ARCA-SWISS Universalis

[dougpeterson]

This may be a simplistic question, but what are the advantages (all studio tethered) of the universalis over say a legacy 4x5 like a Sinar P2?
We are considering this set up (thank you, Doug but have two existing geared 4x5 rigs and full lens sets.
I will assume the new lenses for digital are in order, but not as sure about the camera body. Is the universalis more precise? Hold the DB more securely?

Movements are scaled to the sensor size. The 4x5 rig is very very precise - relative to the requirements for 4x5. The Univeralis is very very precise relative to the requirements for 80mp 645 sensors.

It's also smaller and lighter and less "unwieldy" when using a digital back.

 

[Paul2660]

Actually, the Arca DSLR2, (M2 configured for DSLR cameras), is not a bad solution if you have an M2, the parts needed to get to the DSLR configuration are not many.

One thing on the Universalis, Acra did away with the geared front swing (unless it was added later on but the pictures don't show it), and you have a lot more control with the DSLR2 for swing with the geared version.

Also the DSLR2, with a Sony A7r actually weighs just a bit less than a rm3di and digital back installed. I was surprised when I reviewed the DSLR2 last year at just how portable it is. It's also very easy to pack.

No doubt the Universalis wins on most other considerations, smaller, less weight, and even more perfect for a A7r or digital back. Sure which it was around a few years ago.

Paul

 

[miska]

For those interested by the Universalis, a german Arca-Swiss dealer just put this video online. It's in german, but has english sub-titles...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRvD-GzSWRY

 

[Glowrider]

For those interested by the Universalis, a german Arca-Swiss dealer just put this video online. It's in german, but has english sub-titles...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRvD-GzSWRY

Thank you!

 

[m21apsh]

When is Universalis shipping?


Jeff

 

[med]

If I were getting a 4x5 film camera I might still consider the M-Line two.

If I was primarily or exclusively a digital shooter I'd go with the Univeralis without hesitation.

I am interested at the prospect of using either the M2 or Universalis for both 4x5 and with a 48x36mm digital back. Which bits would I have to change out to accomplish this? Can they share the same function carrier, rear standard, or bellows, or are those the three bits that need changing?

 

[Paul2660]

I don't believe they share any parts. The DSLR2 and M2 share parts but the Universalis is all new. Smaller form factor.

Rod Kulkas, the Arca rep would know for sure.

Paul

 

[RodK]

This may have been overlooked in all of the new Arca announcements. This appears to be a newer LIGHTER, version of the old tried and true M2. I noticed the weight for the unit is around 2.64lbs, I assume no rail included. They are making it in 3 versions, DSLR, Medium Format back, and 4 x 5. The rear mount appears lower or higher depending on the camera being used. This unit does have a 32mm limit on widest lens.

In the photo Arca has the standard rail included, which I believe would need to be added to the total cost.

This unit seems to have all the great movements of the larger and heavier M2. Since it has the R mount any R lens can be used. If Arca comes out with Nikon, Canon, and other mounts supported in the R mount this could be an interesting alternative.

The rail is included. To use a longer focal length or do macro an extesion rail would need to be obtained.
The unit does have rise/Fall on both the front and rear standards. Mf2 has rise fall only on the back. Both units have MicroOrbix tilt. And geared lateral shift on rear as well.
Rod

 

[RodK]

When is Universalis shipping?


Jeff

The universalis has been shipping for several months.
Rod

 

[RodK]

I am interested at the prospect of using either the M2 or Universalis for both 4x5 and with a 48x36mm digital back. Which bits would I have to change out to accomplish this? Can they share the same function carrier, rear standard, or bellows, or are those the three bits that need changing?

The function carriers, the part that connects the bellows frames to the rails, are different on the Universalis from the F-Line/M line series.

So, you could purchase a 4x5 Universalis, and add a bellows, DSLR adapter,
and a 802308 L bracket and Camera plate, to use a Sony, Canon, Nikon, or Leica M240 body.
Rod

 

[med]

I don't believe they share any parts. The DSLR2 and M2 share parts but the Universalis is all new. Smaller form factor.

Rod Kulkas, the Arca rep would know for sure.

Paul

Sorry, I think I worded my question confusingly. I'm looking at either the M2 or Universalis to shoot both 4x5 and with a 645 MFDB. I'm wondering which of the two systems would be better suited to shooting both formats (Doug stated earlier that he would choose Universalis for digital, and M2 for film).

The Universalis, for example, has both a MF version and a 4x5 version. I'm wondering what parts are shared between those versions, so I can figure out how many extra parts I would need to purchase to shoot both formats with it.

The function carriers, the part that connects the bellows frames to the rails, are different on the Universalis from the F-Line/M line series.

So, you could purchase a 4x5 Universalis, and add a bellows, DSLR adapter,
and a 802308 L bracket and Camera plate, to use a Sony, Canon, Nikon, or Leica M240 body.
Rod

Thanks Rod. If I purchased a 4x5 Universalis and wished to shoot with a 645 MFDB, what parts would I need?

-Matt

 

[RodK]

Basicaly the same, but given the weight of a 645 body, I would go with MF2.
Also you understand that the shortest lens you could use on a setup with a 645 body is probably about a 120mm, I hope. With a FF Dslr and a Sony, or Leica, you can get down to 32mm and reach infinity, but on a Canon or Nikon, 90mm is about the shortest you can safely use to focus infinity Remember, the sensor is recessed in a body and so the body has to be calculated into the distance from lens to sensor. And LF style lenses have a rear lens group that extends to the rear from the shutter. The focal length is calculated from the nodal point located usually, inside the shutter. So the rear group of the lens is even closer to the sensor and or body. And th rear group of a LF lens may be larger in diameter than the lens opening on the body. A Nikon has roughly a 46mm body depth while Canon is around 44mm. The Sony A7 series as around 20mm, so can accommodate much shorter lenses.
A 645 body is even deeper...
Be well.
Rod

 

[RodK]

A follow up of my last post.
The Universalis can handle the 645, it is just a bit lighter built body. Given your parameters of 4x5 and MF, the Universalis would be much better choice. Also at some point we will have a great focus system, incorporated with our Dex control, that will make focusing much easier. Not ready yet, but coming.
It would be much easier to remove the back and use it directly on the Universalis and allow use of the widest lenses, down to 23mm.
Be well,
Rod

 

[med]

Basicaly the same, but given the weight of a 645 body, I would go with MF2.
Also you understand that the shortest lens you could use on a setup with a 645 body is probably about a 120mm, I hope. With a FF Dslr and a Sony, or Leica, you can get down to 32mm and reach infinity, but on a Canon or Nikon, 90mm is about the shortest you can safely use to focus infinity Remember, the sensor is recessed in a body and so the body has to be calculated into the distance from lens to sensor. And LF style lenses have a rear lens group that extends to the rear from the shutter. The focal length is calculated from the nodal point located usually, inside the shutter. So the rear group of the lens is even closer to the sensor and or body. And th rear group of a LF lens may be larger in diameter than the lens opening on the body. A Nikon has roughly a 46mm body depth while Canon is around 44mm. The Sony A7 series as around 20mm, so can accommodate much shorter lenses.
A 645 body is even deeper...
Be well.
Rod

Thanks Rod. Sorry again if I wasn't clear... I do not wish to mount a 645 body to the MF2 or Universalis... just the digital back (Leaf Aptus 22 in H mount).

So if I purchased a Universalis F-mf, what would I need to shoot 4x5 on it? Looking at pictures it looks like I would need a new bellows and a bigger rear standard in addition to the 4x5 international back. Can I re-use the rear function carrier for both formats?

And would it be possible to do the same with the MF2 (i.e. purchase a 4x5 compatible bellows and rear standard)?

Thanks,

Matt

 

[RodK]

Ok,
I understand. There is not a 4x5 rear kit, at this time, for the MF2, but I can check.
I would get the 019169 Universalis MF and then a 4x5 Universalis format kit #021245.
I would also say you will need a 041225 rail extension.(10"/25cm).
And a digital back adapter for the MF setup.
With that setup on the 4x5, you can use 55mm to 360mm on flat boards.
And the Nikon 500mm telephoto lens, as well.
On the Universalis 6x9, with a longer bellows, and using the same rail piece suggested for 4x5, you could use a similar range of lenses, and even get down to 23mm with the original standard bellows.
Hope this clarifies.
Rod

 

[Frederic]

Given your needs, if I was to go with the Universalis I'd get the 4x5 version and add a 4x5->6x9 reduction plate (200003). Of course you'd also need a H mount adapter plate for your back.

 

[med]

Ok,
I understand. There is not a 4x5 rear kit, at this time, for the MF2, but I can check.
I would get the 019169 Universalis MF and then a 4x5 Universalis format kit #021245.
I would also say you will need a 041225 rail extension.(10"/25cm).
And a digital back adapter for the MF setup.
With that setup on the 4x5, you can use 55mm to 360mm on flat boards.
And the Nikon 500mm telephoto lens, as well.
On the Universalis 6x9, with a longer bellows, and using the same rail piece suggested for 4x5, you could use a similar range of lenses, and even get down to 23mm with the original standard bellows.
Hope this clarifies.
Rod

Thanks Rod, that is exactly the info that I was looking for!

Given your needs, if I was to go with the Universalis I'd get the 4x5 version and add a 4x5->6x9 reduction plate (200003). Of course you'd also need a H mount adapter plate for your back.

Thanks Frederic! That's a great idea. Other than the additional bulk of the 4x5 setup over the 6x9 setup, is there any downside to this arrangement? I would be worried about reduction in functionality or tradeoffs in precision while using the smaller format.

 

[RodK]

While a somewhat lower price to use a step adapter board on the 4x5, it would compromise the amount of available rise/fall. To center the lens to the back would require much more rise if the DB is installed on the 4x5 standard. Then you have less available rise on the front to work with.
Obviously, as mentioned, the size and bulk is also a factor.

 

[Frederic]

Thanks Rod, that is exactly the info that I was looking for!



Thanks Frederic! That's a great idea. Other than the additional bulk of the 4x5 setup over the 6x9 setup, is there any downside to this arrangement? I would be worried about reduction in functionality or tradeoffs in precision while using the smaller format.

To me the real downside was the limited range of movements in 4x5, compared to my F-Line for instance. As you and Rod pointed out, rise/fall with the MFDB might be reduced too.
I really wished the universalis would answer my 4x5 and digi back needs in a single package, but for now I'm still sticking to the slightly cumbersome tech cam + view cam combo.

 

[med]

Thanks once again Rod and Frederic!

Does the step adaptor not keep the centre in the same spot when going from 4x5 to 6x9? Is part 200003 (141mm to 110mm reducer) what I would use, or is that strictly for lens boards?

I am weighing the pros and cons of sticking with my old F-line (REALLY old f-line, with 171mm standards) and getting an rm3di for digital, or getting a Universalis for both but it seems as though there may be too many tradeoffs... the Universalis looks like it would offer more than a tech cam for digital, but less than my f-line for 4x5 (although the geared movements, reduced bulk, and increased rigidity would be appreciated and worth the loss of some movements for me).

Are there any actual spec sheets for the Universalis MF or 4x5? I can't seem to find any.

Also, are there ANY "analog" lenses from Rodenstock or Schneider that are worth using with a digital back? Since my back is "only" 22 MP I figured there must be some lenses that could be used on both formats, in particular something in the 90mm-120mm range.