I found Waldo!!! eModule Cloud...

[f8orbust]

Despite the 'impossibility' of focussing 'accurately' by eye in the digital age, I am one of many, many photographers who still use a groundglass and shoot digital - shock, horror - despite what Alpa, Arca etc. say concerning the ability to focus accurately in this day and age. And guess what, my images are tack sharp. When the debate 'raged' some years ago about shimming, I honestly thought photography had been lost for good to the bean counters, retired engineers and IT guys seeking a second career.

Both Arca and Alpa's approaches to accurate focussing are fine as long as the distance is recorded on the little card (Arca), or on the HPF ring (Alpa). If not, then what do you do - make an educated guess? Precision has become a very useful marketing tool - I mean, no one is going to argue that a system should be less accurate are they? Why is it Alpa won't produce a sliding back (too 'inaccurate') but Arca and others do, with great success?

This is all rather moot to be honest, especially if you tilt the lens. Then focus becomes the means to tilt the plane of focus, and to be in absolute control of that you need to use those two things either side of your nose (hint: not your ears, nostrils, eyelids or eyebrows).

 

[jlm]

My opinion is that back shimming does only one thing:
It allows the image to be in focus when the helicoid is set at infinity

 

[gazwas]

Despite the 'impossibility' of focussing 'accurately' by eye in the digital age, I am one of many, many photographers who still use a groundglass and shoot digital - shock, horror - despite what Alpa, Arca etc. say concerning the ability to focus accurately in this day and age. And guess what, my images are tack sharp.

Arca actually include a GG with the R cameras for those who choose to focus or frame using traditional methods.

This is all rather moot to be honest, especially if you tilt the lens. Then focus becomes the means to tilt the plane of focus, and to be in absolute control of that you need to use those two things either side of your nose (hint: not your ears, nostrils, eyelids or eyebrows).

For me as an Arca R owner and I'm sure many other pancake camera photographers, the helical focusing is not just about accuracy but more about speed of set up. If I know a set focus point is X meters, I set the camera helical to position Y. Likewise when using tilt, through experience I know that I can tilt the lens and make a focus adjustment to render the best near far depth of field so that every shot is repeatable very quickly meaning less time focusing and more time choosing and best framing for my photographs.

And not to stray too far OT, that is why I think the Cloud Module is a great accessory as it is yet another option for taking the tedium out of photography by making focusing very simple and giving more time to the more enjoyable aspects of taking pictures.

 

[photomgraphy]

My opinion is that back shimming does only one thing:
It allows the image to be in focus when the helicoid is set at infinity

i like the arca-way best. shimming by adding an offset. no mechanical hanky-panky.

like torger i think that stopping down should equalize some wrong mm of distance measuring.
how do we point our disto (several mm of parallaxe are easily convened)? where is our exact sensor-plane?
:toocool:

 

[David Klepacki]

like torger i think that stopping down should equalize some wrong mm of distance measuring.

In this case, two "wrongs" can make things appear to be "right". Stopping down to apertures beyond the diffraction limit of your camera will indeed introduce enough blur to "equalize" any small error in distance measurement. However, I am not raising an issue under these conditions. Rather, I am just pointing out that those folks who are interested in how to extract the highest resolution that their digital back and lens can produce with their Rm3di will require not exceeding the diffraction limit as well as having a highly accurate distance measurement.

In general, diffraction starts setting in beyond F8 with more modern digital backs, and if you look closely at the literature from Rodenstock, you will see that they do not recommend stopping down beyond F8 with their latest Digaron series lenses. Here is an old bookmark link that I found where others confirm this behavior:
Understanding Lens Diffraction

 

[miska]

Hi,
Since a bit of time has gone now, I'd like to know if the impressions on this device are still as positive ?

I am on the fence, whether I should include this in my "starter kit", or if I'll save some money (for lenses for example) and go with a Disto 5 first.

I demoed one at my Arca Swiss dealer (Arca-Shop.de, really nice people by the way), and liked the digital display of focusing distance and near and far focus values for different apertures. Less to remember than the 1,2,3,4 values read on the helical. Was not 100% sure about the use of the "telescope". It seems to require a bit of calibration to adjust to your own vision, and I wasn't convinced of the repeatability of the measurements it provides - but maybe I would really need to calibrate to my vision and redo the experiment. The view through the viewfinder is very bright though, and focusing to the desired distance was easy (objects popped to focus quite well, so no doubt where the intended focus was). It's just the readings I got were ~10m, when I was aiming at infinity. The more I think of it, the more it's likely that the device should have been calibrated to my eyesight.

The build quality was ok, it's a bit big and heavy, especially when paired with a Factum.

I am wondering if for a beginner in tech-cams like me it would make things easier (with its cool digital display of the focusing distance and hyperfocal values), or just add one more gizmo to worry about.

Thoughts ?

 

[Frederic]

The Emodule performs well, but I'd recommend you get a Disto first and save for lenses indeed.
With a bit of practice you'll soon remember the most useful distance/helical numbers for each lens. And then, with some more practice, you'll be able to estimate distances quite accurately and leave that distometer at home.

 

[dougpeterson]

Without calibration to your eye the measurement is of absolutely no use.

You MUST calibrate it to your eye. It is not optional.

 

[miska]

Yes, the dealer did tell me that calibration was important. I just didn't realize how important it was: wrong calibration -> completely wrong results.

It would be really nice, if the module would also handle tilt. Since that is an essential advantage of the Arca-Swiss, it would be really helpful. Would take a lot of the guesswork and tables out of the equation.

 

[dougpeterson]

Yes, the dealer did tell me that calibration was important. I just didn't realize how important it was: wrong calibration -> completely wrong results.

It would be really nice, if the module would also handle tilt. Since that is an essential advantage of the Arca-Swiss, it would be really helpful. Would take a lot of the guesswork and tables out of the equation.

The module could not incorporate tilt as you're no longer talking about one distance that is in focus but rather a table of height-within-frame vs start/end of focus. For tilt focusing a comparative focus mask series is by far the best method in my opinion; establish focus without tilt and note the amount of focus mask indicated at infinity and add tilt and modify focus distance using that amount as a benchmark for acceptable infinity. In 3-5 images taken in fairly rapid succession and with minimal fuss (e.g. not using 100% review at all, or not using it much) you can establish an ideal amount of tilt for the foreground without losing any detail at infinity.

 

[ondebanks]

No, you found WALLY - since Arca is a European brand, and that's what the bespectacled striped fellow is called here in Europe.

 

[jagsiva]

Ha, true enough.

As for my feelings on the EMC after a few months, it is still a very fascinating tool. I was initially disappointed with the granularity of the measurements, especially for longer glass. However, Martin has been updating the software and it is now quite bit better. I suspect this will only improve. So yes, I do still think it is a great accessory. Cheers...

 

[subrata1965]

Calibration:
Lens profiles are factory loaded... All DoF scales and focus information is based on a base CoC that is entered as well. Options allow for 5/6/7/8/9/10/20/30/40 microns.

Which MFDB do you use and what Coc do you use?

For my Rodenstock 28mm f/4.5 HR Digaron-S Lens:

@ 6 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 55.8 feet @ f/8 and 40.7 feet @ f/11.
@ 7 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 48.0 feet @ f/8 and 34.8 feet @ f/11.
@ 8 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 41.9 feet @ f/8 and 30.6 feet @ f/11.
@ 9 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 37.4 feet @ f/8 and 27.3 feet @ f/11.
@ 10 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 33.5 feet @ f/8 and 24.3 feet @ f/11.
@ 20 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 16.7 feet @ f/8 and 12.1 feet @ f/11.
@ 30 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 11.1 feet @ f/8 and 7.9 feet @ f/11.
@ 40 Micron CoC, DOF is showing NP: 8.3 feet @ f/8 and 6.0 feet @ f/11.

 

[jagsiva]

I am using and IQ180 and CoC of 5microns which is setting 5.

 

[subrata1965]

I am using and IQ180 and CoC of 5microns which is setting 5.

For my IQ160, CoC setting should be 6 micron and @ f/11, NP will be 40.7 feet. I need to test and see in reality what acceptable NP sharpness I can get.

 

[cs750]

Comments and reports on the eModule Cloud seem stale since it seems there are few (if any) recent reports on this accessory. I have been interested in this for a very long time. Someone recently made a comment to me that people who have the eModule rarely even use theirs anymore etc. etc. It would be most helpful if those who have RECENTLY used an eModule Cloud or who have used one extensively over a period of time could provide an updated report based upon long term usage. A more recent report would be greatly appreciated.