Alpa 12's - How do you use them?

[d_f11]

<p> I've recently become curious if not facinated with Alpa 12's. They seem to be barebones, no-nonsense & minimalist. Inspite of its official website as well as posts here at Photo.Net, I'm having a hard time sensing how they're meant or preffered to be used - hand-held like Mamiya7's or on a 'pod, like Pentax 67's? There website shows someguy hand-holding their 12tc. I myself shoot only film, outdoors, at either hyperfocal or infinity, so perhaps they'd be most appropriate for my needs?</p>

[kparratt]

<p>Pretty much the same as using a Hasselblad SWC, that is either as a point and shoot, just framing with the optical viewfinder on top, or on a tripod with film magazine removed and composing on a ground glass screen as with Large Format view cameras.<br>

<a href="http://www.alpa.ch/"><strong>http://www.alpa.ch/</strong> </a></p>

[frank_bunnik]

<p>You might just as well look for a Fotoman camera. It gives you a much bigger image for much less money. Quality is excellent. The thousands of dollars you same can be invested in film and a nice trip and you probably have money to spare after that.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>You'd probably want to use a tripod, or any of the tiny advantage in sharpness you would gain by spending the thousands on it will be worthless. I would say go for the Mamiya 7 with the 43mm and use a tripod -- it is less than half the cost, comes with a rangefinder and meter, 120/220 back, is much more ergonomic and less finicky overall. The Alpa has the advantage of the ability to use digital backs, and some have shift. But it is pretty amazing what you are paying when you actually see one in person. They are charging you multiple thousands of dollars for a machined piece of aluminum. You'll notice on their website they don't show many pictures of the "camera" itself, because if people saw it they would stop and think, "really? its 1800 dollars for no grips, no viewfinders, no adapters or lenses...just the frame?" And that is the CHEAPEST Alpa...the 12TC. While I will not argue that they are astoundingly well made, I think the real world advantages of Alpa's are hardly ever visible, and in fact, they are more often less precise in general use since they do not have a rangefinder. Unless you are going to put it on a tripod and focus it on the groundglass for every image, you are much better off with a Mamiya 7 or SWC. </p>

<p>If you really want a tech camera like the Alpa, I would agree with Frank and suggest you look at some of the more reasonably priced ones (which still use the same lenses) such as the Horseman, Fotoman, Cambo and so on. Sorry to come down so hard on Alpa, but I just see them as kind of pointless to 99.9% of photographers. </p>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>D F</p>

<p>NO , YOU DO NOT NEED AN ALPA .<br>

You do not need a luxury car either . But shooting with an ALPA is like driving a luxury car .<br>

It takes you to your destination , but much more comfortable and precise . Believe it or not .<br>

Its just state of the art .<br>

Jürgen</p>

[frank_bunnik]

<p>I forgot the Cambo Wide which might also be interesting for you, or when you want a cheap solution: a crown graphic with a 65mm super angulon (old mode)l. This together should cost you no more than 500 euro, less then 1/10th the price of a similar Alpa. Remember that the alpa image is only 6 x 4.5 cm. much less than 4x5inch... It might nog be as exclusive as an Alpa but the image quality will be much higher and that is what counts.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>I would submit that all of these cameras like the Mamiya 7II, Fotoman, SWC etc are like luxury cars, if we are going to use that simile. Alpas are more like using a helicopter to get to work instead of a car. Yes, it may get you there faster, but the initial investment is huge, and it is actually probably not as convenient as just using a car. But if we dispense with comparisons, I have that Alpas never made much sense to me. And don't get me wrong, I have had my fair share of less than practical craftsman-like cameras (Leicas, Ebony, Rollei etc), but Alpa is in a different league. You are paying more and getting less -- if you want similar features and lenses, the other tech cameras are also extremely precisely made and a much better value. Photography is about the lenses -- as long as the body is well put together it should be the secondary concern. </p>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>Frank<br>

Simply said , your answer is incorrect .<br>

An ALPA 12 camera can take various 6x9 filmbacks and can take a digital back of the newest generation .<br>

That means a digital back with a sensor size of 60MB .<br>

Not to forget , that you can use a RODAGON DIGARON-S 23mm lens of outstanding quality .<br>

That is real digital WA photography .<br>

All other gear suggested here is unable for such a combination .<br>

Jürgen</p>

 

[frank_bunnik]

<p>Okay Jurgen, I didn't know you could use different filmbacks. I have a 8 year old test of Alpa camera's in a Dutch magazine which said that the image was 6x4,5 cm. Some progress since then. I was aware of the digital backs. Don't know how practical the Alpa is with a digital back to shoot handheld outside though.</p>

[stuart_richardson]

<p>That's actually incorrect, some of these cameras, particular the Cambo, are quite comparable to the Alpa. The Cambo can mount the 23mm Digaron-S as well (which is only recommended for 33x44mm sensors, so you would not want to use it with the 60mp cameras, let alone film). It has a wide range of lenses from Rodenstock and Schneider. The same goes for the Fotoman 69 (though this is a film only camera). The Horseman SWD-II has Schneider and Rodenstock lenses starting at 24mm. The only special lenses that ONLY Alpa can use are the Alpa branded lenses that Rodenstock and Schneider have made for Alpa -- most of these can be replaced with the normal Schneider and Rodenstock lenses.</p>

<p>And of course, the same lenses in Cambo or horseman mount are often a lot cheaper than they are in Alpa mount.</p>

<p>Anyway, I will stop my arguing now. My point is made, and Jürgen's point is also valid -- these are special cameras. I just don't think they are worth a premium over other cameras that do the same thing.</p>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>Stuart<br>

I know , that the image circle of the RODENSTOCK DIGARON-S 23mm lens is only 70mm and can not be used with the 60MB sensor .<br>

But I also did not say so .<br>

I know , there are some other cameras which can also use the DIGARON-S lenses . (or Schneider) But they were not mentioned before .<br>

Fotoman and Mamiya 7 are not the ones .<br>

Therefore your response is correct and a good contribution .</p>

<p>Regarding ALPA , which is on the top of my wishlist , you could also see it from a different position .<br>

Some people like ROLEX or IWC or Jaeger Le Coultre wrist watches . (or others) These watches are extremely expensive and show you the time as well as a SWATCH .<br>

But , if you are a technique freak , and many of us are , (I am) , then you might easily come to a point , where a desired gear becomes a must .<br>

Then economic thinking is out of the game .<br>

Jürgen</p>

[d_f11]

<p>I understand this is a "Rolls Royce" camera, and that is THE very reason I WOULDN'T want it. It's just that there seems to be nothing about it that's unnecessary.</p>

[rod_sainty2]

<p>DF, there is nothing "unnecessary" on a Cambo Wide DS, either.</p>

<p>Here's a more significant issue for film users: The Alpa range accepts only a 6x9 back. With the Cambo Wide DS (or the older Cambo Wide), you are free to choose 6x7, 6x9 or 6x12 or go "full format" with 4x5 inch (which gives you an advantage for taller subjects). In addition, the Cambo Wide DS offers lens shift of 40mm upwards, 20mm downwards and 20mm left and right (of course, the maximum shift you can use depends on the particular lens and the format). You only approach that range of shift with the high-end Alpas; the low end Alpa models offer either no shift or limited shift. As Stuart suggested, you'd be better with a Mamiya 7II and the fantastic 43mm lens; with the Mamiya you get an excellent rangefinder and a meter as a bonus.</p>

<p>If you have never used lens shift before, I suggest you check it out. Essential for architecture, but surprisingly useful for landscape. An inexpensive means of doing so would be to pick up an old Cambo Wide 650, which has the 65 Schneider lens and offers 15mm of shift, with a Horseman 6x12 back. A Cambo T-20 right-angle viewer will let you view the groundglass right-side up if you want. After shooting a few rolls, revisit your urge to go shift-less and 6x9 for a lot more money.</p>

[kparratt]

<p>If I had an 'Alpa's worth' of money to play with, and especially if shift and tilt were required often enough, I'd consider buying this, the Arca Swiss Misura. Visit <strong><a href="http://www.galerie-photo.com/arca-swiss-misura-us.html">this page</a> </strong> and scroll down to read the English text.</p>

<div></div>

[j_rgen_loob]

<p>Kevin<br>

I have an ARCASWISS 6x9 F-LINE METRIC + ORBIX and I love that camera .<br>

I also like the MISURA .<br>

But both of them can hardly be used handheld .<br>

The ALPA and "ALPA like cameras" can easily be used handheld , or be used with a <br>

monopod . I include here also the HASSELBLAD SWC .</p>

<p>Jürgen</p>

<p> </p>

[frank_bunnik]

<p>While I agree with Jurgen that the Arca Swiss is not a camera for handheld photography, I also agree with Stuart that there is no point in the Alpa, at least not for the price they charge. I admit I was tempted myself when I read the test 8 years ago. However, as has been stated, the Cambo Wide and the Fotoman cameras offer exactly the same lenses (or with the Fotoman even more choice between Schneider, Rodenstock/Caltar, Nikon and Fuji lenses) with a larger image size for a fraction of the price of the Alpa. Both cameras are very well made and I am 100% sure you will not see any difference between an image made with the Alpa or one of the other suggested cameras. Maybe only when the image was made on 4x5 inch compared to medium format.</p>

[kparratt]

<p>Well yes Jürgen, I do realize the hand-held issue, and it doesn't surprise me to learn that you have that 6x9 F-Line. I bet it is a joy to use. Some years back I had the honour of a personal demonstration of the F-Line by Herr Philippe Vogt himself.<br>

Once having become accustomed to the feel of such equipment, 'precision engineering' takes on a new and real meaning.<br>

Having had to improvise and make do with second, even third best for so many years, I am in one way glad of the digital mania. Why? Because with the facility of internet I can now afford (just) to buy professional top class equipment. When it comes to setting up the Linhof, in studio or out in the field, no one appreciates the design and magnificent build quality more than I do.</p>

 

[kparratt]

<blockquote>

<p>As Stuart suggested, you'd be better with a Mamiya 7II and the fantastic 43mm lens; with the Mamiya you get an excellent rangefinder and a meter as a bonus.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But you can't change film backs. Does this mean you buy two or three Mamiya 7II bodies?</p>

[odama]

<p>I wonder if anyone on this forum has done some comparison between Alpa 12 and Arca-Swiss Rm3D...</p>

[rod_sainty2]

<p>Kevin,</p>

<p>Yes, if you want to interchange film types mid-roll while using a Mamiya 7II you will need a second body. This is a disadvantage of the Mamiya 7II compared to an Alpa 12. However, what is the price of an Alpa 6x9 back? A second Mamiya 7 /7II body may be similar in cost, in the same way that people who once considered the choice of the Pentax 67 and Hasselblad systems often found that the price of a Hasselblad interchangeable back was similar to that of a second Pentax 67 body.</p>