Alpa 12SW Medium Format

[bryan_whitney]

Does anyone have first hand experience with the new Alpa camera???

 

This is an entirely custom camera that can take horseman backs, mamiya

backs, a polaroid back, large format lenses of your choice and so on.

 

I have used a fuji 6x9's for years and would like to try something

that will shift which a version of this camera can do.

 

Any comments??

[paul_chan]

Have you considered the Horseman SW612 Professional? It has rise or shift features and takes 6X7, 6X9 & 6X12 roll film backs. The added advantage is the flexibility of interchangeable lenses from the 35mm Apo Grandagon to the 90mm. A rather compact package and excellent for field use. Naturally, the images from the Rodenstock lenses are legendary. And I believe a configured outfit is much cheaper than the Alpa.

[patrick_drennon]

If you like your Fuji and you have those kind of bucks to spend the Fuji GX-680II will shift and tilt. If I had the bucks I'd replace my Sinar 'F' with one.

[twmeyer]

While I've never made a photo with the Alpa, I did manage to dry fire several at PMA in NOLA a couple of years ago. I have used a Plaubel ProShift and owned a couple of Brooks Veriwides.

<p>

The Alpa takes it to another level. Rack and pinion movements and a film advance mechanism that seemed bomb proof and ultra smooth. The parallex technology (floating frame lines) in the finders is amazing to see. The cost is, however just as astounding. If the Fuji 6x9 seems limiting to you (not really wide enuf) and the Plaubel ProShift too fragile (that film advance seems to be the weak link) I think you'll find the Alpa satisfying. The only thing that keeps it from being perfect is the unavoidable near focus limits of any rangefinder camera. Try to handle one, it's the only way to know.

<p>

By the way, the GX680 is to the Alpa what the Hum Vee is to a Boxter. Both fabulous units, but hardly interchangable, much less comparable. They do however make a neckstrap for the GX680 (!)...t

[mark_eban]

Tom, Looking at the specs of the Alpa, it doesnt appear that the shift is reflected in the viewfinder in the same way as the pro-shift. If this is right, surely it becomes a lot less useable than the other cameras you mentioned...?

[bryan_whitney]

I know that the Horseman SW612 is the obvious alternative to the Alpa.

It can do 6x12 which the Alpa cannot and it can also shift sideways as

well as up. I have used the Plaubel ProShift and found it disorienting

and hard to work with. The Horseman cannot take other backs such as a

Polaroid or ground glass focussing which the Alpa can. Ironically, the

Alpa can use the Horseman reflex finder 6x9 version via one of its

many adaptor plates- the Horseman SW612 cannot. This turns the camera

into a mini view camera. The Horseman is much less expensive. The

Alpa is much more aesthetic to hold (it has wooden gunstock grips) and

is better made. If one can forgo the 6x12 option of the Horseman you

can have what is a very special option for me: a 6x8 motorized back by

Mamiya, mated to the Alpa. I like this for its "5x7" proportions

which are ideal for me (and the golden mean proportions). A selection

of Rodenstock lenses are used with the Alpa as well and you can even

get the Biogon fitted to it. The film back can also be mounted

vertially on the cameraback, giving you a portrait view similar to a

6x4.5 camera if you desire. You can also, if you want, add a digital

back. But is there ANYBODY who owns one or has used one out

there????? I know this is a rare bird but would like some firsthand

experience if

[andrew l. booth]

Don't forget Silvestri. These are the same sort of camera - compact, with hyperfocal focussing - they also offer shift.

<p>

Silvestri's web site is on <a href="http://www.silvestricamera.com/">www.silvestricamera.com</a>

[jim_chow]

I've seen the Alpha (they have a website, too). The workmanship is excellent, but you don't get anything more in terms of image quality/features than with a Horseman SW612 at a fraction of the cost (except you can get the Alpha configured with the Zeiss 38 biogon). The Alpha body w/ schneider or rodenstock lens and viewfinder is on the order of $10K! You can also try a cambo wide (less $$$ than the Horseman), which is basically a 4x5 with no bellows (very thin/compact) and shoot quickloads (I think you can use a rollfilm back, too).

[paul_chan]

Refer to Roger Hick's article on the June issue of 'Shutterbug' for a first-hand test report on the Alpa.

[martin_drazsky]

Bryan, the Horseman CAN take a ground glass back for focusing. It can also take a 6x12 back (unlike the Alpa). I was looking at the Alpa too but the cost and the lack of the 6x12 option put me off. The wood grip on the Alpa is nice but somehow I doubt that its contribution to picture quality is worth the extra few thousand dollars....

[_____]

One mustn't forget: Karl Lagerfeld has one ;)

[rolland_elliott]

I've never used a camera with shifts, but I've read a couple of books on large format photography and understand the principle. After saying that I'd like to say, "Why is everyone so obseesed with stupid shifts!" For the price you pay to get a camera with shifts/rise/falls one could easily take all of their "toppling building" photos to a custom print lab and get a good printer to correct the effect by tilting the lens board during printing. Or you could scan your negs/transparencies and get use photoshop to get parallel lines. If you're an architectural photographer and use this camera movement everyday I'd understand. But for those of you that spend three times the amount of a normal lens to get the shift fuction I just don't get it. Maybe I'm missing something?

 

Swings and Tilts on the other hand are much more valuable movements since they control the plane of sharp focus.

 

My advice is to not waste your moeny on shift cameras if you only use them occasionally, and get your negs/slides corrected in the darkroom or computer for the occasional shot that needs it.

 

Peace Rolland Elliott

[herb_sauer]

As for price, I note that Samy's in the Aug issue of Shutterbug advertizes the Alpa 12SWA outfit with 35mm (presumably Grandagon), 6x12 Horseman back and finder for under $4000.

[twmeyer]

Mark E., I can't really respond without firsthand use of the Alpa, It's been 2 years since I held one for 10 minutes. But the Pro Shift just tilts the finder. It's basically just a guide.

<p>

Rolland, forgive me but your remarks about the usefulness of vertical shift and your expectations of any lab to retro "shift" in printing are fairly typical for someone who has never tried either. Check it out sometime. Prepare yourself for a lot of eye rolling at the lab...t

[thomas_weber1]

1) Thank you for your interest; 2) For most of the technical information you are looking for: may we ask you to visit our Web-site http://www.alpa.ch 3) Please see/touch/discuss the ALPA 12WA and ALPA 12S/WA on the Schneider booth at the PhotoPlus show, Javits Center NY, 28th - 30th October 1999; ALPA, Ursula Capaul & Thomas Weber

[kornelius_j._fleischer]

The Alpa is obviously not a "me too" camera and worlds apart from the mass produced plastic junk you are offered everywhere today. It is manufactured by a Swiss precision camera manufacturer who is famous for his 360 degrees "Seitz Roundshot" camera.

Wouldn4t it be interesting how this Swiss precision camera, equipped with a Zeiss Biogon 38, compares to the Swedish precision camera Hasselblad Superwide 903 SWC, which is also equipped with the Biogon?

[c_l_gagnebin]

I have just gotten back the first set of transparencies from an ALPA 12SW/Horseman 6X9 with a Schneider Super Angulon XL 47mm on Fuji Velvia 50. The results are superb in all respects on the rural New England early fall scenery taken. I have not yet used the shift function on the ALPA but I have had the same lens on a Silvestri and used the shifts there successfully. I have used Nikon's 28mm shift a good bit also. I find the ALPA the best of the lot by far in handiness and ease of operation, workmanship etc. and would use it not only for architectural shift work but for landscape work where I used to use a Mamiya 7. Having replaceable backs is a big plus. One note on the shifts is that with much longer focal lengths the amount of shift can be limited due to inner lens element positions. As to the viewfinder following the shifts, some simple math can give you a camera tilt that will identify the top of the image if one does not want to use a ground glass.

Buzz Gagnebin

[urs_bernhard]

The ALPA is the best camera I ever used. I use it for Reportage/Street photography. It is THE quality P+S camera. My ALPA is equiped with a Zeiss Biogon 4,5/38mm and a Linhof 70mm Filmback, loaded with TX. The Biogon is a superb lens, meeting the high precision of the swiss made ALPA Body. I use the "new ALPA-Format 44mmx66mm" which fits in the 8omm image circle of the lens and has the same ratio as 24x36mm. The 70mm filmback gives me 60 exposures.

I was never so fast, because the scale focusing makes it very easy. The camera is very handy and let you forget the extra pounds you have over p.e a LEICA. No other medium-format-camera with the same features is so handy and intuitivly easy to use. The ALPA is a marvellous travel camera too, because you need not more gimmicks and gadgets then Lens ,body and back to be well equiped. With a ground glass you have even a little view camera.

It costs a bit more then other cameras, I know, but it is worth every dollar and you will have a superb and lasting tool.

[ursula_capaul]

ALPA's 44 x 66mm (or 66 x 44mm) negative format has some more advantages. E.g. with reference to film flatness (up to a certain degree film flatness is more important than negative size): a negative format that does NOT use the film's full size/largeness (61mm) and does NOT use the full mechanical/geometrical possibilities inside the back (e.g. the distance between the idler rollers) is flat enough even for the extreme requirements imposed by wide angle lenses and even without vacuum and the like. Furthermore: the danger of light falling on the film when you put it into the back or take it out of the back is much smaller (because with the 44 x 66mm negative format there is some reserve space on the upper and lower part of the film [= film largeness: 61mm; used by the 44 x 66mm format: 44mm; reserve space: 61mm minus 44mm = 17mm : 2 = 8.5mm on each side]). This is of help with 120 film but it becomes more important if you use 220 film (which has not much paper covering it at the begin and at the end of the film). By the way - there are some very good reasons to use 220 film: better film flatness (no paper behind the film with all the flatness troubles due to this paper) and - of course - more exposures per film (don't forget: if you need it, the ALPA with e.g. the motorized Mamiya RB67 44 x 66mm, 6x7 or 6x8 backs offers up to 0.8 exposures per second, it's about the same with the Cine-Rollex [= manual film transport with only ONE move of the film winding lever per exposure and without any film transport release slide or button]). Furthermore: in the darkroom or doing other processing work it is very convenient to have more space between the pictures than only 1 or 2mm. For the advantages of 44 x 66mm compared to 6x6 as well as for the reasons for ALPA not to use the 6x12 format: please see Roger Hicks article "ALPA - An Unusual Medium Format Camera" in SHUTTERBUG, June 1999, p. 148 - 152.

[Name No Longer Available]

Dear Bryan, I have asked Alpa a question the other day. They gave me an answer that convinced me and that may be of interested to you, too:

Q: What is the sense of using extremely tight tolerances in manufacturing the Alpa if the photographer is using mass produced backs that are not in the same category as the bodies(Mamiya, Horseman)? A: Fortunately the tolerance problem is not in the forground as far as the Mamiya and Horseman backs are concerned. If there IS a difference between what should be and what is the tight tolerances of the Alpa (back-adapter, body, lens-board, etc.) prevent a fatal addition of aberrations. But please, bear in mind the fact that in rough professional use the Mamiya or Horseman backs may be weared out and ready for replacing after one or two years - this is the price you have to pay for the relativly low cost when buying them.

[urs_bernhard]

Why do I use 70mm film on my ALPA? 1.: I can get the film-flatness I require, because there is no protecting paper of the 120, which obstruct film-flatness; 2.: I have not to deal with the danger of lightblur as I have to with 220; 3.: I have about 60 exposures on one film.

With the ALPA-format 44x66 mm I have a lot of save area around the image, which helps definitely with darkroomwork( the film is less likely to "hang" out of focus in the enlarger because of the larger area hold by the carrier). The film is easy to process with the nice stainless steel reel made by HEWES/England for 5m of 70mm-film. The film I use (Kodak TX) is available as readyload in 5m/15ft cartridges,which I buy at B+H (if on stock (mostly), I have it in 2 days in Europe). Because the film is going from one cartidge to an other, I can even cut it if necessary.

Since I use this 70mm-film I can not understand, why this filmsize is so forgotten, and why all photogs and the industryare staying since decades with the oldfashioned 120/220 films(since 1910!). As far as I know ist Kodak offering 12 filmtypes in 70mm, partly in cartridges, partly in 30m spools to be loaded; Ilford offers FP4 and on request HP5 in 30m spools.

[thomas_weber1]

This is a message from those who make the ALPA (= Ursula Capaul & Thomas Weber, Zurich/Switzerland) to those who like first-hand information: HAND HELD at e.g. f 8 and at e.g. 1/125 s an average medium-format SLR and its lenses offer around 40 - 50 lp/mm (center of the picture). With a 903SWC you may reach around 70 lp/mm. With the ALPA, e.g. the interchangeable ZEISS Biogon T* 4.5/38mm and the Super-Rollex 56x56mm or 66x44mm back you can regularly reach 90 lp/mm and more. Why? E.g. minimal vibration (no mirror [compared to SLRs], no focal plane-shutter [compared to some SLRs], extremely smooth shutter release, handling, weight [compared to other viewfinder cameras], etc.) and optimal precision (flange focal distance, film flatness, etc.). THESE are the main reasons why Roger Hicks wrote (British Journal of Photography, 10th Feb. 99, p. 26) about the ALPA: "... you will have the very finest results that are possible on roll-film today. There is an immense satisfaction in this...".

[kornelius_j._fleischer]

For more information on the optical potential of an Alpa camera equipped with a Zeiss Biogon 38 mm lens you may also check the threads on SWC, 903, and Biogon in the Hasselblad section of this forum. These threads also contain current Zeiss resolution test results achieved with the Alpa.