Green Monster or The Intrepid 8x10?

[pepeguitarra]

I am in the market for a used, or new, 8x10 view camera. Someone is offering me a Calumet 1A 8x10 in aluminum, while I am tempted for an 8x10 The Intrepid because of the weight (although, I do not walk too far from the car for a photo, so I could carry the weight of the monster). I mostly would do seascapes, landscapes and ocassional still life and portrait. I just want to have one lens on the 8x10. Can you share what would you choose? Pros and cons of each. Thank you.

[Jim Noel]

I would choose the Calumet with a 360 mm lens. That is if the weight isn't too much for you. I gave mine up at 75.

[Oren Grad]

If I'd been stuck with an aluminum C1 my 8x10 explorations would have died before they got started. No way I would wrestle with that monster in the field - not remotely worth the hassle and hurt. I'd take my chances with the Intrepid.

As always, YMMV.

EDIT: to be clear, I wouldn't take the magnesium C1 either.

[Jac@stafford.net]

The Calumet is my most accurate and rugged 8x10. A simple cart to schlep it is adequate.
(I think the green colored one is magnesium alloy, not aluminum. Someone can correct me.)

[fotopfw]

It is indeed about weight, but also: do you value movements? The Calumet resembles the Cambo I had, a beast, but certainly more movements than an Intrepid (or most field camera's for that matter).
I don't go far from the car, so I carry the Sinar P2 8x10" and a heavy tripod (Gitzo), but never more than 1000 yards. In the studio, that camera is a delight to work with.
If you want just one camera, the Calumet will do nicely in the field and studio.

[Alan9940]

Never owned the Calumet, but I do have an Intrepid. If you're planning to work mainly from the car and/or hike small distances, then I'd go for the Calumet. Just based on what I've read and other photographers I know that own one, it will be much more solid and stable vs the Intrepid, if placed on an adequate tripod, of course. Since I hike over fairly long distances with my 8x10, 3 lenses, and all the related paraphernalia needed, the Intrepid really works out great. It's not as rock solid as my Deardorff, but it's a heck of a lot easier to carry for this old man! ;)

[pepeguitarra]

Thanks for the answers so far. I do have two 4x5 Calumet cc400 (a black one and a grey one), I bought one and I got one for free. I think they are indestructible, they are in perfect conditions after so many years and they weight 5 pounds without lens. The other camera I have is a Super Speed Graphic, that weights 2.5 pounds with a small lens. When I really want one a good picture, I take the Calumet CC4400. That is why the green monster is an option for me. The price is also an attractive reason, very very low.

[Jac@stafford.net]

I was speaking of the Calumet c1, definitely not like the cc400.

[Mark Sampson]

If the Calumet is inexpensive, try it. It's a very capable machine. But if it doesn't work for you, you can sell it on this forum (or elsewhere).

[dap]

You state that even though you will primarily do landscapes, you do plan on taking some still lives and portraits. Do you plan on using any vintage lenses (heavy!) for portraits or are you sticking with relatively compact modern lenses? Judging by the internet chatter, the intrepid front standard might not be up to the task of using heavier lenses.

Another thing to consider if you plan on transporting it much is the physical size. I have the predecessor to the C1 and, in addition to the heavy weight, it is a physically big camera (in relation to the the lighter 8x10 field cameras).

[mdarnton]

I have an Agfa-Ansco view, 12 pounds, and it never goes anywhere. I bought an Intrepid, which has not come yet, to take out. If I don't see the sense in taking out my 12 pound camera, you know what I think about taking out the Calumet!

[John Layton]

Yeah...but if you get buried in surf with the Green Monster - you can just do like Cole Weston did and simply hose it off! (just take that lens off first!)

[Luis-F-S]

I would choose the Calumet with a 360 mm lens. That is if the weight isn't too much for you. I gave mine up at 75.


+1!! Would be my choice it’s a real camera designed in the golden age of view cameras.

[AJ Edmondson]

I had (at the same time) a Wista 810 and an old Calumet C (the earliest version)... invariably I would end up carrying the Calumet despite the weight difference because of the longer bellows and the solidity with which it would lock down. I have often wondered if I am just a glutton for punishment but of all of the 8x10 cameras I have owned (B&J, Kodak, Wista) the Calumet - to this day - remains my favorite!
Joel

[popdoc]

Have/had both.

Surely the attraction of bigger is better/more testosterone needed/wooden ships sailing the seas/etc. favors the green monster....

Realistically, if ease and speed of set up, transporting your photo kit anywhere more than 500 yards from your mode of transportation, your new camera will be the winner.

After my Wista arrived, the Green Monster never left the closet.

Both are great, but....

You’ve got a lovely camera coming your way, and I believe you’ll be pleased with your choice once you use it in the field.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[neil poulsen]

I've not used one, but a friend recently purchased the green (Mg) monster in quite nice condition.

Very nice camera, and light enough so as not to need a huge Linhof or a Gitzo Giant Studex 5 tripod for support. My friend also purchased a Feisol 3472 CF tripod and the Manfrotto 229 (formerly 3039) head that looks like it'll hold the camera just fine. The green monster weighs only a little more than a Deardorff, but in my opinion, it's a more sturdy camera. Having had a Deardorrf, the green Monster would be my preference.

Thumbs Up for the green monster.

[Duolab123]

The tale I heard, when the insurance underwriter figured out Calumet was using Magnesium, they forced the switch to Aluminum??? Myth, who knows. Calumet 8x10 is a hell of a camera.

[G Benaim]

I used a c-1 when I first started out and found it an excellent camera once it's set up on a tripod and w lenses over 19". It's a little too bulky to carry more than a few steps un mounted and the back rail is a pain w shorter lenses. I've never used the intrepid but from what I've seen and read online long lenses might be too much to ask, and there still seem to be glitches that need working out. If your budget will allow, I would recommend a Kodak Master View. It's about the same weight as a green c-1 but folds down to a very compact clamshell, and I've used it successfully w a 24" artar in an ilex 5 shutter, so plenty rigid for that length at least, which is as far as the original bellows extends.