test the waters with a cheaper 810 first. Pick up a used camera (Michael Smith liked the Kodak Master View ~$1200) or maybe an Intrepid. Shoot with it for a few years and see how you like it. If you love 810 shooting, then stepping up to an Arca makes a lot of sense. I just recently picked up an Arca 5x7 conversion and the footprint of that camera is not much bigger/heavier than the Arca 45. However, 5x7 has its own issues (film, enlarger availability, etc) that make it somewhat challenging as well. I frequently think I should just ditch all the other formats keep my 45 setup and just focus on shooting. Gear can be really distracting to making good images. I say that to myself of course.

Good luck.