andre_oldani

Al, believe me there is a menu point in the back where you can set the latency. That has

nothing to do with the shutter of the lens. It is the idle time the back waits until it reads out

the image. I'd ask your dealer for this. Don't think that you bought such an expensive piece

of equipment from gray market.

Best,

Andre

Hi there,

I haven't used the CFH39 so far but last week I handeled the CF39 in the studio tethered.

Still some software glitches...

The flash sync starts/stopps the exposure. With the Hasselblad/Imacons you MUST set up

in the back or the software the longest exposure you are expecting. With older Imacons

the rule of thumb was one or two stops (times) longer than the longest time. Have you set

up your back to at least 16 seconds?

Anyway, the CCD's - unless Hasselblad has invented something new - need a closed

shutter (black) while reading out the data. If you have a synch problem or the result is

normally green or magenta casted. Therefore the question: Do you get clean pictures or

such with green or magenta cast?

You would get this behavior with the first and the second points above. So it is very

unlikely that you get a clean picture anyway. Try to set up your back properly. BTW, you

could even use it at 32 sec all the time. The time you choose in the back or the software is

just the time the back waits until it reads out forced. But who wants to wait 32 sec until

the next shot :)

Best,

Andre

Instead of ranting here some correct information:

Are the SA 47 XL and the Helvetar the same design? Both are Super-Angulon contructions

(symmetrical 8 lenses in 4 groups, same as the Biogon). But they are two completely

different calculations as you can see from the image circle (47 XL = 166 mm at f22,

Helvetar = 123 mm at f22). The SA 47 XL is optimised for f22 and the Helvetar for f11.

Todays LF lenses are not made for being used fully open (f5.6 or f4.5 with the

Rodenstocks) for the sake of an immense image circle. The Helvetar can be used from f8

and with some restrictions also at f5.6.

What construction is the Helvetar? The optical formula comes from the former Super-

Angulon 47 non XL. This lens is not in production anymore but Schneider uses the same

optical formula for their Apo-Digitar 5.6/47 XL (no, it is NOT the SA 47 XL). The Helvetar

is capable of covering up to 6x9 plus shift AND being used with digital backs. The body

construction is optimised for film and digital and shares the same center filter like the 58

XL.

Can I use the SA 47 XL digital? Well, with some good will yes but it is not recommended.

The SA 47 XL with its large image circle (120 degree construction) is made for 4x5" and

larger and for heavy shift with that format. The former SA 47 (aka Apo-Digitar 47 XL) and

therefore the Helvetar is the only wide angle lens Schneider choose to be good enough for

digital usage. As stated before the SA 47 XL is optimised for film an f22. Everybody who

understands just a little bit regarding digital photography (especially diffraction) knows

what that means.

So why not asking the manufacturers straight away? We always try to give correct and

honest answers. Might be that not everybody is behaving like that in todays world but we

never claimed that the ALPA is for everyone :-)

Best,

Andre

Hello Kevin,

I am pro photographer myself using the camera for several years now. So if you need

information, pos and cons form a photographers point of view just drop me a note via

mail. I am also involved in the company and we do not have hesitations to pronounce

clearly where this camera is superior as well as where the limitations are.

A word from the manufacturers side: Two batches of 50 Biogon each (the first with the

optical formula of the one found in the 903 SWC and the second with the recalc as 905

SWC) were sold as interchangeable lenses for the ALPA cameras. A third batch got

postponed as the end price would have reached dimensions of a complete 905 SWC and

there is no chance to get less than 50 pieces in one series. Given the versatility (coverage

of up to 6x9 plus shift) and more reasonable price the Schneider ALPA Apo- Helvetar

5.6/48 mm is an interesting alternative.

Being a completely modular camera system you might also be interested in some wide

angle results with high-end digital backs. Just have a look at www.digitar.alpavision.ch,

www.digitar2.alpavision.ch or in an even better quality www.alpavision.ch/mfm/

Best, Andre

Hi William,

Just have a look at http://alpa.ch/en/galleries/application/application.html - In the

Architecture part have a look at 'Various by André Oldani'. The colour pictures are taken

with an Imacon 132 C. The 'Digital' sections shows you the even more stunnig pictures

taken with a Leaf Valeo 22 Wi. These pictures are full size in JPG. Please have in mind that

it is not only the back, it's the whole system from lens, body to back. The accuracy one can

achieve may be shown in the picture '35XL-11-12mm.jpg'. This is picture got shifted 12

mm and have a look in the corners! The Pictures with the Schneider 24 mm cover an angle

of 90 degrees horizontally and 103 degrees diagonally...symmetrical lenses without the

large distortion of

the retrofocus ones!

Q.C., of course, I meant a reconstruction of the shutter for both Biogon and all other Cxx

lenses (disappeared during editing I think). All these lenses would need a mode for use on

a SWC body (shutter starts closed and ends closed) and 5xx bodies (shutter stars open and

ends closed) or kind of. The focal flange distance of the Biogon doesn't allow it's usage on

a 5xx body, of course. The Cxx lenses on the other hand would need a 'enlarging tube' for

reaching the focal flange distance of the Cxx lenses. Nice experiment of thougts but rather

academical :-) Let us use the Hasselblads as they are :-)

Diego, the precision needed for symmetrical wide angle lenses is very demanding. A

bayonet is always a compromise adding some uncertainties. In addition you need to

understand how Hasselblads work: 'Wen the camera release is depressed, the lens shutter

closes and the diaphragm stops down to the preset aperture, the mirror moves up, and

the auxiliary shutter or focal plane shutter opens. The lens shutter opens and closes for

the duration se on the shutter-speed ring, or in the B setting, the shutter closes when the

finger is removed from the release. Depending on the camera model or the operating

mode on some models, the mirror returns either instantly or when the film is advanced' -

Wildi, The Hasselblad Manual, page 39. - The SWC does not have an auxiliary shutter so

all the C/CB/CF/CFi/CFE (plus F/FE anyway) lenses would we worthless on such a body

(with extensions). Your idea would need a reconstruction of the whole shutter mechanism

for the Biogon with two modes for SWC and 500 (plus some 2000/200 plus Flexbody)

series models. In addition you couldn't use this Biogon on those bodies as the optical

construction doesn't allow this (these bodies are made for SLR and retrofocal lenses).

Kerkko is right about the exchangeable Biogon for the ALPA 12. After two completely sold

batches of this lens a third one might come next year. But this depends on the real

demand. The lens is very expensive by nature and you cannot order them as single pieces.

BTW, Zeiss offered an exchangeable Biogon to ALPA because it is 'the most precise camera

in that area' (Zeiss' words). With the ALPA you can use the lens on whatever format you

want and crop later as needed. The camera is open for 6x4.5, 44x66, 36x72, 6x6, 6x7,

6x8 and 6x9 (56x84) with backs from ALPA (modified Linhof Super Rolex), Mamiya RB,

Horseman/Arcaswiss plus Polaroid.

I wouldn't comment other cameras and systems that I own or handled profoundly myself

(just touch doesn't count!). Therefore and for my part I can't discuss the flexibility of some

other cameras. But I would call a complex system with a whole and ready to buy range of

high precision lenses from Schneider, Rodenstock (and Zeiss) from 24/35mm (digital) and

38mm (film up to 6x9) up to 250mm plus macro system plus adapters for digital backs

(Hasselblad V, Hasselblad H1, Mamiya 645 AFD) quite flexible :-)

Joe, I always found the chromogenic film to be very convenient. I use it for B&W work in wedding reportage as the wedding couple can get copies of this kind of B&W much easier (yes, I am not a picture archive and give my negs to the bride and groom).

Unfortunately I was not able to try Fuji 400CN as it has not arrived till now in Switzerland. I tried all the chromogenics from XP2 to T400CN, Portra 400 BW and the new BW400CN. Personally I always prefered it in MF. You can find some examples here: www.alpasamples.alpavision.ch . Please mind the large files when clicking the thumbs :-)

Dear Bill,

We contacted Linos/Rodenstock and the head of photo optics, Mr Philipp Gschwendtner,

re-confirmed the data that we show on the website (www.alpa.ch). The guy from

Rodenstock might have mixed up things in 1996. The Heliogon was in the Rodenstock

taking lens program for several years and also sold als TechniKON 2.8/95 to Linhof. This

lens was a six element Gauss type as you describe. The TechniKAR 3.5/95 that was used

in the Linhof 220 and is now available for the ALPA is indeed a Tessar type (4 lenses in 3

groups). Rodenstock sold this lens in a slightly modified version (with a different focal

length) as a taking lens named Ysarex and also as enlarging lens under the name Ysaron.

Therefore 'Technikon' and 'Technikar' ('Heliogon' and 'Ysarex' respectively) were two

different lenses. I hope this was of help.

Best regards, ALPA of Switzerland, André Oldani

Dear Bill,

Thanks for the information. This contradicts with the data we got from Linos/Rodenstock

this year. They say it was made only for Linhof. It is a 4 element Tessar type with 2 single

lenses and one compound lens. The lens design was used later in a modified version with

a different focal length under the name Ysarex optimized for infinity and Ysaron as

enlarging lens. Data sheets were not available. This information comes from the head of

photo optics at Linos/Rodenstock. But as you know...nobody is perfect. If available in

electronic form we would be glad to get this information so that we can contact Linos/

Rodenstock and clarify the situation. Thanks in advance.

Yes, it is true. Some ALPA customers were seeking for a lens that brings back the look of

the earlier B&W lenses. As film material and chemistry is at it is, ALPA was looking for

single coated lenses that are still available and found a batch of them at Linhof, the

Technikar 3.5/95 mm (a Tessar type). The lenses go to Schneider where they get

completely cleaned, checked and only the best get used for the ALPA Technikar. As

Compur shutters do not exist anymore for this type of lens only the Copal Press fits. The

lens covers officially 6x7 but 6x8 and even 6x9 (with soft corners) can be rechead. It is a

unique and special purpose lens with an own character. You can find some sample shots

from this summer here: www.technikar.alpavision.ch

A 22 MP sensor (or whatever given size) produces the same size of file whether it is RGB or

monochromatic. The difference is that in case of RGB every pixel just records the part of

the light it is intended for (R or G or G or B). Only after interpolation the pixel gets

transfered into the pixel you see in the picture. I assume that is not the way in a

monochromatic back. Therefore the result should be better detailed or at least better in

contrast in the end. Pete Myers describes it as 'In monochrome, 6 mega pixels effectively

does what it takes 12-24 mega pixels with a color matrix.'

Unfortunately a low demand is like a niche in a niche and wouldn't result into lower prices

for the lacking color. But as long as the user accepts the results of a converted (flattened)

RGB color picture into B&W this will not change. It's the same as to many people accept the

quality of poor wide angle lenses until they see what the German lens manufacturers

achieve in that (wide) field :-)

As I do not tested the back quality per se in the test shots, the pictures got post-

processed for print use. The 24 mm outdoor shot is way to sharp for screen use. No center

filter was used as the I couldn't screw it in because of the large flash sync connecter I had

at hand interfering with the screw in of the filter. Also the pictures with the 35 mm lens

was without center filter. The Schneider Digitar 5.6/35 mm XL (90 mm of image circle) is a

pre-series lens. Only 5 ex. exist worldwide and thereof only 'free' one is in an ALPA mount

:-). A proper center filter with the right correction was not available.

I would say that if existing, colorshift often results also from high contrast or

inappropriate exposure time. Plus digitally we face a lot more diffraction at small

apertures. But believe me, I just got shocked when I saw the wide end results of a Canon

2.8/16-35mm L lens on a brand new Canon 20D (Not DOA but it has to go straight back

to the dealer on Monday as the one I picked up Friday has a malfunction in both the top

LCD and the finder display - have my fingers crossed for the Ds MkII I have ordered). Oh

boy, I love my manual (film) cameras like the ALPA or the Leica MP!

The business here seems to be driven mostly from photo journalism, fashion,

advertisement et al. So the target are printed publications, posters and media. Here you

normally have the large volume of film and development cost that justifies the investment

(do no forget the whole chain from camera, lenses, digital device, computer and storage

one need). Going digital doesn't mean just putting a digital back on a camera.

If you want to see a sensor of dimensions like 6x7 or 100x125mm. Go outside, look

straight upwards in the nightly sky and maybe you are on a picture taken with such a

beast. Very little of course :-) Fairchild used to have a sensor of 84x84mm on their

website, BTW. But for your health sake, I'd not ask the price :-)

Regarding the weight of equipment: With the advent of new and very high resolving film

material we face a lot of professional photographers being tired of schlepping around their

LF gear. In addition we hear a lot from them about the much more restrictive regime on

flights (inner European flights allow often not more than 8kg of cabin luggage) and

forbidden tripods (for some strange and intransparent security reasons ... because one

could use them as a weapon???). My ALPA plus some 4 lenses, roll film back (6x9), light

meter, film etc. is not more than 7 kg :-)

I just read the review about the monochromatic digital camera Kodak DCS 760m (http://

www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/kodak-760m.shtml). As the idea behind

- and the results of course - are very tempting, I am asking myself about such a technique

in a high end digital back. Please get me right, I do not want to start a war about film vs

digital or this brand versus that. It is only about the fact that the manufacturers of digital

back need to get seduced by possible market size. Looking at the myriad of new digital

SLR showing up even they might not ignore this niche any longer. As it seams there are

monochromatic sensors from Dalsa and maybe Kodak existing.

That's the reason why I put this question on the medium and large format forums: Is there

any substantial interest in true B&W digital cameras/backs in general and especially for

landscape and architectural work?

As I am related to ALPA (www.alpa.ch) I try a lot of gear in the field. Recently I did some

tests with the high end backs and the newest Schneider Digitar (even the pre-series

Digitar 5.6/35 XL) lenses (see www.digitar.alpavision.ch) on a Leaf Valeo 22. One can get

breathtaking results with that kind of digital device (eyelike / Jenoptik, Imacon /

Hasselblad, Phase One and Sinar also to mention) but the interpolation (and therefore

possible moire and especially stairs) takes away a lot of the advantage.

Anybody out there seriously minded in that area? THX in advance.

I just read the review about the monochromatic digital camera Kodak DCS 760m (http://

www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/kodak-760m.shtml). As the idea behind

- and the results of course - are very tempting, I am asking myself about such a technique

in a high end digital back. Please get me right, I do not want to start a war about film vs

digital or this brand versus that. It is only about the fact that the manufacturers of digital

back need to get seduced by possible market size. Looking at the myriad of new digital

SLR showing up even they might not ignore this niche any longer. As it seams there are

monochromatic sensors from Dalsa and maybe Kodak existing.

That's the reason why I put this question on the medium and large format forums: Is there

any substantial interest in true B&W digital cameras/backs in general and especially for

landscape and architectural work?

As I am related to ALPA (www.alpa.ch) I try a lot of gear in the field. Recently I did some

tests with the high end backs and the newest Schneider Digitar (even the pre-series

Digitar 5.6/35 XL) lenses (see www.digitar.alpavision.ch) on a Leaf Valeo 22. One can get

breathtaking results with that kind of digital device (eyelike / Jenoptik, Imacon /

Hasselblad, Phase One and Sinar also to mention) but the interpolation (and therefore

possible moire and especially stairs) takes away a lot of the advantage.

Anybody out there seriously minded in that area? THX in advance.

As described symmetrical (non-retrofocal) lenses wouldn't work because of the mirror in

an SLR. Therefore all SLR systems in medium format as well as in 35mm are retrofocal

constructions. The only symmetrical lens in the Hasselblad set up is the Biogon which is

fixed mount in the SWC body (also because wide angle lenses are more delicate to adjust,

they have to be very precisely otherwise you will not get sharp images).

Distortion IS a problem with retrofocal systems. The new Carl Zeiss Distagon 4.0/40mm IF

has based on the technical information of the manufacturer a distortion of at least 3% in

the edges. This lens is superbly optimised for digital use. The former calculation (4.0/40)

has a big turn in its distortion chart. The peak is some 1.5% at around 30mm of image

radios (60mm of image circle). The Biogon for comparison has maybe under some 0.5%.

All

charts can be found on www.zeiss.de. Together with Schneider-Kreuznach this is the only

company I am aware of showing real measured performance data of all their lenses.

If you are in architectural photography distortion IS important. If you really care

distortion DOES make a difference. But to be honest, without movements (shift) of the

camera you cannot reach the full freedom for this area of photography. Here the

Hasselblads are quite limited. You need a system using large format lenses for achieving

movements.

I am using the ALPA 12 SWA. Here all the (wide angle) lenses are symmetrical

constructions. With my Schneider Super-Angulon 5.6/38 XL the shift movements are

25mm for 6x6 anyway and the camera can be used up to 6x9 with highest precision. Here

the Biogon (which is sold out at the moment) is exchangeable but also limited to 6x6 (plus

the ALPA format 44x66mm which uses the image circle much more economically). My

Schneider ALPA Apo-Helvetar 5.6/48 (based on the Super-Angulon 47 non XL) has

distortion values slighly over the Biogon but up to 6x9! And the Schneider Super-Angulon

5.6/47 XL has such a large image circle that you shift 25mm even with 6x9.

Well, as always, it depends on what kind of photography you are interested plus what you

define as quality. And believe me, you can see differences :-)

I don't want to disappoint you but what you describe is already sold to photographers. Just

have a look at http://www.sinar.ch (yes it is in English, no worries) - 17.6 cm2 ist the net

area of the 37x49 millimeter Kodak sensor. It features some 22 megapixels in a 9 micron

technology and is - together with the 22 MP sensor from Dalsa - state of the art, actually.

You find the same sensor in the Imacon Ixpress 132C, the PhaseOne P25/H25 and the

Dalsa in the Leaf 22Wi and the Jenoptic Eyelike.

We might see more megapixels already this year (just do the math with smaller pixel size).

But the major manufacturers will hardly bring larger sensors. A 56x56 does not make

sense to them as they bet on the 645 form factor with the actual Mamiya/Contax/

Hasselblad. Prices for such a full frame 6x6 sensor would be even higher for the sake of

the old 'square cropping discussion'.

Larger sensors in the future? My ALPA would be glad to take sensors up to 6x9, if

available. But don't forget the cost for the bodyguards for such a prestigous piece of

Silicon at todays prices...plus the cost of the additional data storage and computers to

cope with the data flood.

Pavel, nealry everything depends on your budget. If you are looking for the largest MF then you need a Linhof back. Something that is not always taken into account: the 6x9 of horseman is 56x82. To my knowledge only Linhof Super Rolex backs have the true 56x84 (2:3 ratio) as well as the right 6x7. Linhof Super Rolex backs can be used on Linhof cameras (www.linhof.de) and on the ALPA (www.alpa.ch). They are more expensive but if you use them heavily (read professionally), you will end up in shorter live cycles with cheaper stuff like Horseman/Arca Swiss. That's what real pro report to us and I broke a Horseman back myself when I tried to close it.

The Linhof M679 is a very nice camera. I like it. But wait for photokina. They should come out with a 'cs' model that allows shift oft the front standart. AFAIK the 'cc' is lacking that.

If you play with the idea of using your camera handfree and also with digital: Horseman - my latest knowledge - cannot get properly adapted with a digital back. ALPA offers 25mm rise/fall and will come up with some lenses for lateral shift plus has adapters for Hasselblad V, Mamiya RB and ArcaSwiss/Horseman already plus will come up with adjustable adapters for Hasselblad V, Contax 645, Mamiya 645 and Hasselblad H1 for photokina.

Well, as I said, it depends on your budget. But less expensive things often turn out the opposite in the long run...

I'd point out the other side. Both lenses are quite nice but when I owned a complete

Mamiya 6 outfit for some 2-3 years it was more like 2/3 with the 50. Focal lenghtes

depend on your style of photography and topic. I'd rather feel restricted in such a wide

country without a wide lens :-). Depends also if you can handle the foreground/

background thing as with 6x6 you often have to look for something in the bottom part of

the picture not making it dull. You can find some pictures I took with the 50mm only here:

http://www.six-by-six.ola.ch/gallery/200202-2/00.html

I am speaking for ALPA. We try to monitor the different discussion forums but after the

revamp of Photo.net this doesn't work properly with us.

We are again and again surprised how superficial a lot of visitors read through the Web.

We doubt that hardly any of the visitors of the "no comment" pages ever used a digital

back in their whole life. Proved by several responses over the last weeks we also doubt

that they even noticed that the pictures taken on the site were performed with a digital

back (we mentioned it several times on every page). If it comes to digital (not only there

but here a lot stronger) there is a tendency to start religious wars and attempts to protect

the investments in the own equipment with praises for the own and damnation of the one

of others.

ALPA has excellent relations to all the lens manufacturers like Rodenstock, Schneider and

Zeiss. Some photographers love and swear on one or the other brand. We offer lenses

from those manufacturers because they are first rate. Offering just one manufacturer

would make things much easier for ALPA but customer needs and satisfaction has to be

first.

Of course the Schneider Super-Angulon 58XL is a phantastic lens like the Rodenstock

Apo-Grandagon 55mm, ON FILM (I use the 58XL myself, see sample pictures at http://

www.alpavision.ch/press/index.html and go for the 58XL). The use of the 58XL with a

digital back is somewhat limited and also Schneider knows that. And this is not just a

question of comparable size between lets say a 6x9 negative (the ALPA 12 can handle

backs from 6x4.5 up to 6x9) and a sensor of any dimension. There are lenses that are - by

construction - sub-optimal for digital use. Even the outstanding Biogon 4.5/38mm is not

the best choice for the usage with digital backs. Digital sensor are different beasts, at least

for the moment.

BUT, the ALPA 12 system is a very capable platform for hybrid use, analog (on film) and

digital. Change is a snap and a matter of seconds. We just tried to start showing that. We

also do not cheat at our customers and tell them what is useful for his or her type of

photography.

It is not the intention of ALPA to stoke religious wars. We therefore deleted the whole

section from our website and will advise our customers and the people with a real interest

in that area directly.

Best regards,

André Oldani, partner of ALPA of Switzerland

Hi Gary, 56x76mm is correct for Mamiya. I don't know if Fuji has a different size with its

680 series. The effective size of the negatives depends heavily on the back manufacturer:

6x7 from Horseman/ArcaSwiss is 56x69.5mm but from Linhof its 56x72 - 6x9 from the

latter manufacturer measures the correct 2:3 ratio and is 56x84 where Horseman/

ArcaSwiss only gives you 56x82mm.

The Schneider ALPA Apo-Helvetar 5.6/48mm is optically based on the Schneider Digitar.

The Schneider Super-Angulon 5.6/47mm (non XL) is not made and sold anymore by

Schneider Kreuznach.

If we talk about image circle one has to know that this is not the circle of light of the

respective lens. The image circle is defined by the manufacturers where they declare the

limit - according to their quality standards - for a given aperture. The circle of light that

a lens draws is wider and not always mechanically limited like the Biogon, e.g. The image

circle of the Schneider ALPA Apo-Helvetar 5.6/48mm is declared as 98mm at f5.6 and -

given a larger circle of light - does not dark out the edges of a 6x9. At f22 the image

circle is 123mm (all data from the ALPA.CH website).

Declaring the image circle smaller (60 to 80mm) for digital has to do with the quality claim

of Schneider and ALPA. AFAIK the lens is in short supply because Schneider sells lenses

like hell and they nearly cannot cope with the demand (also from ALPA) for the moment.

Hi Hendrik,

The Macro Planar 120 for the Contax 645 gives you much more flexibility:

a) full integration (no stop down metering as with the adapted Hassy/Zeiss 120)

b) focus from infinity down to 1:1 (not only 1:4.something with the adapted Hassy/

Zeiss 120 without bellows or macro rings)

Best,

André

Sorry folks, I did not get the last postings automatically. During the next weeks I

could perform some parallel shots with the Biogon on 44x66 and the Helvetar on

6x9. I allready did some but want to try some under the same conditions for short

distances and infinity. I'll post them on www.alpavision.ch - if you like to get

informed you can subscribe to the mailing list (goto the ALPAca section).

It is correct that the Linhof weights a ton! It is built like a tank, that's why you have to

carry that tank :-) At the moment I use the Mamiya backs for 6x6 and 44x66 on my

ALPA plus a Horseman back for 6x9. The Horseman is lighter, shallower in

construction and OK to use. For film flatness the Linhof may have the edge.

We were discussing so many problems with all the existing backs that it might be the

only solution that ALPA realises in the future their own back with the same aim for

precision. The combo ALPA12/Helvetar/ALPA back and a to be realised sports finder

would make a system that could become my optimal system for Alpine hiking. BTW I

love to use the ALPA freehand when walking around. I just got me the Leica MP, thats

the counterpart in small format that fits the 12 best .-)

Big? Well, everything is relative! The SWC has a very good 'form factor', I agree. But it

weights complete with a 6x6 back some 1.3 kilo. The ALPA 12 SWA with Helvetar, 6x9

Horseman back some 1.6 kilo (the Biogon in its optical calculation like the 903 is

around 100 gramms more). The much better viewfinder adds another 300 gramms.

Unmount the viewfinder and the dimensions are a depth of 13cm, 18cm wide, 12cm

high. Big? Well, you get a complete (up to) 6x9 camera, built in shift/rising front, fully

exchangeable lenses and backs and a grip and steadiness you hardly can achieve with

the SWC. Everything is relative in live...