OP
OP
As an architectural photographer I'll mainly use front rise. How do you like your Chamonix?
Arca Swiss - $5,000
-
A
- Thread starter Darryl Roberts
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Very nice 300mm f/6.3 Komura Commercial in Copal 3S
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
For Sale Very clean 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon in Copal 0
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Folding Pocket Kodak Plate Holders, Cut Film Sheaths, and Ground Glass
- Started by trichrome
Forum statistics
As an architectural photographer I'll mainly use front rise. How do you like your Chamonix?
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,807
- Format
- 8x10 Format
My 8X10 is a Phillips folder, the Godfather, so to speak, of all the modern composite simplified designs, including Chamonix. But for wide angle lens use, or at least "normal" focal length lenses and shorter, dedicated architectural cameras lacking base rail tilts, having axis tilts only, are faster to set up and operate than folders. Of course, they need box-shaped carrying containers, but compact quite small the other direction. Then, if you select a model with a "universal" bellows, essential half-pleated and half-bag, that single bellows becomes quite versatile. Ebony made the finest of these, but being no longer made, are now especially expensive, whether new or used. But they are the most precise of wooden brands, with the best hardware (machined titanium). Chamonix also makes very nice non-folders like the 45Hs-1. Don't expect the same kind of detent precision as a die-cast metal camera. You need to use your loupe more to double check settings. But this is one logical way to dramatically reduce carrying weight and bulk, as well as your budget!
Remember, you can supplement rise somewhat with a vertically offset hole position in the lensboard. Fast very wide angle lenses tend to be heavy, so this method of attaining more rise is more stable than overtly tall front risers.
Remember, you can supplement rise somewhat with a vertically offset hole position in the lensboard. Fast very wide angle lenses tend to be heavy, so this method of attaining more rise is more stable than overtly tall front risers.
Last edited:
FWIW, the points against a ball head are spot on in my book. Get a geared head. Manfrotto makes an inexpensive one if you buy used. It's kind of a space hog and heavy, but a big step up from a ball head for a view camera (or any as far as I'm concerned).
I recently bought an Arca Swiss and love it. If the relative cost is an issue, there are other monorails. If cost is an issue, maybe its not the best choice. But if a monorail suits and a relatively compact one as well does, then push ahead without regret. Everyone has their prejudices, and if you feel you need this sort of thing... then do it or find a similar one. Linhof also makes a relatively small monorail and Sinar Norma. I think Toyo has some as well... though they may be equally rare. Arca isn't the only one... it's an oft recommended one, but not the only one. Perhaps because the F line is their most known product, their rep in this regard may be more widely appreciated than the others whose flagship products aren't their smallest stuff.
If you've going to wonder whether you'll push the limits and regret THAT decision, then don't do it. For my bit, I have no regret. I've made plenty of in-and-out camera mistakes in my time, but not this one. The cost is sufficient that it HAS to be a keeper.... but the lack of equipment on the market doesn't just attest to the fact that this is a small production item, but also that most folks keep them a lifetime. Rod Klukas says that they sell about 1 a month, so yes, that's small volume compared to digital cameras and probably better known brands like Linhof and others. Will the Arca F seem as light as you think it will be? No. Why? Because you'll add another lens to your bag and you're back to the same weight. Fact is you might even finally spring for a backpack big enough to carry the stuff you've put in separate bags... at least I did. And so I'm also carrying 6 film holders (thanks to Dan Stone).
I think the dirt and dust thing Drew mentions may be real, but I tend to baby my equipment. Haven't seen or heard of this as a problem. Maybe if you throw it in the mud or shoot in dust storms you'll have an issue if you don't wipe it down. But your tripod will have the same problem in some cases. I think Drew probably meant this more as a general caution - and its valid in that case, but to avoid the whole idea or precision and prefer a monorail with lots of slop in the mechanism isn't probably what he's recommending either. So would it be fair to suggest that I probably would have been equally happy with another monorail? Possibly. And did I spend more money than I had to? Definitely. But somethings you just go ahead and do and look ahead and not back. It was a good decision, and there are always "mightas and wouldas" in every one we make. Make the decision and move on. Weigh the factors, and pull the trigger.
Ultimately, your lens decisions, your supports (tripods) and lights, and the decisions that drive how you print will likely cost you a lot more. There's not really a cheap part to the process once you get past the film and paper, chems etc. I think if you're going to focus on film in a digital age, you'll spend what you feel is justifiable for the process you choose to make that happen. You can expect with most to sell used equipment at half or less of what you pay for it. With an Arca, maybe slightly more due to its perceived desirability and relative scarcity. Over what period of time does that differential make sense? Certainly in the years and decades... you have the option (whatever you choose) with this route that digital does not offer due to higher obsolescence and more rapid decay in resale. Look at rentals for a digital camera - or even digital lens! - and you'll see that none of the camera parts of the process are all that expensive to buy compared to rental costs. So there's always a logic you can use to justify what you want to do. Been there, done that.
In sum, the sooner you make a decision and start using the camera that fits your need, the longer your use will run, and the more worthwhile you'll find it. If ARCA is that pick, then maybe you need a slightly longer period of use (but probably less lengthy than some of the brand's detractors would have you suppose). Google Rod Klukas. He's a good dealer. There are others, but he'll work with you to help match your objectives to the most suitable of Arca's options. He also sells used equip when he has it - which is rarely.
I think the chief fair knock on Arca is that all parts tend to be expensive due to high precision machining, and small volume. These are two sides of the same coin. So while the modular nature of all Arca parts allow you to cobble together anything you want, any combination whatsoever, you may find that taking an F 4X5 Field and adding a bellows and rear frame/format to use it for 5X7 as well is more expensive than you'd think. So if actually applying the camera's modular aspects is something you plan on, then ARCA might become a gift that keeps on giving - to ARCA. Something to think about. Yes, you can do it but you have to do it carefully, and there's no package discount for the odds and ends needed to do it.
So that's my four cents. Doesn't differ materially from what others are posting, but simply the view of a user as opposed to others who made different decisions for their own reasons. Arca is a great line of cameras, but there are others that are fine, too. Make your own decision and don't regret it, and don't be afraid to call Rod and discuss ARCA or some of the other dealers to discuss their line-ups.
I recently bought an Arca Swiss and love it. If the relative cost is an issue, there are other monorails. If cost is an issue, maybe its not the best choice. But if a monorail suits and a relatively compact one as well does, then push ahead without regret. Everyone has their prejudices, and if you feel you need this sort of thing... then do it or find a similar one. Linhof also makes a relatively small monorail and Sinar Norma. I think Toyo has some as well... though they may be equally rare. Arca isn't the only one... it's an oft recommended one, but not the only one. Perhaps because the F line is their most known product, their rep in this regard may be more widely appreciated than the others whose flagship products aren't their smallest stuff.
If you've going to wonder whether you'll push the limits and regret THAT decision, then don't do it. For my bit, I have no regret. I've made plenty of in-and-out camera mistakes in my time, but not this one. The cost is sufficient that it HAS to be a keeper.... but the lack of equipment on the market doesn't just attest to the fact that this is a small production item, but also that most folks keep them a lifetime. Rod Klukas says that they sell about 1 a month, so yes, that's small volume compared to digital cameras and probably better known brands like Linhof and others. Will the Arca F seem as light as you think it will be? No. Why? Because you'll add another lens to your bag and you're back to the same weight. Fact is you might even finally spring for a backpack big enough to carry the stuff you've put in separate bags... at least I did. And so I'm also carrying 6 film holders (thanks to Dan Stone).
I think the dirt and dust thing Drew mentions may be real, but I tend to baby my equipment. Haven't seen or heard of this as a problem. Maybe if you throw it in the mud or shoot in dust storms you'll have an issue if you don't wipe it down. But your tripod will have the same problem in some cases. I think Drew probably meant this more as a general caution - and its valid in that case, but to avoid the whole idea or precision and prefer a monorail with lots of slop in the mechanism isn't probably what he's recommending either. So would it be fair to suggest that I probably would have been equally happy with another monorail? Possibly. And did I spend more money than I had to? Definitely. But somethings you just go ahead and do and look ahead and not back. It was a good decision, and there are always "mightas and wouldas" in every one we make. Make the decision and move on. Weigh the factors, and pull the trigger.
Ultimately, your lens decisions, your supports (tripods) and lights, and the decisions that drive how you print will likely cost you a lot more. There's not really a cheap part to the process once you get past the film and paper, chems etc. I think if you're going to focus on film in a digital age, you'll spend what you feel is justifiable for the process you choose to make that happen. You can expect with most to sell used equipment at half or less of what you pay for it. With an Arca, maybe slightly more due to its perceived desirability and relative scarcity. Over what period of time does that differential make sense? Certainly in the years and decades... you have the option (whatever you choose) with this route that digital does not offer due to higher obsolescence and more rapid decay in resale. Look at rentals for a digital camera - or even digital lens! - and you'll see that none of the camera parts of the process are all that expensive to buy compared to rental costs. So there's always a logic you can use to justify what you want to do. Been there, done that.
In sum, the sooner you make a decision and start using the camera that fits your need, the longer your use will run, and the more worthwhile you'll find it. If ARCA is that pick, then maybe you need a slightly longer period of use (but probably less lengthy than some of the brand's detractors would have you suppose). Google Rod Klukas. He's a good dealer. There are others, but he'll work with you to help match your objectives to the most suitable of Arca's options. He also sells used equip when he has it - which is rarely.
I think the chief fair knock on Arca is that all parts tend to be expensive due to high precision machining, and small volume. These are two sides of the same coin. So while the modular nature of all Arca parts allow you to cobble together anything you want, any combination whatsoever, you may find that taking an F 4X5 Field and adding a bellows and rear frame/format to use it for 5X7 as well is more expensive than you'd think. So if actually applying the camera's modular aspects is something you plan on, then ARCA might become a gift that keeps on giving - to ARCA. Something to think about. Yes, you can do it but you have to do it carefully, and there's no package discount for the odds and ends needed to do it.
So that's my four cents. Doesn't differ materially from what others are posting, but simply the view of a user as opposed to others who made different decisions for their own reasons. Arca is a great line of cameras, but there are others that are fine, too. Make your own decision and don't regret it, and don't be afraid to call Rod and discuss ARCA or some of the other dealers to discuss their line-ups.
Lots of great advice here--if you find yourself still sweating front rise on your Norma, there is the possibility of adding extensions to the front standards. This thread might be of use: https://www.largeformatphotography....Extending-Rise-on-Sinar-Norma-Front-Standards
At any rate, there's a lot to say for the plug-and-play aspect of a new F-line, but the flip side is that there don't seem to be any technical photography problems that a tricked-out Norma can't address.
At any rate, there's a lot to say for the plug-and-play aspect of a new F-line, but the flip side is that there don't seem to be any technical photography problems that a tricked-out Norma can't address.
OP
OP
I was eyeing the 45HS-1 thank you for this insight.
OP
OP
The Arca D4 geared head is very impressive.
OP
OP
Yup, I'm leaning toward the geared Arca, I don't desire other fancies (outside of photography) that many do, so I want to spend some of my hard earned on something nice that improves pack-ability over my lovely Norma, which will be stuck inside for table top work. The Arca seems very user friendly and precise.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,807
- Format
- 8x10 Format
One minor rebuttal to JWM : the presence of smooth rods versus geared ones owes nothing to "slop". Just the opposite. Numerous brands of monorails are every bit as precisely machined as Arcas. Even many mechanical transports in dusty gritty factories and food plants rely on linear motion devices having tightly sealed sleeve bearings or highly durable delrin-like plastic sleeves designed to keep dust and other fine particles out, year after year. That's hard to accomplish with exposed gears without special sealed covers adding substantial extra cost and weight.
But the kind of risers or standards used on wooden and composite cameras rely more on slots that do need a small amount of extra tolerance to accommodate minor expansion/contraction variables. No big deal. One simply learns to be aware of the fact and double-check critical focus on the ground glass if the shot is intended for a significant degree of enlargement. It's almost a non-issue in common 4x5 applications. I would get more nitpicky, however, if a roll-film or digital back were involved, since the degree of magnification in reproduction is going to be significantly greater, and working with much shorter focal length lenses per desired perspective requires even more acute focus.
But the kind of risers or standards used on wooden and composite cameras rely more on slots that do need a small amount of extra tolerance to accommodate minor expansion/contraction variables. No big deal. One simply learns to be aware of the fact and double-check critical focus on the ground glass if the shot is intended for a significant degree of enlargement. It's almost a non-issue in common 4x5 applications. I would get more nitpicky, however, if a roll-film or digital back were involved, since the degree of magnification in reproduction is going to be significantly greater, and working with much shorter focal length lenses per desired perspective requires even more acute focus.
Last edited:
OP
OP
I'm considering saving $1000 and getting the non-geared version.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,807
- Format
- 8x10 Format
An especially helpful dealer who handles the Arca line is Badger Graphic. But I'd imagine anything new these days has to be specially ordered.
OP
OP
F -classic C 4x5. I just called Badger to ask the Front Rise millimeters, he didn't know
OP
OP
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,807
- Format
- 8x10 Format
B&H has the specs listed. Ironically, Arca's own Euro site doesn't, unless it's buried in some back file hard to locate. But if you want some special configuration, I'd call them or e-mail them directly. Someone will speak English.
OP
OP
Alright, thank you.
Rod Klukas is "the official" US dealer and maintains some inventory here. He knows his stuff: Rod Klukas, US Representative Arca-Swiss USA, PO Box 28450, Tempe, AZ 85285.
Phone: (480) 206-4770 Mobile; Skype: rod.klukas; www.rodklukas.com Instagram: @arcaswissusa
Rod will walk you through the process and Zoom or FaceTime to show you the choices. He'll provide instruction, he'll tutor in person, and probably knows more about this than some us will ever know. Highly recommended. If you're ready to go, he'll have it to you in no time. B&H doesn't exactly save a dime on stuff they don't inventory.
Phone: (480) 206-4770 Mobile; Skype: rod.klukas; www.rodklukas.com Instagram: @arcaswissusa
Rod will walk you through the process and Zoom or FaceTime to show you the choices. He'll provide instruction, he'll tutor in person, and probably knows more about this than some us will ever know. Highly recommended. If you're ready to go, he'll have it to you in no time. B&H doesn't exactly save a dime on stuff they don't inventory.
OP
OP
I had a Zoom with him a couple of weeks ago, very informative. But his prices can greatly be beat.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,807
- Format
- 8x10 Format
I briefly ran into him once, but wasn't much interested in the particular segment of Arca he was presenting at the time, involving MF digital stitching platforms. Michael Strickland gives a candid review of these cameras which honestly points out how the standards are rather underbuilt in terms of wind resistance. But he was using the 8X10 version - truly a kite - and at the shoreline. I wouldn't make any blanket assumption that architectural photography involves only city shoots well protected from wind and sand. Some multi-millionaire might well have a rammed-earth adobe castle in mind out in the middle of the desert. As a technical as well as color consultant at the same time, I got involved with all kinds of sites in significantly varying climates.
Last edited:
Yes, I think he's found the market for digital view cameras (if that's what you call it) is more high end and (I guess) less price sensitive. Trick to pricing is that you'll see his prices are current... and the same on the euro site Arca sells I think. B&H and ViewCameraStore.com may or may not be. If they have to order, then your pricing will be Rod's. He also has some discretion to offer discounts. Perhaps. So I'm not sure there's as much variance as you think. Nice if you can get it... and if you can, go for it. But don't be surprised if quotes move up.
Yeah... so when I talked with Rod, he pushed the digital platforms until he saw I was more firmly interested in the film option. Lots of folks these days apparently want mostly to shoot digital and do a little film. I'm the opposite. Digital is for assignments, family and snaps.... the serious fun... the stuff I like is film.
FWIW, folks on the LargeFormatPhotographyForum mostly deal with Rod for Arca and recommend him highly. YMMV. Everyone's does. But Arca is a niche within a niche within a niche.
Yeah... so when I talked with Rod, he pushed the digital platforms until he saw I was more firmly interested in the film option. Lots of folks these days apparently want mostly to shoot digital and do a little film. I'm the opposite. Digital is for assignments, family and snaps.... the serious fun... the stuff I like is film.
FWIW, folks on the LargeFormatPhotographyForum mostly deal with Rod for Arca and recommend him highly. YMMV. Everyone's does. But Arca is a niche within a niche within a niche.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2012
- Messages
- 86
- Format
- Medium Format
Seriously recommend finding the one dealer you like and work with them. There are too many moving parts to be treating something as precise and well-thought-through as Arca as if it were a wholesale item. Arca is odd in their marketing (no website), and thus Rod is the main US guy to deal with. He's solid if a bit old school... but he reached out to me to fix something on my D4, several years old, and he hadn't even sold it to me: sent it to Europe to get rebuilt, and returned it for no charge whatsoever. And I never had bought anything from him either.... so he's got my vote.
- Joined
- May 28, 2005
- Messages
- 520
- Format
- 4x5 Format
If I understand correctly, an Arca Metric C 4x5 comes with a 141mm front standard. (The Arca Metric C "Field" 4x5 comes with the 6x9 front standard.) That's probably the case, because the "Field" is not capable of 100mm of rise. If so, this will be a REALLY NICE camera! I'd say, go for it. In my view, having geared rise/fall is sweet.
Another nice feature of Arca Swiss, is that a fresnel lens is integrated with the system. This makes for an excellent viewing experience. Normally placed over the ground glass on other cameras, Arca positions tbe Fresenl lens between the ground glass and the lens. They adjust the spacing tolerances to make this possible.
I've been an Arca user for a long time and have come into my array of gear through the used market. But these days, used Arca equipment rarely shows up, especially that with 141mm standards. For me, Arca has been kind of an exploration, made all the more possible by the system's modularity. I began with a 171mm Classic F, and eventually graduated to metric 4x5 and medium format systems through a couple of lucky purchases. Currently, I'm experimenting with a metric rear married with an Oschwald era, axis-tilt, front standard, both mounted on older Type A function carriers. I prefer axial tilt to base tilt. S.K. Grimes is adjusting my bellows to make this possible.
One comment that I'd offer, while geared rise/fall is very nice and makes a difference, it's only really needed on one of the two standards. Front is better; but, rear also works fine. If the latter, one can raise the front standard by something more than enough, and then fine-tune with geared rise/fall on the rear.
I've also experimented with Sinar a lot and put together a nice system that since then has been sold. I like Arca better. As for geared rise using a Sinar P, that comes at the huge cost of excessive weight. I'm currently selling one for a friend, and it's not for me.
Best of luck on purchase. Let us know what you decide.
Another nice feature of Arca Swiss, is that a fresnel lens is integrated with the system. This makes for an excellent viewing experience. Normally placed over the ground glass on other cameras, Arca positions tbe Fresenl lens between the ground glass and the lens. They adjust the spacing tolerances to make this possible.
I've been an Arca user for a long time and have come into my array of gear through the used market. But these days, used Arca equipment rarely shows up, especially that with 141mm standards. For me, Arca has been kind of an exploration, made all the more possible by the system's modularity. I began with a 171mm Classic F, and eventually graduated to metric 4x5 and medium format systems through a couple of lucky purchases. Currently, I'm experimenting with a metric rear married with an Oschwald era, axis-tilt, front standard, both mounted on older Type A function carriers. I prefer axial tilt to base tilt. S.K. Grimes is adjusting my bellows to make this possible.
One comment that I'd offer, while geared rise/fall is very nice and makes a difference, it's only really needed on one of the two standards. Front is better; but, rear also works fine. If the latter, one can raise the front standard by something more than enough, and then fine-tune with geared rise/fall on the rear.
I've also experimented with Sinar a lot and put together a nice system that since then has been sold. I like Arca better. As for geared rise using a Sinar P, that comes at the huge cost of excessive weight. I'm currently selling one for a friend, and it's not for me.
Best of luck on purchase. Let us know what you decide.
i like these
https://www.walkercameras.com/
The website does not do them justice - they are basically indestructible - if you can roll with a rigid back.
The 5x7 has more extension than the 5x4 if you do not just want to shoot wides.
https://www.walkercameras.com/
The website does not do them justice - they are basically indestructible - if you can roll with a rigid back.
The 5x7 has more extension than the 5x4 if you do not just want to shoot wides.
Excellent suggestion, I'm currently trying to ascertain if I really need to shoot longer than 400mm on 8x10--if not, then Mr. Walker's "architectural" Titan XL makes a lot of sense to me (and also perhaps to the OP if there were a 4x5 reducing back involved.)
Thanks for the link--the Walkers always have me monitoring the USD/pound sterling exchange rate. Otherwise, I'm sorry that the molds for the SF series were lost--I could imagine that line in larger formats being very interesting.
Otherwise, I'm sorry that the molds for the SF series were lost--I could imagine that line in larger formats being very interesting.The Arca-Swiss Universalis 4x5 is quite small and the Arca-Swiss 4x5 F-Line field also collapse to a very small size. They both have fabulous screws for focusing and very precise movements.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |