Ebony RW810 or Arca Swiss F Series

[Torontoamateur]

The Arca Swiss does well in the studio and in the field, It is just a fantastic camera. The P@ is for extreme studio work when movements are needed. I kept the Sinar F just because. The Wisner is for showing off for formal portraits . People like the wooded an brass with Burgundy bellows for show. Generally I use the Arca Swiss as much as all the rest put together. I have the basic set up F Metric without the special adjustment thingy. It works just fine. Well actually Fantastically. I have had this 20 years and have no complaints. I use it for the 120MM Nikkor up to the 480mm Rodenstock. My fave is the 240mm Rodenstock. With that it is like a giant but friendly Leica with 35mm Summicron. Best to get one and try it out. They are rare and definitely hold value. The Ebony has far fewer movements but is elegant. If you do not li thkee Arca Swiss I am sure you can resell it easily.

[John Layton]

I would find this choice impossible...and would sell a kidney to have both!

[r.e.]

It sounds like the actual options that you're considering are a used Ebony and a new Arca-Swiss, and that the price for each is about the same. On the face of it, the price equivalence doesn't make a lot of sense, which was the reason for the first question that I asked in post #2. You've since clarified that the used Ebony comes with additional components that interest you and that you're talking about a new Arca.

I would suggest that you phone Arca-Swiss in Besançon, France. The phone number is readily available. Ask them whether there's an Australian dealer, and whether they can give you the name/co-ordinates of one or two Australian photographers who have one of their 8x10 cameras so that you could check one out in the flesh. With respect to any reservations about 141 standards for your needs, I would suggest that you contact Ben Horne. He's in a position to give you some additional, hands-on advice.

Re Mark Darragh's post... There isn't much on a 171 camera that is both unique to that camera and that can go wrong. There are at least three makers of 171 lens boards, and the boards are also pretty readily available second-hand and sometimes as new old stock. Arca-Swiss is out of the business of making 171 parts, but it will make some. I don't think that parts availability is a significant issue.

That said, I don't understand the idea, floated in later posts, of passing on the Ebony, a brand that you know and apparently like, in the hope of finding a used 8x10 Arca. It's not like they come up on eBay every week. I don't think that an 8x10 F-Line has been offered on this forum for ages. There is what appears to be a very active German dealer who might have a line on one, as might the U.S. Arca-Swiss dealer Rod Klukas. Given that you live in Australia, it's probably also worth finding out about possible sources in Asia if second-hand is the route you want to go.

[Tin Can]

The Ebony will increase in value

[Rod Klukas]

Hello Craig.
I recommend you to buy a used 171mm F line classic 8x10.
I assume you want to use old brass lenses with the new camera to buy and to do wetplate in the field??
I don’t recommend the current 141mm system if you want to use large fast brass lenses which have 100mm or larger diameters of lens elements.

But 171mm system is discontinued so if you can’t find a 171mm f classic then 141mm f classic is the next buy imo.

Neither dynamic nor micrometric orbix hold heavy brass lenses upright, say heavier than 1.5kg.
F line classic has the rear rise but metric models don’t.
I think the rear rise is convenient for 8x10 portrait.
Another model which has the same rise is 8x10 misura but the set comes with the short optical bench meaning less bellows extension and no tilt/swing/shift? on the rear and it has dynamic orbix.
The misura is great for compactness and rear frame rigidity to assure both frames parallel to each other. It’s a compromise model and it is offered only with 141mm front frame.
Other rear frames with classic or metric function carriers have weaknesses in this respect, which are wobbly and you have to be careful with the bellows extension is well enough with bellows draw when using long focal length lenses.

If you use the camera with modern lenses mostly then the current 141mm f line metric model with micrometric orbix is nice and you can buy the f classic front frame later as you need for heavy brass lenses.

I don’t have any experience with Ebony 8x10 cameras.

Actually the Metric does have rear rise now, though not geared. The 141 series also there are adapter boards for smaller lenses as well. We make 141 to 110x110 lens boards, and SK Grimes makes fine 141 to Linhof Tech, etc, though the tech boards are small for 8x10. The rear light trap hole is quite close or too small for many 8x10 lenses. I am not sure what wobble Mr Hayashi is speaking of , but if the focus locks are locked after adjustment/focusing, there should be no wobble. If you have questions I am always available for email, Zoom, etc.

[r.e.]

The Ebony will increase in value

How many people want a custom 9x11 back and four 9x11 holders?

[neil poulsen]

I've had many 8x10 cameras that include Sinar, Burke and James, Oschwald (older style) Arca Swiss, Kodak 2D, and even a Bender Kit camera, a Kodak Master, etc.

The best 8x10 that I've owned was an Oschwald era Arca Swiss that was designed from the ground up as an 8x10. It had an oversized rear function carrier to support the extra weight of the 8x10 format frame. (In fact, it was one solid piece.) The front risers were extra tall, so that after raising the format frame to be on axis with the rear 8x10 format frame, there was length remaining for plenty of additional rise. Let me say that this camera was rock solid. I sold it, because I've generally been downsizing in 8x10, and I didn't need a camera with bag-bellows capability. Here's the listing.

https://www.largeformatphotography.i...61#post1617761

I should clarify a little. The front standards sold with these cameras were designed for 8x10 (unlike the currently sold version), but I purchased mine with a front standard intended for 4x5. So, S.K. Grimes custom made the risers for the camera shown above, and they did a stunning job. Their risers were even better than those originally sold by Arca, because Adam made them 50% thicker. They worked beautifully. Strong, and very smooth. They were a bit expensive, but worth it.

If I were in the market for the type of camera that you've described, this is the direction that I would pursue. And, probably at substantially less cost than the two options you're considering now.

[John Layton]

Hmmm...maybe both kidneys - and kick some of the funds back for a portable dialysis machine!

[Bernice Loui]

This plus how and where these larger lenses will be used should be one of the prime requirements that drives camera choice. Will the camera of choice have enough stability and rigidity to properly support the largest lens in mind or in the future? Will the camera of have enough bellows and camera extension to accommodate all lenses to be used?

If these larger lenses are in barrel, what kind of shutter? Could be as simple as the lens cap to a Sinar digital that goes 1/500 sec to seconds.

What about camera accessories like bag bellows, filter system, extensions for camera/bellows and ease of availability. One thing to see a catalog item, can that item be had and with what effort and cost?

Then comes camera support ala Tripod and tripod head. Stability and adjustability are as if not more important than camera alone.

There is definitely a user experience tied to camera and all combined with producing the image and the experience tied to producing that image.


Bernice

I do need stability for large lenses.

[agregov]

I have an Arca F-line C 4x5 (110 standard/orbix) with 5x7 and 8x10 conversion options (171 front standards/non geared). I would agree with the notes on rigidity, that in comparison to the 4x5 and 5x7 setups which are rock solid IMO, I find the 8x10 setup not as rigid. The Arca 8x10 rear standard is heavy and has a higher center of gravity (given its size), so the rear function carrier has a tougher time keeping the rear standard as rigid than smaller format Arcas. Note, I am using collapsible rails, so they may not be quite as sturdy as a telescopic rails setup for 8x10. Also, do think about how much rise you might need. For example, 4x5 C model doesn't have enough rise for architectural subjects with the 110 front standard (141 would be better in this example). If you did need a bigger front standard, I do not believe finding a 171 front standard for 8x10 would be that difficult. Then all you would need is the right bellows to attach to the 171 front frame. I would talk to Arca directly if you have specific needs. While they may not make new 171 parts any longer, they may be able to track down a used 171 front frame for you. And if they no longer sell the right bellows, I'm sure Custom Bellows in the UK could make you one. One final note, depending on how you like to work, the geared 8x10 version in the Arca line can be nice when working with long lenses under the darkcloth. Rise/fall/tilt can be done easier one handed with 450mm+ lenses. Note, the geared option will be heavier camera. As always, it's about tradeoffs.

I do not have experience with the 8x10 Ebony. One thing that hasn't been noted in the thread yet, if you plan on using the camera mostly in the field, the Ebony would likely fit more camera bags. The Ebony folds up into a square. The function carriers + rail make the Arca have a larger footprint collapsed which makes fitting it in some backpacks more difficult. Also, one bonus to using a smaller front format frames with the Arca, is lenses are easier to pack. I use 110 lens boards (since I need them for my 4x5) with an adapter for the 171 boards on the 5x7 and 8x10 conversions. S.K Grimes made me a 171 board converter, works great. Note, I use lighter lenses which cover 8x10. I don't have experience using heavy lenses with smaller lens boards.

Ben Horne would be great to chat with 1:1. He has a lot of experience with both cameras in the field. I do agree with others in the tread, it would be great to try out each camera before buying.