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

vjbelle

Well-known member
The Pico is very much reinforced at the front. That is also why it has such an odd shape. We discussed it yesterday with the people from A/S. I think it makes a lot of sense as cameras tend to get lighter and bayonet mount lenses can get quite front heavy. Never had a 138 in my hands, but they offer a purpose-built adapter ring for the 138 that they showed yesterday. So I reckon the Pico is capable of fully supoorting that lens.
The purpose-built adapter for the 138 float is necessary because the mounting system is different than copal. I won't believe it doesn't tilt until I see it. The 138 float is all forward weight and will be very demanding on any gearing system.

Victor B.
 

Whisp3r

Active member
Upon seeing the photo @FloatingLens shot during the launch event, depicting the Pico, a Schneider 110mm BR and a GFX 100II, I immediately wondered about the image circle of these Blue Ring lenses. They were designed for a 40x54 sensor so I assume some movement will be possible when using a GFX body as a digital back. But how much exactly? I did a light search (10 minutes) on the 'net as well as on this forum, but came up empty-handed regarding any info on the image circle of the Blue Ring lenses. Would anybody be willing to share some knowledge, if available?
 
Last edited:

corvus

Active member
Does anyone have more information about the 24mm and 50mm lenses for the system?
I suspect rehoused Canon TS-Es. The available apertures match. The 50 is a 1:2 macro (based on infos from the arca swiss usa website)
I think you are correct in your assumption. This question was asked in passing in a conversation. Although not directly affirmed, the gesture and of course the lens shape itself (without shift mechanism) left me with no doubts ;)

The main advantage, for me, of the Pico is its weight. It sheds two pounds as compared to an M-Two. It allows me to use all of the lenses I would usually use including my 138mm float. However I'm not sure if the tilt mechanism is strong enough to hold tilt when all of the forward weight of the 138mm float is attached. I have yet to see a bellows camera that can. I sent them a question regarding this via their messaging system and will see how they respond.

Victor B.
The 138 is listed in the compatibility table.
 

FloatingLens

Well-known member
Regarding any info on the image circle of the Blue Ring lenses. Would anybody be willing to share some knowledge, if available?
Had the same thought at the hands-on and tried it. We got a hard vignette at extreme movements of the Pico at f11. To me it looked like a mechanical vignette, but it was impossible to tell for sure. BTW: the image shows the 2,8/110 BR.
 

corvus

Active member
Upon seeing the photo @FloatingLens shot during the launch event, depicting the Pico, a Schneider 110mm BR and a GFX 100II, I immediately wondered about the image circle of these Blue Ring lenses. They were designed for a 40x54 sensor so I assume some movement will be possible when using a GFX body as a digital back. But how much exactly? I did a light search (10 minutes) on the 'net as well as on this forum, but came up empty-handed regarding any info on the image circle of the Blue Ring lenses. Would anybody be willing to share some knowledge, if available?
When it comes to lenses for system cameras, I would always only use the maximum size of the format for which they were developed. I don't know of any system manufacturer (Canon, Leica, Fuji, P1, etc.) that has provided specific information about the image circle in the technical data. So I would set the format diagonal as an image circle.
 

Whisp3r

Active member
Had the same thought at the hands-on and tried it. We got a hard vignette at extreme movements of the Pico at f11. To me it looked like a mechanical vignette, but it was impossible to tell for sure. BTW: the image shows the 2,8/110 BR.
Thanks, I adjusted my post, it is indeed the 110mm. I keep thinking about 120mm for some strange reason :) I would only need about 5mm to 8mm for interior photography, which probably doesn't quality as extreme on the Pico.

When it comes to lenses for system cameras, I would always only use the maximum size of the format for which they were developed. I don't know of any system manufacturer (Canon, Leica, Fuji, P1, etc.) that has provided specific information about the image circle in the technical data. So I would set the format diagonal as an image circle.
Thanks Torsten, that's a pretty useful guideline!
 

Paul Spinnler

Well-known member
The BR lenses have varying image circles, but typically in the are of 70+ to around 80mm. The wide ones 35, 45, 55 have less IC than 80, 110, 120, 150, 240.

You should get ample shift on a crop chip, namely Hassy or Leica SL / M.

The problem with the wides is that they do have a tiny bit of distortion and if you don't use them on the XF with an IQ back C1 can't correct exactly what's needed. So for architecture, it is not ideal.

This said, the 120 Macro on this thing should be awesome if LS sync is supported.
 
Last edited:

rdeloe

Well-known member
When it comes to lenses for system cameras, I would always only use the maximum size of the format for which they were developed. I don't know of any system manufacturer (Canon, Leica, Fuji, P1, etc.) that has provided specific information about the image circle in the technical data. So I would set the format diagonal as an image circle.
My experience using Pentax and Mamiya medium format lenses on a digital view camera system supports what you are saying. Most had circles of illumination larger than the film format, but the circle of good definition tended to be fairly tight to the format. The exception was zoom lenses, where it's common for the circle of good definition to increase a bit from the widest focal length to the middle of the zoom range, and then decrease again as you approach the longest focal length.
 

Whisp3r

Active member
The BR lenses have varying image circles, but typically in the are of 70+ to around 80mm. The wide ones 35, 45, 55 have less IC than 80, 110, 120, 240.

You should get ample shift on a crop chip, namely Hassy or Leica SL / M.

The problem with the wides is that they do have a tiny bit of distortion and if you don't use them on the XF with an IQ back C1 can't correct exactly what's needed. So for architecture, it is not ideal.

This said, the 120 Macro on this thing should be awesome if LS sync is supported.
Thank you Paul, I used 70mm to be on the safe side, using Torsten's rule of thumb would amount to an image circle of 66,7mm so I think 70mm is a good reference number. That would give me enough movement for quick (commercial) interior photography assignments. The distortion on the wide-end is somewhat unsurprising but unfortunate nonetheless, it means whatever I would gain on-site time-wise, I would lose again in post-processing (I dislike post-processing with a passion). For pure architecture, I have the RM3di/SK lenses/IQ4 combo, which is ill-suited for quick interior photography assignments such as private home / real estate photography (which currently makes up 90% of my revenue as a pro photographer).
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I think you are correct in your assumption. This question was asked in passing in a conversation. Although not directly affirmed, the gesture and of course the lens shape itself (without shift mechanism) left me with no doubts ;)


The 138 is listed in the compatibility table.
Doesn't mean a thing!! Sure it fits. Sure it can reach infinity. Sure it is capable of movements. But.... will it sag when mounted? I have not seen that it does not sag on any bellows camera yet.... and that includes any other camera AS makes.

Victor B.
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Doesn't mean a thing!! Sure it fits. Sure it can reach infinity. Sure it is capable of movements. But.... will it sag when mounted? I have not seen that it does not sag on any bellows camera yet.... and that includes any other camera AS makes.

Victor B.
Marc Serrurier solved the drooping massive lens (mirror) problem for the 200" Hale telescope. Since sag can't be eliminated, his design sags the same amount, and in parallel, at both ends of the optical system. Perhaps they should try it for digital backs and the 138. :ROFLMAO:
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
Marc Serrurier solved the drooping massive lens (mirror) problem for the 200" Hale telescope. Since sag can't be eliminated, his design sags the same amount, and in parallel, at both ends of the optical system. Perhaps they should try it for digital backs and the 138. :ROFLMAO:
(y)

Victor B.
 

RodK

Active member
I think the pico has a very specific use case but the weight and size come with limitations. In particular, the inability to mount 110 mm boards means this body is out for me. However, there may be an upside in the pico lens control unit. What if that control unit + 110 mm board lens holder could work with a universalis or M2? I expect that is the plan. Combine that with a rear mount that accepts the latest GFX bodies (supposedly available) and you have something that will let you use Arca's small and full size view cameras in a very broad variety of configurations. Tell your dealer you want it. That might encourage AS to actually move forward with applying the control unit to more bodies.
There will be a 110 to B-Bayonet adapter lens board.
Rod
 

corvus

Active member
These should be the minimum dimensions for shifting a 44x33mm sensor on P1 lenses. If you combine vertical and horizontal, vignetting and loss of sharpness are likely.
FloatingLens and I had moved 20mm V + 20mm H on the 110BR yesterday when we saw the clear shadowing - so a very extreme attempt.

240602 imagecircle.jpg
 

RodK

Active member
Doesn't mean a thing!! Sure it fits. Sure it can reach infinity. Sure it is capable of movements. But.... will it sag when mounted? I have not seen that it does not sag on any bellows camera yet.... and that includes any other camera AS makes.

Victor B.
The front frame is extremely rigid and the MicroOrbix tilt mechanism is much beefier than the iteration on our other previous cameras which required a different design to allow Rise/Fall. As the front does not rise/Fall and we beefed up the tilt/swing mechanism, I am confident that there should be no sag.
Rod
 

RodK

Active member
The Pythagorean theorem will tell you the diameter required to cover any format. It is X squared + Y squared = Z and the square root of this total is the diagonal of the sensor size, or minimum image circle to cover your sensor

So X = dimension one side
Y = dimension other side

For 44x33mm sensor

So 33 x33 = 1089

44x44 = 1936

1089 + 1936 = 3025

Square root of 3025 = 55mm. Which is the diagonal of 44x33mm sensor

Hope this helps.

Rod
 

rdeloe

Well-known member
Here's a simple spreadsheet that accounts for shift in X and Y on various sensors. Enter shift on the long edge in "Shift X" and short edge "Shift Y"


Spreadsheet.jpg
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
The front frame is extremely rigid and the MicroOrbix tilt mechanism is much beefier than the iteration on our other previous cameras which required a different design to allow Rise/Fall. As the front does not rise/Fall and we beefed up the tilt/swing mechanism, I am confident that there should be no sag.
Rod
I would be a potential buyer at that point and more than likely not add any more to my M-Two. However it would have to be tested. Why is this so important? Swing is easy to calibrate in the field. Even Tilt is easy as long as there is a tall building nearby or something tall and fairly straight. But out in the middle of nowhere with lots of sky and distant mountains there is no way to adjust tilt for any errors. Even scenes with architecture that may not be very tall can be difficult. Uncalibrated tilt can easily result in a totally ruined image.

Victor B.
 

Doppler9000

Active member
The Pythagorean theorem will tell you the diameter required to cover any format. It is X squared + Y squared = Z and the square root of this total is the diagonal of the sensor size, or minimum image circle to cover your sensor

So X = dimension one side
Y = dimension other side

For 44x33mm sensor

So 33 x33 = 1089

44x44 = 1936

1089 + 1936 = 3025

Square root of 3025 = 55mm. Which is the diagonal of 44x33mm sensor

Hope this helps.

Rod
The 33x44 forms a 3-4-5-type triangle…

33-44-55
 
Top