Arca Swiss Pico Lens Compatibility

[vjbelle]

Thanks for the explanation. I'm not loving that aspect. I suppose you could attach an accessory long Arca-Swiss compatible rail on the bottom and shove it all forward, but that makes it klunky and heavier.

To be fair, they named it "Pico" because it's supposed to be smaller, lighter and more compact -- so it's not meant to be a universal solution.

The camera mount is on top of the shift rise/fall movements. Anything attached to the plate has to allow for back fall which will have a portion of the mechanism extending out of the bottom. That is the reason for the short mount plate. (hope my wording makes sense!).

As I said above I've gotten around it with my tripod head setup and this is not a big deal for me. Losing over 2 lbs is a really big deal for me!!

My M-two set up to use my HB CFV-100C weighs in at 2300g. The Pico ready to go weighs in at 1291g.

Victor B.

 

[rdeloe]

The camera mount is on top of the shift rise/fall movements. Anything attached to the plate has to allow for back fall which will have a portion of the mechanism extending out of the bottom. That is the reason for the short mount plate. (hope my wording makes sense!).

As I said above I've gotten around it with my tripod head setup and this is not a big deal for me. Losing over 2 lbs is a really big deal for me!!

My M-two set up to use my HB CFV-100C weighs in at 2300g. The Pico ready to go weighs in at 1291g.

Victor B.

Understood. It is a very different design -- clever of them.

The weight difference between the Pico and my F-Universalis is not nearly as much as between your M-Two. My F-Universalis, ready to go weighs in at 1,431 grams (with Rotafoot and bellows but without a lens board). It's worth spending some money to get a nearly 1 kg weight saving like you did, but it's not worth it for me to get 0.14 kg.

 

[vjbelle]

Understood..... but you still would really like the Pico!!

Rob..... I need a 50mm tube to use my 180T on the Pico. Ideally it could be threaded 34.6 on one end and the other end could be a bare 34.6 opening that I could attach to the lens plate - although both openings could be unthreaded. FFD between my 120mm and the 180T is 52mm - 50mm will work just fine. I can't find this stuff so far. What would you order?

Thanks......

Edit: I would need male 34.6 threaded on one end.

Victor B.

 

[davidsuchoff]

Understood..... but you still would really like the Pico!!

Rob..... I need a 50mm tube to use my 180T on the Pico. Ideally it could be threaded 34.6 on one end and the other end could be a bare 34.6 opening that I could attach to the lens plate - although both openings could be unthreaded. FFD between my 120mm and the 180T is 52mm - 50mm will work just fine. I can't find this stuff so far. What would you order?

Thanks......

Edit: I would need male 34.6 threaded on one end.

Victor B.

Victor - thanks for sharing your insights and initial takes on the Pico. I'm a CFV 100 owner and have been anxiously waiting to hear/read about initial Pico experiences. I've been waffling back and forth between the Pico and the RM3di but am leaning more towards the former. Thanks again and look forward to reading more about your experiences with the camera!

 

[rdeloe]

Understood..... but you still would really like the Pico!!

Rob..... I need a 50mm tube to use my 180T on the Pico. Ideally it could be threaded 34.6 on one end and the other end could be a bare 34.6 opening that I could attach to the lens plate - although both openings could be unthreaded. FFD between my 120mm and the 180T is 52mm - 50mm will work just fine. I can't find this stuff so far. What would you order?

Thanks......

Edit: I would need male 34.6 threaded on one end.

Victor B.

Victor, for custom work, Rafael from RAF Camera is unbeatable. Sketch out a drawing on the back of a napkin and send him the picture. He'll send you back a mechanical drawing for proofing.

Can you tell me why you need a 34.6mm tube? Is your lens in a Copal 0 shutter? And do you want to use it on different cameras with different mounts? If you provide some more info and pictures I might have some ideas.

 

[vjbelle]

Rob.... thank you for taking the time to get back to me. I don't need a 34.6mm diameter tube but do need openings at either end that are 34.6 which is the diameter of a Copal 0 opening. My 180T has a copal '0' shutter just as all of my Schneider lenses. None of this is critical. I just thought that if the parts were available I would order another Pico lens plate and see how everything works out. The image you have posted of the M65X1 (33mm) tube would be a good starting point. I would need adapters on each end that would probably add another 10mm. A little shy of what I need but at least a start.

Victor B.

 

[Doppler9000]

Rob.... thank you for taking the time to get back to me. I don't need a 34.6mm diameter tube but do need openings at either end that are 34.6 which is the diameter of a Copal 0 opening. My 180T has a copal '0' shutter just as all of my Schneider lenses. None of this is critical. I just thought that if the parts were available I would order another Pico lens plate and see how everything works out. The image you have posted of the M65X1 (33mm) tube would be a good starting point. I would need adapters on each end that would probably add another 10mm. A little shy of what I need but at least a start.

Victor B.

I would be tempted to base the ‘tophats’ on one of the bayonets Arca Swiss offers as a Pico lens board, and put together the pieces from Raf’s catalogue.

For example…

 

[vjbelle]

Another wrinkle perhaps for some is that shorter lenses such as Schneider's won't accept some of the 100mm filter holders - especially the newer Lee holder. The lens I have mounted is a Schneider 72mm and the holder used is the older 'Foundation' Lee holder. It just barely clears the tilt mechanism. The real issue is the lack of space of movement of 100mm filters such as GND. They won't move down enough for the needed placement. I use 2 stop GND filters but have ordered a 3 stop so that I can get just a little bit of sky darkening for my Schneider lenses. The best solution for this would be a 20mm lens extension tube which would allow for the filter to move downward as needed.

I do not have this issue for any of my Rody lenses.

Victor B.

 

[vjbelle]

I would be tempted to base the ‘tophats’ on one of the bayonets Arca Swiss offers as a Pico lens board, and put together the pieces from Raf’s catalogue.

For example…

View attachment 215504View attachment 215505View attachment 215506View attachment 215507

Thank you for the post. I saw the tube at the RAF site but not the adapters.

Victor B.

 

[cunim]

I do not have this issue for any of my Rody lenses.

Very interesting point. I use an older Lee system, and no longer have any SK lenses so I should be OK? Can you post a pic with one of the HR lenses.

As an aside, I have started using circular magnetic GNDs with the GFX. You lose a bit of control over placing the gradation but they seem to work well enough for the digital world.

 

[vjbelle]

Look on page 2 mid way down. The lens in that image is the Rody 50mm. The 40mm also clears. All of the Rody lenses I own will clear (40mm, 50mm, 90mm, 138mm). 55mm from the front of the lens plate is needed for the front of a lens to clear the shelf on the tilt mechanism. Rodenstock doesn't give a measurement for the front element of their lenses so it's hard to tell if all of the S/SW lenses will clear.

What brand magnetic GNDs are you using?

Victor B.

 

[vjbelle]

Here is an image showing the Rody 40mm with the new style Lee holder. The holder just clears the tilt shelf by maybe 3mm. There is lots of room for adjusting the GND.

Victor B.

 

[rdeloe]

Rob.... thank you for taking the time to get back to me. I don't need a 34.6mm diameter tube but do need openings at either end that are 34.6 which is the diameter of a Copal 0 opening. My 180T has a copal '0' shutter just as all of my Schneider lenses. None of this is critical. I just thought that if the parts were available I would order another Pico lens plate and see how everything works out. The image you have posted of the M65X1 (33mm) tube would be a good starting point. I would need adapters on each end that would probably add another 10mm. A little shy of what I need but at least a start.

Victor B.

I recommend you thread your Copal 0 shutter onto an adapter, rather than dropping it through a hole and locking it on with a ring (as one would do with a lens board). There's no advantage to doing that for a case like this. If you're worried about the lens twisting off the threaded adapter board, you can still put a Copal 0 locking ring on after it's threaded to the adapter.

Copal 0 thread is M32x0.5mm. If you like the idea of using M65x1 tubes with the threaded coupling I described, then this is the part you need:
https://rafcamera.com/adapter-m32-5x0-5-to-m65x1 It's an adapter with Copal 0 female threading and male M65x1. The rest of the parts @Doppler9000 listed will fit onto this.

 

[cunim]

What brand magnetic GNDs are you using?

With the GFX, I use Kase but they are probably no better or worse than others. The 77 mm filters fits directly, and can be used with adapter rings for other lenses. Usually, I put Lee filters on the tech camera. Tell, the truth, I don't know which is better (Kase or Lee) at preserving optical quality.

My major annoyance with my Kase magnetic GND is that you can't cap it securely - so you can't just leave it on the lens. The filter + cap will come off in your bag because the magnetic hold is not that strong. I've tried caps that go over the entire front element, but they can trap the magnetic filter inside when you take them off - and a trapped filter can be the devil to get out of a deep cap. So I just take the mag holder and filter off when I put the camera in the bag. One more inconvenient little step. Kase has magnetic caps (why wouldn't they come off?) and I think they have filters that are threaded on the front (will take standard clip-on caps), but I have not looked into this.

 

[vjbelle]

Major complaint is that the magnets just aren't strong enough. I don't worry at all about my Lee coming off. But a magnet system would solve the issue for the Schneider lenses.

Victor B.

 

[JeffK]

No they aren't. The rear standard does move but the front standard is stationary. The advantage is that the rail is completely moveable in the tripod head unlike the Pico which has a very short mount plate attached to the rail. That way the weight, for the Actus, can be centered on the tripod head.

Victor B.

yes, I stand corrected. I didn't describe it well. Front standard moves by adjusting the position of the rail. Rear standard is repositioned to attain focus. Can always be kept balanced on the tripod head.

 

[JeffK]

Would be cool to see Cambo come up with the 645 lens panel that can receive the AS Aperture control module. Then Actus users could leverage their blue rings with aperture control.

 

[Reginald Fluggelding]

Another wrinkle perhaps for some is that shorter lenses such as Schneider's won't accept some of the 100mm filter holders - especially the newer Lee holder. The lens I have mounted is a Schneider 72mm and the holder used is the older 'Foundation' Lee holder. It just barely clears the tilt mechanism. The real issue is the lack of space of movement of 100mm filters such as GND. They won't move down enough for the needed placement. I use 2 stop GND filters but have ordered a 3 stop so that I can get just a little bit of sky darkening for my Schneider lenses. The best solution for this would be a 20mm lens extension tube which would allow for the filter to move downward as needed.

I do not have this issue for any of my Rody lenses.

Victor B.

View attachment 215508

looking at your DB hanging that far off the end of the rail is quite disappointing. I was hoping this would be the camera for me but that looks like a liability and a bad distribution of weight. I also saw your other photo showing the Rodenstock 40 mm and the filter holder and seems like if I was swapping between wide angle (especially 35XL) and longer lenses I'd have to swap rails otherwise It looks like the rail would be sticking out into the FOV.

 

[Vivseries1]

I use the Cambo AC-324 compendium lens hood with my Rodenstock lenses, which is a great lightweight solution. It looks like there may not be enough clearance in the front standard for that hood?

 

[vjbelle]

looking at your DB hanging that far off the end of the rail is quite disappointing. I was hoping this would be the camera for me but that looks like a liability and a bad distribution of weight. I also saw your other photo showing the Rodenstock 40 mm and the filter holder and seems like if I was swapping between wide angle (especially 35XL) and longer lenses I'd have to swap rails otherwise It looks like the rail would be sticking out into the FOV.

There is rearward weight.... that is just how it is designed. Either you can live with it or there are other cameras. All DB hang off the end of a mount. There is no difference between the Pico or any other system. If the back happens to fall off of any camera it will be a very bad day.

The 35XL is just fine with the 15CM rail. You will never see the rail with that lens.

Victor B.