Hi Michael,

Great to see a video review of the rm3d. As an arca swiss digital user I've been keen to see more of this camera than I have.

I think there are a couple of errors in what you say on the video review:

The written review you say:

"The size is a bit larger than some alternatives, but since there are both rise and fall and shift movements on the front standard the additional size over an Alpa TC, for example, is quite appropriate."

On the video they look to be on the rear, which would be better.

You highlight a choice by arca to give 30mm fall and 10mm rise as a strange one because for architecture you want to extend the height of the image on the most part. However, seeing as this movement is on the rear of the camera then the 30mm fall would translate to an extended height in the image and so you wouldn't have to turn the camera upside down for most of architectural photography.

My analysis will obviously be wrong if all the movements are on the front.

Nick

In the video they state that the tilt is on front, and the shift/rise/fall is on the rear standard. This is even demonstrated in the video, as they show the tilt in action on the front and point out the location of the shift/rise/fall knobs on the rear. Having shift/rise/fall on the rear is definitely preferable to front if you're only going to have one or the other, since it allows for parallax-free stitching. Also I seem to recall in one of the discussions here that having only tilt in front and shift/rise/fall on the rear allows for tighter tolerances with less 'slop', which is important for high-res digital backs, so I guess that makes sense also. I can't really think why it would be important to have shift/rise on the front standard, although having rear tilts/swings would be useful.

As you say, with rear standard movements it's fall that you would want for shooting tall objects rather than rise, so the adjustments provided make sense. The fact that the camera can so easily be turned upside down is pretty neat though.