Alpa review

[John Collins]

It is and it isn't.

Both backs can be set to "No Latency", which means that they do not have an energy saving sleep mode, and therefore don't need a wake up. But, this eats batteries. So when working in the field if one already owns a two shot release and doesn't want to carry lots of extra batteries, it makes sense.

Michael

Thanks for your comment, Michael.

John

[narikin]

I would believe all Alpa's stories about the ultimate tolerances essential for digital, if it wasn't that they made a tilt shift adapter, which of course, moves all of those tolerances completely out of wack.
now I just think its a neat way to sell you lenses that they mark up, rather than you buying your own, and mounting them on a lens board, like we used to do with LF film cameras.

[CBarrett]

i liked the concept till i phoned with one of the arca swiss guys in summer 2007 and this told me that the first 50 samples of the rm3d are sold and will be delivered one month later. i think it took 2,5 years to make this story real ( if they have sold 50 now )  and it ate all my trust and interest month by month a bit more.

Ok, Archivue... the only time you post you seem to mention the Rm3d.  I gotta ask, are you with Arca?

Actually, I'm curious, have you used one?  Or the rotaslide?

LoL.... I'm one of the biggest Arca fans you'll find, (I've used their cameras for 18 years) but I gotta hand it to Sinar... they delivered on the Artec.

[Dustbak]

[attachment=18138:Alpa.jpg]

The Alpa 12 with rise model as per LL review - I use a Schneider 24 or 35 digitar on this set-up and wouldnt useanythign longer than a 45. I think Sinar's arTec is a better set-up for landscape and architectural work though because you dont need to rely on hyperfocal technique or experienced guesstimates for focus of course the arTec isnt as portable nor is it handholdable - I use the Alpa regulalry for street shooting very easy to hand hold at insanely slow shutter speeds. My view is that it is too much hassle to use a ground glass on an Alpa - and then switch between it and your digi back - out in the field. I cant comment on Cambo - have owned and used Alpa's for over five years now - just the sweetest and most basic system you could ask for - everything is up to the photographer - which means most so called pros in this forum - wouldn't know what to do with one - but thats another story for another time.  

Agreed. I would plan to use the Alpa in the same way. Thanks for the image, it does show how compact the Alpa is.

[archivue]

Usually, i'm shooting architecture, but for the last six months, i've shoot only artworks on location for 10 museums... and i will come back to architecture, next year...
so it leaves me time to think about my next purchase !
I first thought, it was possible to use a 35 xl with a 22mp back on a LF camera if everything was on the top... so i had my F line completely check at the factory, i've bought the last generation ground glass from arca (the one you have with the M2), and a rotaslide.
At the end, i can't be 100% shure about focusing... unless if i use my live view with a computer...
Next solution, is to make some sort of spacer to put betwen the two fonction carriers... one for inf. one for 15m...

So, i will probably by a sort of pancake camera.

i have the rotaslide and an f line at the moment, a friend of mine have the RM3D MKI... i had the oportunity to tried it.
i've spend a lot of time to evaluate this kind of camera.
I'm not with arca, just a customer !

i've found the Alpa swc to be a perfect companion for travel with Roll film Back
i've found the XY to be the ultimate solution for stitching
and the MAX to be a good compromise in term of size vs mvts
Tha cambo RS looks quite good as well, with some reports about trouble with flare
I'm not fan of silvestri, maybe i'm wrong...

But, the think is that i prefer ground glass for composition... and without sliding back... to dangerous for the back !

So, Alpa doesn't want to offer it... probably for good reason... but it seems to work for the others...
The artech seems nice, but can't be used hand held...

i came to the conclusion that the more complete system was Arca RM3D

tilt with all lenses
sliding back (ground glass !)or hand held (and good viewfinder)
more precise focusing ring, not the standard stuff
compatible with my existing arca equipment... so i will be able to use the RM3D on a rail with my F line back, and use the helical mount for helical focus stuff...

the only thing i dislike with the RM3D is the Handle... while the material is very good (special resin from medical stuff : Perspiration free)... it isn't anatomical at all.

[archivue]

Question to Alpa users...

When you are using it with a digital back, are the distance on the ring 100 correct ?

a friend of mine did test a P45+ and a SWA, and it wasn't... but maybe a problem with this sample only !

[CBarrett]

Alpa Groundglass will be here tomorrow.  I'll let you guys know how compatible it is with the Arca carrier and how it compares to the standard groundglass as well as the Maxwell screen in my sliding back.

I can't believe I just paid $250 for a 3" x 4" piece of glass!  It must be photo gear!

[filmcapture]

Question to Alpa users...

When you are using it with a digital back, are the distance on the ring 100 correct ?

a friend of mine did test a P45+ and a SWA, and it wasn't... but maybe a problem with this sample only !

I have four Alpa lenses, and their scales don't agree with each other. They are not 100% correct,  but acceptable. Three of them are wide angle lenses, and I use them to shoot landscape, so far I have not found this is an issue.  

[PeterA]

Question to Alpa users...

When you are using it with a digital back, are the distance on the ring 100 correct ?

a friend of mine did test a P45+ and a SWA, and it wasn't... but maybe a problem with this sample only !

[attachment=18174:Massengill.jpg]

I dont understand what you mean by 'correct' and how I would even go about testing for this 'correctness' - however some high school algebra - ( probably not the strong suit of the typical 'pro shooter'  BS artistes in this forum ) -  would sort out your COC and DOF expectations OR just consult a typical DOF table / look up what hyperfocal means - and think about how much in focus room you have when shooting in the sweet spot of a 24/35 lens between f8-11 - maybe this would help you understand the uses of wides by Schneider or Rodesntock on a camera platofrm like this - and remove any sleepless night worry about this issue.

[archivue]

I dont understand what you mean by 'correct' and how I would even go about testing for this 'correctness' - however some high school algebra - ( probably not the strong suit of the typical 'pro shooter'  BS artistes in this forum ) -  would sort out your COC and DOF expectations OR just consult a typical DOF table / look up what hyperfocal means - and think about how much in focus room you have when shooting in the sweet spot of a 24/35 lens between f8-11 - maybe this would help you understand the uses of wides by Schneider or Rodesntock on a camera platofrm like this - and remove any sleepless night worry about this issue.

TMark - Dont confuse me with someone that gives a toss about opinions rfom people like you     <..... look a smiley just for you.

i've test a 45 digital rodenstock mounted on his focusing ring on an arca with live view...

i've put the ring to inf. and made the focus to inf. using the camera adjustment and live view.... then without moving the frames, i just turn the ring to 2 meters... and check where was the focus, it was around 10 meters... i've made several tests like this, and find out that it wasn't good...

After that, a friend of mine test an alpa with P45 and one lens, and find the same problem

But maybe, these need proper calibration... it's why i ask ...
At the same time, Arca are offering their own ring for that turn 3 times... for precision !

That's it !

Sorry for my french/english...

[PeterA]

i've test a 45 digital rodenstock mounted on his focusing ring on an arca with live view...

i've put the ring to inf. and made the focus to inf. using the camera adjustment and live view.... then without moving the frames, i just turn the ring to 2 meters... and check where was the focus, it was around 10 meters... i've made several tests like this, and find out that it wasn't good...

After that, a friend of mine test an alpa with P45 and one lens, and find the same problem

But maybe, these need proper calibration... it's why i ask ...
At the same time, Arca are offering their own ring for that turn 3 times... for precision !

That's it !

Sorry for my french/english...

No need to apologise for the language archivue, I think i misinterpreted your question just after I notice teh smarty pants BS from teh other poster above.

- I haven't got a Rodenstock but looking at my 35 Apo digitar Schneider the difference between 5 meters and infinity focus on the focus ring represents less than 5 degrees of the rotation - which is tiny. On the Schneider the 5 meter point marking is then followed by the infinity marking. On the other hand the radial distance between the 1 meter and 1.5 meter markings are at about 90 degrees on the ring...
Obviously close distances allow for greater 'precision' because it is useful and longer distances allow for less - if you use focus throw distances as the benchmark. Of course this makes sense - because hyperfocal near to about infinity on a 35 is achieved between 1.5 and infinity at f11
OR

the radial distance between 2 and 10 meters is abotu 35 dgrees..on teh Schneider if it is similar on teh Rodenstock ..well maybe ..
you have the misfortune of a lens which has slipped in its helical mount....

Pete