25mm up is the standard for the rear and zeros at -10 on the front. It's different for every format frame pair you use so I suspect they based it on 5x4. It is the smallest pack size.
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!
Small technical cameras, an overview and comparison
- Thread starter Lorenz(GFX)
- Start date
They both occupy the same space in the bag but configured differently. Here is the 'pack' for the complete system. so L to R is the pack of filters, fully assembled camera laid on the back and end of rail with cut out foam to stabilise. Rail is in the top pouch. I can swap out the filters for a 90mm lens if I want to travel really lighter. Second small pack has lenses, batteries, hood for back and lens key in top. That is it.
I did spend some time with a Cambo DB which is the equivalent of the Arca in this configuration. It was much smaller to pack but I found it to be a bit of a toy by comparison to the build of the Arca (without wishing to offend anyone). Does the job very well.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
I must say one thing about Linhof. They rarely come out with new products - basically never. Techno is one and done and MT 3000 also.
BUT - they have a point, the design is actually great. I wonder why the Techno never full caught on. I suppose it is at this cross-stage between bellows and pancake where most go for a pancake.
It is a very beautiful camera though.
On Arca I always loved the modularity of the film cameras, meaning you can easily replace 6x9, 4x5 etc. frames on say the F-Metric.
In a sense the Pico is the perfect final point for Arca, although it is a bit more on the expensive side as result.
BUT - they have a point, the design is actually great. I wonder why the Techno never full caught on. I suppose it is at this cross-stage between bellows and pancake where most go for a pancake.
It is a very beautiful camera though.
On Arca I always loved the modularity of the film cameras, meaning you can easily replace 6x9, 4x5 etc. frames on say the F-Metric.
In a sense the Pico is the perfect final point for Arca, although it is a bit more on the expensive side as result.
Last post from me but this is the other significant difference between the 2 systems if you want to pack 'configured'. In the Techno the back hangs off the camera and is quite vulnerable imho. With the Arca you can set it up so that the main weight is taken by the rail and although still vulnerable I think is a safer option.
The Techno has been upgraded but in an unpublicised way as I understand it. I agree it is a very good rigid design with everything you need. A bit overkill in some respects.
Paul Spinnler
Well-known member
Still find the the F-Metric 6x9 one of the best compact systems - if you do not need stitch and shoot film + digital hybrid.
vieri
Well-known member
The advantage of Arca-Swiss against the Techno, to me, is basically expressed by compounding @Paul Spinnler 's messages above.
The Techno is great, but it's limited in what it can do compared to the F- or M- line of Arca-Swiss, and compared to the Pico as well. E.g., you can't use a GFX or X2D on the Techno, as you can on the Pico; you cannot use 4x5" film on the Techno, as you can on all F- and M- line Arca; and so on.
More, Arca-Swiss is keeping innovating and creating new products; I think that, given the state of the art of digital back vs "small" MF, developing cameras like the Pico or the F-Universalis which can accommodate all sort of digital capturing devices is a genius move. We are talking about the state of the art in digital backs on a separate thread, these days; I think that and this are deeply connected. If I were to invest in a digital tech camera today, I would absolutely privilege a system that can accommodate MF bodies besides digital backs.
I am currently shooting 4x5" B&W film only, but if I wanted to go back to digital and keep my workflow, all I needed to do was getting an adapter to attach whatever digital recording instrument I wanted to my Arcas and I'd be good. If I thought that I needed more resolving lenses, I could also easily mount any current Rodenstock to Arca lens plates, and be done. One more reason for me to have selected Arca-Swiss against, say, the Master Technika 3000 (besides it being much less straightforward to use than a rail view camera, in my opinion).
Best regards,
Vieri
Mamiya M645/Phase One mount has electronic contacts so things likely aren't that simple. In fact, product page for the Mamiya Phase One lens board does say Pico Aperture Control e-Module is required and sold separately. What the product page doesn't clearly spell out is the Pico's front frame is passing signal between the two, so this kind of configuration is highly Pico dependend. As a result, putting a Mamiya Phase One mount on an F or M series body through a B mount adapter board would kill the electronic functuions on almost all Mamiya and Phase One M645 lenses...
Interesting that Arca Swiss decided on this type of two piece setup when they started the Pico from stractch. The 110mm Canon EF lens board is a single piece, the mini USB port is only for connecting to a powersupply in the form of a USB powerbank. Spacing on this board design is so tight that some Canon TS-E models requires special mounting sequence so the power supply connector won't get in the way. That might be why Arca decided to rebarrel selected TS-E lenses rather than design a new Canon EF lens board for the Pico. 24 and 50 are certainly the most commonly used TS-Es, but 17, 90 and 135 are now gone.
A bunch of rambling off the top of my head. Please ignore if they don't make any sense...
diggles
Well-known member
While the 24mm and 50mm are the most commonly used TS-E lenses, the 17mm, 90mm, and 135mm are also viable options for use on the Pico if you are comfortable with a reversible modification.
Based on the requirements of a GetDPI forum member, who was kind enough to clue me in, RAF produced a Canon TS-E to M39 adapter that is now available on the RAF Camera website. To use this adapter, the aperture must be locked at the desired f-stop in advance. The shift mechanism is then removed from the lens, and the internal wiring disconnected. Then it attaches directly to the tilt mechanism of the lens.
I am currently using the Canon TS-E 24mm II and 17mm in this configuration and am achieving professional results. The mechanics of the shift mechanism appear to be identical across these lenses, and, as far as I can tell, Canon used the same design throughout the newer TS-E lineup. One practical consideration is the diameter of the adapter’s rear opening, as rear element sizes vary by model. Fortunately, RAF can bore the adapter to the required diameter upon request. The bore can be enlarged up 35mm.
With regard to focusing, the floating element must be taken into account. For interior work, I typically set the lens to the 3 m mark, establish focus using the rail, and then fine-tune with the focusing ring. For exterior work, I set the ring between 3 m and infinity before following the same rail-and-ring process. I initially used my backup kit to calibrate my feel for the distance scale.
I primarily use these lenses on the Pico with a Sony A7R V, though I have also used them successfully with a Hasselblad digital back.
FWIW, I do the initial setting of the lens scale with a laser rangefinder measurement, then use rail to focus on the point that was measured. That pretty much takes care of the lens floating element. As my swing/tilt methodology relies on moving the rear frame back and forth, the lens scale is pretty much untouched after the initial setup.
diggles
Well-known member
I’ve been considering trying a laser rangefinder, though I haven't used one yet. Which model do you use?
Warren, the Nikon Prostaff 1000 works well.
My comments from a while back:
Leica Disto question
Which model do most users have? I just checked the most basic ones - on a budget - and the range was either 130 ft or 330 ft. Is that enough because beyond that is infinity setting on a lens? Thanks.
www.getdpi.com
Disto E7100i. No sufficient for setting hyperfocal distance on helical mounted lens, but fine for setting floating element lens on view camera.