Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Cube care and Lubrication

J

jlm

Workshop Member
finished up me cube and can pass along some info:

i completely dismantled mine, (not so easy, as arca took some design shortcuts making assembly easier than dis-assembly) i added a few holes so some buried screws are now accessible and replaced some pesky little e-clips with a setscrew to retain two tiny little shafts. my cube was an early model with slippery knobs using 2 O-rings on each knob for grip. i replaced those with homemade knurled knobs...

tweaked the fit of all the arc'd sliding parts and applied a thin grease to only those areas and the bearing areas for the drive shafts (left the actual gear rack dry, as i don't want grease there to collect grit.)

also to the base tilt mechanism sliding surfaces, which slides back and forth as you add the major base tilt

the friction wheels now work perfectly; turning them to the (-) direction simply disengages any additional braking. turning to the (+) direction all the way starts to put pressure on the nylon brake shoe which presses on the 1/2" wide arc'd surface, eventually enough pressure to hold it as a lock. no lubrication on the braking surfaces!
 
J

jlm

Workshop Member
never got around to posting a picture of my highly modded cube:
special bubble levels, much more precise
rotation top plane dead square to levels for 360 degrees;
bronze knurled and patinaed knobs never slippery, no rubber bits;
completely dismantled, all guideways lapped in and lubed;
tension +/- knobs now work: the action is so good, that when loose, with a firm movement, you can push through the arcs, spinning the knobs as it goes. then you can tighten the tension gripper as you see fit.

 
GrahamWelland

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
Those adjustment knobs look a lot better functionally than the rubber covered ones on my Cube. I had one of the ribbed rubber grips break on mine and I'm currently awaiting delivery of a replacement (Contact Rod klukas / Precision Camera Works for replacements).
 
J

jchabalk

New member
Seeing if i can revive this long dormant thread ;)

I have a cube with a similar RRS clamp to the one jlm shows in this thread. The fact that clamping surface isn't square to the head is kind of frustrating and i'm wondering if there's any good way to address this on my own through (possibly) shimming the clamp, or is this just something that we all need to deal with?

I'd guess i'm not the only one in this position. The toughest part of it is the round bubble level on the RRS clamps are really difficult to gauge side-to-side when the camera is pointed up or down from the horizon line.

Otherise this setup is amazing.
 
A

Alan

Active member
jchabalk said:
The fact that clamping surface isn't square to the head is kind of frustrating and i'm wondering if there's any good way to address this on my own through (possibly) shimming the clamp, or is this just something that we all need to deal with?
Click to expand...
Great thread - can't believe I missed it the first time around!

I 'temporarily' used some cellophane tape on one side of the clamp ways to level mine. I was intending to replace it with something more permanent/durable, but never got around to it. I've done the same thing with L-brackets to level the camera in the bracket.

IMG_0878.jpg
 
Last edited:
rdeloe

rdeloe

Well-known member
Alan said:
Great thread - can't believe I missed it the first time around!

I 'temporarily' used some cellophane tape on one side of the clamp ways to level mine. I was intending to replace it with something more permanent/durable, but never got around to it. I've done the same thing with L-brackets to level the camera in the bracket.

View attachment 214849
Click to expand...
Huh, I thought it was just me. I used a piece of metal foil tape to raise it up enough so that the levels on the Cube are closer to accurate. It always bothered me that the levels on the Cube don't match the levels on the F-Universalis. One of them is wrong, and I think it's the Cube.
 
J

jchabalk

New member
rdeloe said:
Huh, I thought it was just me. I used a piece of metal foil tape to raise it up enough so that the levels on the Cube are closer to accurate. It always bothered me that the levels on the Cube don't match the levels on the F-Universalis. One of them is wrong, and I think it's the Cube.
Click to expand...
It's a case of having too much conflicting information at some point. I've got a single bubble level on my tripod, one of the leveling base (if i use it), 2 on the cube, and one on the clamp.

And none of them are in agreement so I end up still using either a small shoe mount against the camera, the integrated level in a digital camera, or a slightly larger level against the frame of a larger camera to judge where i'm at. It's still good and i can just use the cube adjustments for deltas but it's kind of funny looking at like 4-5 levels all showing a slight - but material - difference 😂
 
4

4x5Australian

Well-known member
This issue is but one real-life practical advantage of using the Cambo WRS system. :)

The WRS body has dual tubular-type bubble levels, left - right and fore - aft, right there on the camera, right next to each other. They are very quick to use.

I don't have to look all around the exterior of the camera to level it, as I have had to do using other systems. I use them on every set-up and enjoy doing so every time.

Rod
 
Last edited:
corvus

corvus

Active member
I haven't quite understood what is not square to what? Are you all saying that the top clamp that supports the camera is not exactly level to the head in terms of leveling? I was under the assumption that it was THE precision device...

Using integrated digital levels in the camera settings is not a good idea in my experience. I checked this once myself with one of our calibrated laser levels that we use on construction. There are clear deviations. When I contacted my camera manufacturer (Canon) about this, they told me that this is "normal" and only serves as a guide. There is also no way to adjust it.
 
rdeloe

rdeloe

Well-known member
corvus said:
I haven't quite understood what is not square to what? Are you all saying that the top clamp that supports the camera is not exactly level to the head in terms of leveling? I was under the assumption that it was THE precision device...
Click to expand...
This is the second time this week that Mark Knopfler lyrics: "Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong". ;)

Here are three high quality levels. Which one do I believe? If my Stabilia is right, then the F-Universalis is very wrong and the Cube is nearly right. If I didn't have a Stabila level sitting on the rail, I would blame the clamp in the Cube. However, if the clamp is causing the rail to tilt, then the Stabila would be off in the same direction and amount as the bubble on the F-Universalis. Therefore, I conclude that the bubble in the F-Universalis is off.

Of course, maybe the F-Universalis level is the only correct one, and both the Stabila and the Cube are wrong... ;) One of them has to be wrong. Which is it? Fortunately, for the work I do, where I rarely need to be absolutely level, close enough works.

Important caveat: this is going the long way in the clamp. On the perpendicular axis, I had to raise the level of one side of the Cube clamp to get the F-Universalis and Cube to agree. Given that one F-Universalis level appears to be off, it's quite possible that in making them agree, I've now made the Cube wrong!

An additional wrinkle is that all this fussing over which of these levels is correct does not take account of the fact that my GFX 100S connects with a Rotafoot. Is the Rotafoot level and square? Is the GFX camera level and square when it's on the Rotafoot? The GFX mount allows an extremely small amount of play when the camera is on the Rotafoot, but even though it is small, that amount of play is enough to throw it off level. Which of the possible positions is correct?

Level.jpg

corvus said:
Using integrated digital levels in the camera settings is not a good idea in my experience. I checked this once myself with one of our calibrated laser levels that we use on construction. There are clear deviations. When I contacted my camera manufacturer (Canon) about this, they told me that this is "normal" and only serves as a guide. There is also no way to adjust it.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. The integrated digital level in every digital camera I've used is "ballpark" at best and cannot be trust where it matters.

I've also tried hot shoe levels, and other similar devices. None are reliable or as convenient as the levels on the F-Universalis and Cube.
 
J

jchabalk

New member
Sounds like we're all in this together 😂

In my particular case i can adjust the cube until its 2 levels each show perfectly level but the bubble level on the RRS arca clamp attached to it shows that it's not level - and as you rotate the clamp it appears to change a bit (eg: the mount on top of the cube isn't perfectly squared to the cube body).

It's not really that big of a deal in the end, i just continue to carry the level i use for various cameras. The hasselblad is my most frequently used camera and i've put a level against the side of it for years when framing up shots.

I agree with the comments on digital camera levels, the ones i've used also seem to have a sensitivity of a couple of degrees before showing out of level also - enough that i can tell by eye that the frame isn't level even though the camera level shows that it is.
 
corvus

corvus

Active member
rdeloe said:
This is the second time this week that Mark Knopfler lyrics: "Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong". ;)

Here are three high quality levels. Which one do I believe? If my Stabilia is right, then the F-Universalis is very wrong and the Cube is nearly right. If I didn't have a Stabila level sitting on the rail, I would blame the clamp in the Cube. However, if the clamp is causing the rail to tilt, then the Stabila would be off in the same direction and amount as the bubble on the F-Universalis. Therefore, I conclude that the bubble in the F-Universalis is off.

Of course, maybe the F-Universalis level is the only correct one, and both the Stabila and the Cube are wrong... ;) One of them has to be wrong. Which is it? Fortunately, for the work I do, where I rarely need to be absolutely level, close enough works.

Important caveat: this is going the long way in the clamp. On the perpendicular axis, I had to raise the level of one side of the Cube clamp to get the F-Universalis and Cube to agree. Given that one F-Universalis level appears to be off, it's quite possible that in making them agree, I've now made the Cube wrong!

An additional wrinkle is that all this fussing over which of these levels is correct does not take account of the fact that my GFX 100S connects with a Rotafoot. Is the Rotafoot level and square? Is the GFX camera level and square when it's on the Rotafoot? The GFX mount allows an extremely small amount of play when the camera is on the Rotafoot, but even though it is small, that amount of play is enough to throw it off level. Which of the possible positions is correct?

View attachment 214852



Totally agree. The integrated digital level in every digital camera I've used is "ballpark" at best and cannot be trust where it matters.

I've also tried hot shoe levels, and other similar devices. None are reliable or as convenient as the levels on the F-Universalis and Cube.
Click to expand...
Ah ... Another Dire Straits fan (y)

I could make the following suggestion if you have the ability to find a well calibrated leveling device:
Set the aligned horizontal laser line to level center axis lens/camera. Then project the horizontal line onto a distant wall where it is still in focus when looking through the viewfinder/display (i.e. not too far). Use the grid on the display to level the camera and then determine the most reliable bubble levels of the optical spirit levels. These should be sufficiently correct ...
I always use the two on my F-Universalis. They seem accurate enough. Even if I move the lens in a central perspective, the result in the shot is almost always correct ... unless I have a bad day :cool:
 
V

vjbelle

Well-known member
None of my bubble levels agree with each other. One or another is off by a smidgen so what's to trust? I really don't trust any of them for horizontal level and the only time I really need to be perfectly level is when there are straight lines in the image - such as architecture. I have found that the grid marks in any of my cameras (Fuji, HB, Sony) are extremely accurate for leveling horizontally which to me is most important. The bubble levels on my M-Two gets me close enough for vertical pitch. I line up the grid marks with whatever I want to be straight and 99% of the time the image is straight - no correction needed.

Victor B.
 
rdeloe

rdeloe

Well-known member
corvus said:
Ah ... Another Dire Straits fan (y)

I could make the following suggestion if you have the ability to find a well calibrated leveling device:
Set the aligned horizontal laser line to level center axis lens/camera. Then project the horizontal line onto a distant wall where it is still in focus when looking through the viewfinder/display (i.e. not too far). Use the grid on the display to level the camera and then determine the most reliable bubble levels of the optical spirit levels. These should be sufficiently correct ...
I always use the two on my F-Universalis. They seem accurate enough. Even if I move the lens in a central perspective, the result in the shot is almost always correct ... unless I have a bad day :cool:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip. Thankfully, like Victor (just above my post) close enough is good enough. The only time I really notice it being off level is when I'm flat stitching, and the amount is generally quite small.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top