View Full Version : Cambo SC vs. Calumet CC-400's for Architecture

Hailu Shack
25-Apr-2001, 20:37
Hello Again,

Still reading and looking for info to help me make some beginner's decisions on entering LF monorails. I am working on pretty much a bargan basement, not looki ng to make money from photography.

Both of the above camera groups would seem to fit the bill. As you know the Cam bo SC's are a bit more expensive on the used and internet market. What I want t o do: architectural photos (exterior mostly), bridges, outdoor sculpture and pub lic works, and some table top for fun. I think I could get by without the rear- rise on the Calumets by using the tripod. However, I am very worried that I wil l not be able to use a 90mm or 75mm in a recessed lensboard on the Calumet. Or can the Calumet's regular bellows be interchanged with a bag or shorter bellows. Lastly, can the monrail be removed for easier transportation?

I don't need, nor want a "Cadillac" of a LF camera. A Chevy that will take me ar ound the block is just fine.

Thanks in advance for any illumination you can provide.

[I drive a Corvair, thank you very much!]

Don Sparks
26-Apr-2001, 09:04
The Calumet CC-400 wide body can handle down to a 65mm without a recessed lens board. The front standard is recessed on these models. 210mm is about the longest you can use. I bought one in excellent condition at a local camera store for $150.00.

James E Galvin
26-Apr-2001, 11:56
I have a CC-400, not the wide version. A 90 could be used with a flat board, but for more movements I made recessed boards for both the 90 and a 65 (Grandagon and SA) and have plenty of movements. The bellows len gth is not the limit - the standards run together. I have not tried removing the rail, it has stops on the ends that don't, at leas t, pull off with fingers.

Hailu Shack
26-Apr-2001, 17:33
Thanks for the info so far. Follow-up question is: How wide is the "wide body"? and How could I identify one [any particular stamps, labels, etc.] Thanks again :)