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!
New camera from Arca Swiss: the Pico
- Thread starter P. Chong
- Start date
I think this is a legitimate question. I can only answer for myself but no bellows camera is as light and potentially as finely machined. These positive attributes will fill the gap I have been looking for. The M-two is ancient but still very well machined. If it were in the same weight category I probably wouldn't be looking at the Pico but it is a lot heavier and bulkier.
Victor B.
Chris Barrett
Member
I'm in an absolute quandary right now. I shelved my M2 when I upgraded from the A7r3 to the A7r4... the 4 sadly being incompatible with the view camera. I was fine using tilt/shift lenses for the last 3-4 years, but I pulled the Arca back out last month, reverted to my dusty R3 and have been loving the elegance of the M2. Now comes the Pico. The problem for me as an architectural photographer, is the current lens limitations. On the M2, I can use all my Canon mount glass... 11-24, 17TS-e, 24 TS-e, Contax 35PC, 50 TS-e and so on. With the Pico, the widest lens is their modified 24 TS-e. Now, I could move to the Fuji bodies and the 24 now becomes a 19, but not nearly as wide as I can go with my current system. I'm having the hardest time deciding what to go with now.
Image below shot Monday... 17mm TS-e on the A7R3/Arca stitched up and down for a little extra image.
Image below shot Monday... 17mm TS-e on the A7R3/Arca stitched up and down for a little extra image.
corvus
Active member
If the A7R4 doesn't work - probably because the handle is in the way - then the only option is to keep the A7R3 or maybe connect the Sigma FP-L to the M2 (without the handle). That's basically my current argument with system cameras, as they usually have a handle and there's always lost space in front of the sensor due to the depth of the housing. Only with a back do all of these limitations disappear.
It doesn't currently look like there will be a separate Canon EF lens board for the Pico.
It doesn't currently look like there will be a separate Canon EF lens board for the Pico.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
They could modify the Nikon 19mm tilt shift at one point?
Chris Barrett
Member
If I stay with the M2, I might try out the A7cr, which seems to have less of a grip and decent resolution. Rod has said that they will consider additional lens modifications if there is enough interest. I believe what I really want is the Pico with a GFX 100. I just don’t know if the combo is going to be versatile enough for me.
rdeloe
Well-known member
I use an F-Universalis with GFX 100S. It's fantastic for my purposes, but will be problematic for yours. The widest symmetrical lens that shifts is the SK APO-Digitar 35/5.6 L-88 I use. It is limited to 8mm of shift because the rear end is inside the GFX mount. An additional challenge with the wide symmetrical lenses is that the thick cover glass on the GFX sensor does not play nice with them. I had to close up the spacing between cells on my wide symmetrical or rangefinder design lenses to get best performance. That may not be possible on a SK 35/5.6 XL-102 in a Copal 0 shutter.
If you need very wide lenses, which seems to be the case, I'm not seeing a path forward that is better than what you have, unless you're willing to throw a lot of money at this venture and get a medium format back and wide tech camera lenses.
If you need very wide lenses, which seems to be the case, I'm not seeing a path forward that is better than what you have, unless you're willing to throw a lot of money at this venture and get a medium format back and wide tech camera lenses.
So True!! Only with a DB will the limitations disappear. That is the main reason I purchased a CFV-100C with no regrets. Almost the same price as a 100 II with no lens limitations.
Victor B.
diggles
Well-known member
The Pico looks like a very interesting camera and it seems to fix the alignment issues I had with the Actus. If I hadn't already moved on to the Rm3di…
The DB does remove the lens limitations, but if you use flash in your architectural photography then a mirrorless camera body with a mechanical shutter is a must.
Doppler9000
Well-known member
I would think the rail would allow focus without the need to mount in a helicoid.
Last edited:
FloatingLens
Well-known member
As far as I understood at the Pico premiere, lens boards can be ordered separately for mounting your own lenses. (personal chat with Jean-Pierre Pieve)
Last edited:
None of my lenses are going back to AS. I intend to mount them myself including the 138 Float in Pico dedicated lens boards.
Victor B.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
There's an R adapter. As I understand it you can just use your R lenses on the Pico via adapter, as long as you adhere to FFD constraints. Maybe Rod can clarify.
Chris Barrett
Member
They do have Copal 0 boards available for the Pico. And for those who've asked, no there won't be a Pico Canon mount board. Their modified TS-e lenses remove the rear mechanics, shortening the lenses and likely making them easier to focus at infinity on the system. I've been down the digi-back route... my last was an IQ 260 that I used on an Rm3D. The 35 was barely usable. You can do so much more with a small sensor and wide Canon glass. Lots of the work I do simply isn't possible with a digital back. The beauty of the M2 is that if I need to be light and quick, I can leave it home and use the Tilt/Shifts on the Metabones adapter. Getting modified lenses for the Pico means you're stuck with that system. I've hungered for a really elegant system ever since I transitioned from 4x5 film. I loved the Rm3D, but digital backs have so many shortcomings.
I followed your blog years ago and remember when you gave up the Phase DB in favor of a Sony smaller sensor. To say the least it was very inspiring even though I never needed the range of movements that you required for your work. It may be that what you need simply can't be obtained with DB ever and you have cleverly found a way around to meet your needs.
The beauty of the Pico for me is three fold: Light weight, rigidity and precision. Weight, which is extremely important, is a given - rigidity and precision have yet to be determined. My needs are very different than yours but all of us want what AS is selling. The truth will be found in the very near future.
Victor B.
The beauty of the Pico for me is three fold: Light weight, rigidity and precision. Weight, which is extremely important, is a given - rigidity and precision have yet to be determined. My needs are very different than yours but all of us want what AS is selling. The truth will be found in the very near future.
Victor B.
Last edited:
Chris Barrett
Member
Light weight, rigidity and precision. Same.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
Well the IQ4 kind of changed the came for digital backs. The CCD gen sensors were a dead-end for ultra wides, although the 260 to this day is considered the best of the last gen CCDs. Its Sony backlit CMOS tech on a larger scale with circuitry optimized for high DR. The problem kind of is that the IQ4 is the only real option that's super flexible and modern and price is still high excluding one-off forced sales like we saw a few days ago.
I do think however that a small mirrorless like the Sigma on an Alpa or Arca is indeed a great option.
I wonder whether P1 will finally come around with the IQ5.
The latest digital backs with BSI technology are now in their third iteration since CMOS sensors replaced the CCD sensor in your IQ260. As noted here and elsewhere, the new sensors found in the IQ4 150, Fujis and Hasselblads appear to play quite well with wide angle lenses such as the SK35, certainly no worse than the BSI sensors in your Sonys if you were to compare apples to apples (i.e., shift to the edges of the image circle), notwithstanding the recent issues with PDAF banding in the Hasselblad CFV-100C, which appear to be easily fixable in post using the methods of either @diggles or @mristuccia.
But the rate limiting parameters for you seem to be requirement for flash sync with and interoperability of lenses between platforms, which make all of the above essentially moot. Indeed, it seems that the best option for your needs is to stick with the Sony + M2.
Anyway, glad to see you here on GetDPI.
John