Arca-Swiss style clamp clearance

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: Chris S., Pau, Beatsy, rjlittlefield, ChrisR

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Arca-Swiss style clamp clearance

Post by Chris S. »

In another thread, Stevekale raised the following question:
stevekale wrote:Does anyone know if an arca style clamp such as the Really Right Stuff B2-Pro 60mm can sit flat on a baseboard or does the screw knob require some clearance (just like madmacro)?

If someone knows the answer to this I would appreciate it.

I understand from AndrewC that the lever clamps can operate sitting flush with a base board but what about the screw knob versions?
I’m responding in a new thread, as I want to include pictures and thus might risk hijacking madmacro’s interesting thread on his nifty new setup.

Steve, I don’t know if there are screw-type clamps that can sit flush. My 4-inch long Kirk clamps can not. But I wonder if your search for a clamp with a knob small enough to mount flush is really the best possible direction?

Below are two pictures of my rig, the Bratcam, in various iterations. Note the use of metal plates “B” and “E” to—among other things—create clearance between the clamp knobs and focus block. (The lower of the two Kirk clamps is mounted upside down, to permit it to move along an Arca-Swiss style rail.

Image

Image is from an earlier post.


Similarly, in the picture below, metal plates labeled “F” and “D” provide similar function:

Image

Image is from another earlier post.


These plates do not meaningfully reduce the stability of the rig—mine handles 100x just fine. My plates were made by a professional fabricator, but yours needn’t be. Mine do more than just create clearance—they permit alignment adjustment, and provide for the particular needs of adapting the existing surfaces and holes of the focus blocks to the Arca-Swiss standard. Yours could be a simple spacer—basically a big, rectangular, home-made washer. You would make with aluminum stock from the hardware store, a hacksaw, and a drill.

The benefit of this approach is that you could use clamps with large enough knobs to be easy to turn with bare hands, and provide enough clearance to move your fingers around them. I’ve found that having such knobs really close to obstructions makes them frustrating to work with. Providing additional “finger room” around adjustment knobs was something I changed between iterations of the Bratcam.

If you really want to flush mount a screw-type clamp, you could potentially get a clamp that doesn’t clear, and file down the knob until it does. But would you find it convenient to work with such a small knob? I suspect not.

As for lever clamps, they definitely have their place—I have one on my “go-to” tripod and use it all the time; I trust it and appreciate the convenience, as remove and reattach the camera countless times in a typical shoot. But I’ve avoided them in the Bratcam for several reasons. The first is that lever clamps can be a bit picky about the tolerances of various A-S plates, and I want to be able to mix and match any old A-S plate I happen to have on hand (a bunch, of varied manufacturers and ages). Second, during setup of an image, I often use my clamps in an almost-closed position, with just enough looseness to slide an A-S rail, and then tighten everything down for shooting. I find this easier to do with my screw clamps than my lever clamp. Third, I prefer long clamps such as the Kirk 4-inch. Perhaps these are now available in lever-release types, but they were not at the time I chose the Kirks. Not that 4 inch clamps are necessary—they are almost surely overkill for most folks; but I like them.

Cheers,

--Chris

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Cheers. Thanks for the pics. I will also have to look over the original thread in which you posted your setup.

In my proposed setup I intend to either (a) have the base of the Stackshot which is an Arca style rail either bolted directly to the baseboard or, as I kind of like the idea of being able to quickly release the rig (double Stackshot in cross formation and camera etc) from the base board for either tripod mounting for rearrangement for vertical orientation (b) bolt two quick-release clamps to the base board which would attach directly to the Arca rail of the lowermost Stackshot (essentially the reverse of your B and C in the second photo).

I had intended to simply do the former as I don't necessarily need to be able to adjust it by sliding the Stackshot forward until I saw Madmacro's setup. (b) offers both some further forward/backward adjustment, if ever necessary, and an easier swap of orientation. It sounds, from Nikonuser's post, that the screw knob version won't work (which I had suspected).

By the sounds of things, the Really Right Stuff lever clamps would be solid enough.

Craig Gerard
Posts: 2877
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 1:51 am
Location: Australia

Post by Craig Gerard »

Steve,

Double, or back-to-back AS clamps may prove beneficial.

An AS plate, the length of which can be your choice, is attached to the base board, the 'double' AS clamp becomes the interface between the baseboard and Stackshot AS dovetail. The AS plate attached to the baseboard should provide clearance for AS clamp knobs (if any).

A number of makers offer back-to-back AS clamps.
Here are two examples:
http://store.promediagear.com/Arca-Swis ... _p_13.html

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 0653469315

Of what material is your baseboard composed?

I find optical breadboards to be excellent, but they are heavy (shipping expensive) and hard to find in places other than the USA.

Here is a 'lighter' version that would need to be attached a 'heavy' base. These particular optical breadboards are 'modular' and can be interlocked.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/230669634817



Craig
To use a classic quote from 'Antz' - "I almost know exactly what I'm doing!"

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

stevekale wrote:Cheers. Thanks for the pics. I will also have to look over the original thread in which you posted your setup.

In my proposed setup I intend to either (a) have the base of the Stackshot which is an Arca style rail either bolted directly to the baseboard or, as I kind of like the idea of being able to quickly release the rig (double Stackshot in cross formation and camera etc) from the base board for either tripod mounting for rearrangement for vertical orientation (b) bolt two quick-release clamps to the base board which would attach directly to the Arca rail of the lowermost Stackshot (essentially the reverse of your B and C in the second photo).

I had intended to simply do the former as I don't necessarily need to be able to adjust it by sliding the Stackshot forward until I saw Madmacro's setup. (b) offers both some further forward/backward adjustment, if ever necessary, and an easier swap of orientation. It sounds, from Nikonuser's post, that the screw knob version won't work (which I had suspected).

By the sounds of things, the Really Right Stuff lever clamps would be solid enough.
Steve, I say from experience that the capability to quickly remove the StackShot from the base will prove very handy for the reasons you mentioned. I had similar reasons for building my rig as I did, and have found this capability extremely useful. The Bratcam has a lot of fore/aft adjustment (about a meter's worth, as soon as a pending modification adds a bit), because I use it with optics from microscope objectives to a 200mm macro lens, and subjects widely variant in size. I would not want to give up that level of quick, convenient adjustability.

Rather than mounting two clamps on your baseplate, you might want to get two of something like these bidirectional clamps. Several companies make clamps like these--I haven't tried the Sunwayfoto versions, but mine of another brand is very useful. Then get a nice, long A-S rail from Chris Hejnar (the one I currently use is 18-inches long and 5/8 inch thick. Then arrange it, bottom to top, as: Base board, A-S rail, bidirectional clamps, StackShot. Voila--quick to remove/reposition, and solid as a rock.

As I type this, I see Craig has beaten me to it. Great minds think alike. . . . :)

Cheers,

--Chris

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

stevekale wrote:By the sounds of things, the Really Right Stuff lever clamps would be solid enough.
Without question it is solid enough (I have one). But it is not adjustable to accomodate variations in A-S rail thickness, and so is slightly picky (though not greatly so) about what A-S plates you use it with. There are now several brands offering lever-release A-S clamps, and some are both adjustable and cheaper than the RRS.

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Cheers guys. Having now seen the price of the clamps I think I can live with the two bolts and an allen key for now - it won't take too long to assemble and disassemble. (I was focused on RRS because of the reference from Stackshot i.e. there would be no issue with "fit".) I will peruse all the links above though.

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Chris S. wrote:
Rather than mounting two clamps on your baseplate, you might want to get two of something like these bidirectional clamps. Several companies make clamps like these--I haven't tried the Sunwayfoto versions, but mine of another brand is very useful. Then get a nice, long A-S rail from Chris Hejnar (the one I currently use is 18-inches long and 5/8 inch thick. Then arrange it, bottom to top, as: Base board, A-S rail, bidirectional clamps, StackShot. Voila--quick to remove/reposition, and solid as a rock.
Remember the base of the Stackshot already is a 26cm A-S rail so no real need for another rail (just base board, clamp(s), Stackshot) except for extreme adjustability.

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Craig Gerard wrote:
Of what material is your baseboard composed?

I find optical breadboards to be excellent, but they are heavy (shipping expensive) and hard to find in places other than the USA.

Here is a 'lighter' version that would need to be attached a 'heavy' base. These particular optical breadboards are 'modular' and can be interlocked.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/230669634817



Craig
I was thinking of heading down the granite/sorbothane route. The Thorlabs breadboard in the size I would want is £203. At 7kg its also not that heavy either (although I've read the posts discussing just how relevant this may be).

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Chris, just out of interest, why the need for the mounting plates R and P? Could the Thorlabs goniometer not bolt down onto the Newport rotational platform directly? It would seem possible if they were both Thorlabs but I'd need to look at their CADs more carefully.

While on the subject of Thorlabs, how strong/sturdy are their 1.5" post assemblies? Do you think you could mount about 5kg of gear off one for a vertical setup?

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

stevekale wrote:Chris, just out of interest, why the need for the mounting plates R and P? Could the Thorlabs goniometer not bolt down onto the Newport rotational platform directly? It would seem possible if they were both Thorlabs but I'd need to look at their CADs more carefully.
For clarity, here is a closeup of the Bratcam's subject stage from the same thread as above image. Steve is asking about the silver-colored aluminum circle above the rotation stage, and the silver-colored aluminum square below it.

Image

Steve, I sourced most Bratcam components from eBay, and was looking for quality stuff at low prices. This meant that some pieces were not originally intended to work with certain other pieces. The goniometric's stage's mounting holes did not line up with available holes in the rotation stage, despite the fact that they came from the same manufacturer. It would certainly be possible to construct something like this without making adapters, by buying new components that were all meant to work together, but this would be much more expensive. Out of curiousity, I once started to price a similar subject stage pieced from stock Meiji components, but stopped when my nose began to bleed.

For connecting goniometric stage to rotation stage, my options were to have an adapter plate made, or additional holes drilled and tapped in the rotation stage. The adapter was simple and inexpensive, avoided marring a valuable component, and--perhaps most importantly--gave me additional purchase for turning the rotation stage by hand. This stage is so smooth and well-damped, and the radius large enough, that turning it by hand is pleasant even when the subject is under high magnification. I like having the micrometer on this movement, but in most cases, it's not necessary. (This is not true of any of the other movements.)

For connecting the rotation and translation stages, making an adapter was necessary, because the rotation stage is a bit bigger than the translation stage. But having these adapters made was neither expensive nor difficult.
While on the subject of Thorlabs, how strong/sturdy are their 1.5" post assemblies? Do you think you could mount about 5kg of gear off one for a vertical setup?
I have no experience with these. Looking at the Thorlabs Website, I note that the standard use of the 1.5" post seems to rely on a single 1/4-20 screw to bolt to the breadboard. This would concern me for 5kg. But whether it would work or not would depend on what magnification range you're looking to do, how far out you cantilever the weight, and other factors. Check out the image below, of the Thorlabs C1505 mounting post bracket from the Thorlabs Website (as of October 2011). If I went with this post, I'd add one of these brackets upside down, and add screws to attach it firmly to the breadboard. By doing this, the post would be attached by a collar, as well as at its endpoint, and should be much more solid. And placing this item under the cantilevered weight of your rig might offer needed support.

Image

A 1.5" solid post should be pretty sturdy if well-attached to the base. That said, I'd personally go with something welded from steel or aluminum. Overkill? Possibly. But likely both cheaper and far stronger than an assemblage of new parts. I don't know why steel is not more popular in this community. Perhaps it's seen as being hard to work with. But is granite any easier? I've heard suggestions that steel can "ring" with vibration, but have yet to see practical problems even at high magnifications. I strongly recommend finding a local fabricator (look under "welders," rather than "machinists" or "tool and die makers," as the rates are cheaper--though my fabricator can do any of these things). Or work with my fabricator, Don Wilson (contact info in my signature)--he's a gem. If one starts working with such a craftsman, things suddenly become easy, inexpensive--and possible.

Cheers,

--Chris

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Cheers Chris

" Looking at the Thorlabs Website, I note that the standard use of the 1.5" post seems to rely on a single 1/4-20 screw to bolt to the breadboard."

One would use a base such as the one below, the PB1, to bolt it to the board:

Image

I guess that's still one screw between mounting base and column...

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

stevekale wrote:I guess that's still one screw between mounting base and column...
Yep. I'd collar the vertical post. But that's me, and I'm picky. For my work, 10x-20x is a trivially-easy, relaxing walk in the park. 100x is still pretty easy mechanically, but tougher in terms of lighting and DOF. If one's interests are, say, 10x, mechanical issues should be an order of magnitude less demanding. That said, I can't imagine thinking, "Drat! I wish I'd made my rig less sturdy." :)

Cheers, Steve!

--Chris

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

stevekale wrote:Cheers guys. Having now seen the price of the clamps I think I can live with the two bolts and an allen key for now - it won't take too long to assemble and disassemble. (I was focused on RRS because of the reference from Stackshot i.e. there would be no issue with "fit".) I will peruse all the links above though.
I've just now realised that it will be impossible to bolt down a screw of suitable length down through the Stackshot base from the top (a short screw, yes, but not one long enough). So an A-S clamp or two bolted to the baseboard will be necessary. #####.

Chris S.
Site Admin
Posts: 4199
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:55 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Chris S. »

stevekale wrote:. . .it will be impossible to bolt down a screw of suitable length down through the Stackshot base from the top (a short screw, yes, but not one long enough).
Impossible? Going from pictures of the StackShot (I don't have one to look at directly), it looks as if the problem is that the Stackshot's drive shaft gets in the way of inserting a long screw. Is this it? If so, a couple ways around it come to mind. Disassembling the StackShot, screwing in the base, and reassembling looks plausible--but negates the quick removal you're looking for. (So probably not a good idea--but I couldn't help but mention it because the word "impossible" is inspiring.)

But how about inserting the screw from below? If you've drilled your granite all the way through, you could countersink a screw up from the granite base, through the StackShot base, and put a nut on it. If there is space, a wingnut would allow quick removal. Or if you don't want to drill all the way through the granite, a headless screw (either purchased that way, or a regular screw with the head cut off) could be epoxied into the granite. As in the case of a through-bolt, the StackShot could be held on with nuts.

All that said, I still don't think this is your best choice.
So an A-S clamp or two bolted to the baseboard will be necessary.
If you're going to the expense of buying A-S clamps, I'd strongly advise going the route Craig and I recommended: Bolt an A-S rail to your granite base and clamp the StackShot to it with two "bidirectional" or "back-to-back" clamps (pretty much the same thing, just different words). My sense of this comes from a lot of experience with a similar arrangement--it's a solid, adaptable, and easy-to-assemble approach that will serve you well long-term. I suspect it's a common experience among us that soon after developing a nice rig, we think of more things we wish it could do--not because the rig doesn't work, but because it does. Good results give us bigger ideas, and so we end up continually adapting our rigs to as our vision expands.

With the approach Craig and I suggested, you will find yourself with an easily adaptable, upgradable rig. I can foresee your getting a longer A-S plate, drilling additional mounting holes, making a riser block for taller subjects or a larger subject stage, adding more axes of camera movement, etc. With something such as we suggested, these things will tend to be pretty easy. And those back-to-back clamps are very useful on the tripod--just clamp an A-S rail onto your tripod head, attach the StackShot (or collared macro lens, or camera) with the clamps, and you have a very easy-to-use field rig.

Cheers,

--Chris

stevekale
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 2:40 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by stevekale »

Yes the drive shaft is directly in the way. And it's not possible to undo the rail, bolt it down (from the top) and then reassemble the rest of the Stackshot on top because the rial bolts to the Stackshot from the bottom.

A screw from the bottom of the base board (all the way through) would work. The Stackshot holes are threaded. A bit painful having to turn everything over to release the Stackshot and not as "pretty".

I'll give some thought to the additional rail. I had worked out that the Stackshot rail I have (extended rail with 8in of movement) gave me as much fore-aft movement as I would need with my range of lenses (from Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro with tubes and 2X converter, Nikon 10x lens with 135mm "tube lens", through to Nikon 10x with the 70-200mm f/2.8L lens as a tube) without having to shift the subject stage. I'll check all this again.

If I do go the rail route, this would seem suitable/more cost effective:

http://reallyrightstuff.com/ProductDesc ... uble-Clamp

Image

I can't see from their website how their rails can be bolted down from above.

EDIT:

I took another look at "centre of camera base to subject distance" for all the combinations of lenses I would currently use.

The shortest is the Nikkor 135mm 2/2.8 plus 10x Nikon objective => 8 inches

The longest set of lenses would be the 100mm f/2.8L with full Kenko tube set and 2x converter => 15.5 inches (such a distance would be somewhere between 1:2 and 1:3 with the 100mm lens only) [what magnification would that be?]

So if I have my thinking right a fixed extended rail Stackshot would cover an object 0.5 inches deep across this range. One could also have some latitude in where to place the Stackshot (fore-aft) within two clamps if the clamps are set in from either end.

That seems like a huge amount of freedom of latitude. Am I missing anything?

Of course, a rail would mean there is greater margin for deeper subjects or a wider field of view than 1:2. Furthermore, the cost is relatively similar: 2 x B2 LRII 60mm clamps = $240 versus 2 x B2 Duo Double Clamps plus a 12 inch rail from krosno65 = $255 (ignoring US postage).

Hmm which way to go...

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic