New camera from Arca Swiss: the Pico

[Paul Spinnler]

That’s nice. I heard it’s 20mm shift in X/Y and can control blue ring and some tilt shifts.

It’s nice to see innovation. I think for people without SK or Rodie glass which has become very expensive this is a good alternative. Converted Nikon or Canon TSEs cost less than proper latest gen tech lenses.

Looks like squarely aimed at crop MF BSI, ie CFV100c!

 

[wallpaperviking]

Blue Ring

 

[wallpaperviking]

http://instagr.am/p/C6whHzUPA25/

 

[rdeloe]

http://instagr.am/p/C6whHzUPA25/

Intriguing...

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Well it solves the expensive back as a hindrance to entry topic and opens up Schneider BR. Here the 35, 45, 80 MK II, 120 Macro come to mind as interesting lenses, with the allure being the wides for arch use via shift and stitch, although correcting distortion won't be too easy. More interesting is SK via R. Question on SK BR is whether you can use LS flash sync, especially with the macro.

... And the R mount compatibility opens up interesting combos like SK glass on a Leica M monochrom for example.

The CFV has problems with wide-angles so you could skip that back and just use a Leica SL3 or if that one has PDAF issues the Sigma comapct 60 megapixel camera and the Leica M series - colour and mono.

The Sigma is the price breaker solutions as it retails for 3k or less.

I suggested to Alpa to come up with an L system adapter so you can attach the Sigma to the STC, but it looks like Arca beats them to this goal of opening up M and L cameras as backs.

I think for R system owners this is great and actually it allows you to create a very cool Leica M based microcosm tech cam kit.

Leica M11 / M11M + Pico + SK on R; for non-arch Rodie R and SK BR 35/45/80 MKII/120 would be cool.

The M platform uses the same Sony BSI sensors, so you should be on the color variant be able to use it with SK glass as long as FFD can be maintained.

Very curious if you can mount an M close enough to focus the 35 / 43 XL.

If this works you can skip the digital back and enjoy your Leica Ms while out and about with friends & family etc. and use them as digital backs on the Pico if you want. 20mm shift should be no problem on a 35mm "back" with all tech cam lenses.

Another nice touch is the 120 BR Macro ... which could never been tilted before! Interesting to know if flash sync with SK BR is possible.

R camera owners can be very happy about this development as the Pico supports the R mount - and therefore increase the utility of the whole ecosystem. M owners can also rejoice.

Alpa could use this as inspiration to develop finally the L/M mount camera as backs adapters ...

 

[MGrayson]

Do we have any ideas of the pico's weight and how that compares to the alternatives? My interests are at the wide end, which probably means a DB, which probably means a tech camera, which probably means stick with what I have.

I do like true verticals, though, and it's hard to get them perfect in post...

Matt

 

[Paul Spinnler]

I think this mainly benefits new tech cam people who want to use an L or M camera or a Sigma camera as a cheaper digital back alternative especially if they already own such a system.

If you thought about tech cams and are on M for example, skipping the digital back with this is an easy gateway to tech cam lenses and the newly adapted 35mm T/S shift Lenes they developed.

I mean how cool is that if you have an M11M for example. Built in storage, EVF adapter, Leica camera sync, Sony BSI, endless shift and stitch.

I think this is especially interesting for people who want to still have their toes in tech cam land, but are somehow fed up a bit bit the price point of digital backs and who have a more casual approach to tech can photography.

You can still invest in great glass which retains value, but can skip the digital back problem.

I mean the Sigma 60 megapixel camera is an outright bargain. Let’s not forget that a few years ago 60 megapixels was the absolute bleeding edge for large chips.

If I just owned a mirrorless 35mm camera this is a cool solution.

The bellows construction effectively allows more with non flat mirrorless bodies, eg the SL camera.

I guess adapting the X2D should also not be a problem.

 

[P. Chong]

the dimensions are

H: 192mm W: 114mm L: 150mm with 15cm rail or 100mm with 10cm rail. (Both are provided in standard order) Weight: about 1.1kg

Do we have any ideas of the pico's weight and how that compares to the alternatives? My interests are at the wide end, which probably means a DB, which probably means a tech camera, which probably means stick with what I have.

I do like true verticals, though, and it's hard to get them perfect in post...

Matt

 

[rdeloe]

the dimensions are

H: 192mm W: 114mm L: 150mm with 15cm rail or 100mm with 10cm rail. (Both are provided in standard order) Weight: about 1.1kg

Does your width value include the bellows? It looks like it does, which would make it nicely compact.

For comparison, an F-Universalis with standard rail is

• W: 113mm (frame only -- bellows sticks out to the side, but collapse to a bit more than the width of the frame).
• L: 205mm (150mm rail available)
• H: 260mm (250mm if you drop the front standard)
• Weight: 1,436 grams with bellows, Rotafoot for GFX, 20cm rail, but no board.

I like the design concept of the Pico (small, compact), but the small space for lens boards will be a problem for some. Using GFX as the example, here are some considerations:

• Arca-Swiss' Pentax 645 110mm board has a mount that is 78mm diameter, plus a few mm for the button. It would work fine because it can be on a flat board.
• Lenses in shutters that can work on a flat board would be fine.
• A Mamiya 645 mount is 74mm diameter, with additional 3mm for the tab. Flange distance is 63.3mm versus 70.87mm for Pentax 645, but it should still be OK on a flat board.
• Lenses that need recessed boards will be the problem. For example, a S-K APO-Digitar 35mm f/5.6 would require a recessed board to have any movement room on GFX; the limiting factor is the GFX mount because the rear of the 35mm is inside the GFX mount. The Copal 0 shutter is snug inside a square 110mm board with a roughly 85mm recessed opening.
• I'd be out of luck using my modified Mamiya 6 and 7 lenses with a M645 mount (as I do now) because I don't see the mount fitting inside a recessed board (if one exists). I would have to mount them to a dedicated recessed board.

The take-away is that A-S is going to have to have to provide lots of guidance on what works and what doesn't with different combinations of cameras, and buyers using mirrorless cameras will need to think through carefully about what will work.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

If it allows for SK 35/43/60 or Rodie 23/32/35/40/50 to be used with crop MF or Leica M / L it'll be a great solution.

Very curious to see what combos are possible with the M11M.

 

[rdeloe]

If it allows for SK 35/43/60 or Rodie 23/32/35/40/50 to be used with crop MF or Leica M / L it'll be a great solution.

Very curious to see what combos are possible with the M11M.

A Leica M is not the best choice for adapting lenses with short flange distances and big rear ends.

The M mount flange distance is 27.8mm. The diameter of the opening of the M mount accounting for bayonet flanges is ~41.1mm. That makes the S-K 35 XL a non-starter because the rear cell needs to be inside the body of the M camera, and the rear cell is 43mm diameter.

A Sigma FP-L has more promise, but the flange distance is still 20mm. That means the rear cell of a 35 XL is probably not inside the FP-L body, but it is inside the Pico mount. (I say "probably" because my spreadsheet is good but not perfect!) The inner diameter of the FP-L mount is reported to be 51.6mm, so the XL rear cell will fit inside, but only allow 4mm of movement. It's far from ideal.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

A Leica M is not the best choice for adapting lenses with short flange distances and big rear ends.

The M mount flange distance is 27.8mm. The diameter of the opening of the M mount accounting for bayonet flanges is ~41.1mm. That makes the S-K 35 XL a non-starter because the rear cell needs to be inside the body of the M camera, and the rear cell is 43mm diameter.

A Sigma FP-L has more promise, but the flange distance is still 20mm. That means the rear cell of a 35 XL is probably not inside the FP-L body, but it is inside the Pico mount. (I say "probably" because my spreadsheet is good but not perfect!) The inner diameter of the FP-L mount is reported to be 51.6mm, so the XL rear cell will fit inside, but only allow 4mm of movement. It's far from ideal.

My point is more that there Pico addresses an audience which through it can “skip” buying a digital back. You should be able to adapt the new AS modified T/S lenses such as the 24mm and if you can use say a Digaron 40/50 on top that’s pretty useful with a M11M.

I just think that in 2024 a lot of digital back owners already have a camera to use them with and the question then is who is going to buy this one given that most people with backs on a Cambo, Arca or Alpa already.

Once all the facts are on the table one can put together a matrix with compatibility info which will be very interesting to look at.

 

[rdeloe]

For sure there will be some good options. I just didn't want anyone to get excited about the S-K 35mm with that combination.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Let's face it. The problem of the tech cam market right now is that most prospective "younger entrants" are priced out in this environment and pro's are either priced out due to lack of refinancability or they just prefer the new gen mirrorless systems like the GFX for workflow.

This said, if you can make the transition to tech cam glass - Rodie HR and SK are still amazing – as EASY as possible by just slapping your mirrorless camera instead of a P1 back onto the Pico that's a win for the market.

Let's see how the adoption is.

 

[corvus]

The camera will be presented at the Arca Swiss Day in Stuttgart on 01.06. https://www.arca-shop.de/arca-swiss-day/
I'm considering going, but I'm not really expecting any different solutions for DSLM system cameras with bodies and the associated FFD restriction than we can already achieve with F-Universalis or Actus. Rob explained it correctly that symmetrical wide angle lenses will always be compromised at the mount or the bayonet on the body itself. And using retrofocus like the T/S Canon will turn out very similar to F-Universalis with a separate aperture control solution.
Basically, all of this is already there as a solution, so I'm rather skeptical. Only the weight and size might be the arguments to trade it in. I'm actually flirting with the Sigma FP-L, but for SK lenses, f=47mm is the smallest focal length that could be moved without restriction (which will also be FFD bodies for most other system cameras). Everything below that will come down to details, such as the thickness and diameter of the lens mount.

For this reason, some time ago I asked Sigma support whether it would be possible to make the flange housing on the FP-L removable and modular ... that would be it ... but it is probably illusory.

 

[Paul Spinnler]

The Sigma is the best bang for the buck if you are into stitching – the Nikkor 90 samples on a bellow cam posted the other day were fantastic. Nothing to complain.

 

[rdeloe]

For this reason, some time ago I asked Sigma support whether it would be possible to make the flange housing on the FP-L removable and modular ... that would be it ... but it is probably illusory.

Wouldn't that be something!

 

[Paul Spinnler]

Essentially the ask is to make a 3k 35mm 60 megapixel BSI back.

 

[corvus]

Exactly! A combination like Sigma FP-DB / AS-Pico / SK 35XL would also have the potential to answer the endless questions about the lack of a T-S lens with f=35mm for FF.