CAMBO CAMERAS

The Calumet 45N (made by Cambo) and a Schneider 210/5.6 were my first 4×5 film setup, which I acquired as a student studying product photography in advertising art school. Once I got my feet wet shooting monorail cameras in the studio, I transitioned to using Linhof, Sinar, and Arca Swiss over the years. My current film 6×12 panoramic kit includes the Cambo Wide 650. The beauty of the Cambo Wide lies in its simplicity and versatility. I can shoot 4×5 and 120 film, and if I want, I can even stitch a large pano with my digital back. This page is all about my experiences with the Cambo Wide 650.

IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE 650 PANO KIT COMPONENTS
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE DEPTH COMPARISONS
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE 6×12 KIT
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE 650 – MY SETUP
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE 650 IN A RUGGARD DRY CASE
IMAGE: CAMBO ROAD KIT IN SACK PACK
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE KIT + STASH MASTER + BATAFLAE 26L
IMAGE: CAMBO WIDE + CFV50c IMAGE SIZE
IMAGE: TWO GRAFLOK DIGITAL PLATES WITH DIFFERENT FOCUS PLANES
IMAGE: FOTOMAN 6×12 GRAFLOK VIEWFINDER
IMAGE: CAMBO ACCESSORIES
IMAGE: SUMMER IN THE MARSH 2024
IMAGE: DA YI 6×12 FILM MAGAZINE

When I began exploring cameras for panoramic film photography, the Linhof 6×12 and 6×17 models caught my eye. However, they were too expensive for such a niche format. While I sometimes use my Ebony 4×5 for 6×12 shooting, I wanted a dedicated 6×12 camera with rise and fall that I could customize to my specific needs.

After some research, I discovered the older version of the Cambo Wide before it evolved into a digital model. It piqued my interest enough to start looking for one in great shape, and after a few months, I found the model I decided on: the 650 with its Schneider Super Angulon 65/5.6 lens. You can read many of the Cambo Wide’s specs in the above graphic.

Suppose you are familiar with and enjoy pancake-style digital cameras such as ALPA, Arca Swiss, and Cambo. In that case, the Cambo Wide line of 4×5 cameras might interest you for shooting 4×5 and 120 films.

The graphic above shows my Cambo Wide 650 (CW 650) side profiles with the different shooting configurations I use. You can see how the depth of the camera changes with each setup. Image #1 shows the ground glass without its protector installed to demonstrate the minimal depth. Image #2 has a standard 4×5 film holder installed, and image #3 features the Linhof Rollex 6×12 magazine.

The last configuration, with the 6×12 magazine, is my primary setup for shooting with the CW 650. However, I acquired a lighter-weight 6×12 magazine, which replaced the Linhof Rollex 6×12 due to its carry-weight.

The CW 650 I shoot has 15mm shifts to the right and left, and 15mm rises and falls when the lens is rotated 90 degrees. It’s essential to check the photos of whichever Cambo Wide model you’re considering, as different models can have varying amounts of movement. The brochure listing my model states all the models have 20mm movements, but that is not true—only some do!

I use the rise and fall adjustments on most images, which is one of the main reasons the CW 650 appeals to me as a 6×12 panoramic camera. You’ll notice how I have the CW 650 lens configured in the image above: I keep it set for rise and fall. Being short, I appreciate using a big round turn knob to adjust my horizon lines with ease.

After a few years of shooting with the CW 650, I sent it to Precision Camera Works (PCW) for a CLA and tune-up (tightening the rails, flash sync testing, etc.). I invested in this maintenance because I enjoy shooting with the camera and have no plans of parting with it. If you ever need your Cambo Wide serviced, look up Bob Watkins of PCW.

After I acquired my CW 650, I placed blue masking tape across the top and bottom of the ground glass to mask out the 6×12 format and shot like that for a few years. When prepping the camera for shipment to PCW, I removed the blue tape, and most of the grid lines under the blue tape came off. After receiving the camera back, I placed black fabric tape to mask the 6×12 perspective back onto the ground glass’s reverse side. It is thin and flexible enough for this use, though I do not know if it will remove grid lines.

The 65mm focal length perfectly meets my needs for grand landscape shots, providing a balanced perspective without excessive wide-angle distortion. When I shot the 6×12 format on my 4×5, it was often done with my Rodenstock 65/4.5, so it’s no surprise I wanted the CW 650.

How well a camera performs in the field is crucial to me. I use various cameras for landscape photography, with the 4×5 requiring the most setup time and my Fotoman 617 the least amount. If a camera gets in the way or has too many bits and bobs to deal with outside in the landscape, I will let it go. After using the CW 650 for almost five years, I have come to appreciate its simplicity and capabilities as a valuable tool in my panoramic toolbox.

Over time, I have tweaked the CW 650 and made it easy to set up and shoot. I love the combination of the 6×12 masking on the ground glass with the Linhof 6×12 viewfinder I use for pre-visualization, making it much easier and faster.

Notice the handle on the side of the CW 650; I wrapped it with sports tape, making it very easy to handle. It lets me quickly grab the camera from its case, with the 65mm lens ready to go. I load the camera on the tripod, focus either via ground glass or hyperfocal distance (I tested my lens for accuracy and suggest others do as well), close the lens, load the film magazine, cock the shutter, and take the shot. It is just easier and quicker with the CW 650.

So, to recap, what I like most about the Cambo Wide are (1) the rise and fall adjustments, (2) its ease of customization, and (3) the simplicity it brings back to the shooting experience.

Cameras with lens cones instead of bellows, like the CW 650, can be inconvenient to travel with, as the more lenses you carry, the bulkier your pack becomes rather quickly. Although a one-lens kit is perfect for capturing landscape panoramas, I sometimes get the urge to have a longer lens. My #1 dislike: not being able to shoot with a longer lens when I feel like getting closer or compressing the background into the foreground.

In the past, Cambo offered a Cambo Wide 1000 with a Schneider APO-Symmar S 5.6/100mm lens, but it is very rare, and the only one I saw stated it had fungus on the lens, and the seller still wanted over $1,200.00 for it! I spoke to someone selling a Cambo Wide 900 (90mm lens), and they mentioned the 90mm vignettes, so I imagine the 100mm does as well. That is vignetting on 4×5 film. I would guess the 6×12 format would not show vignetting because the top and bottom of the 4×5 format get cropped out on 120 film.

If I want to shoot 6×12 with a longer lens, I use my Nikkor SW 150/5.6 on my Ebony. That is the beauty of having a removable Graflock film magazine, sharing it amongst cameras.

I wouldn’t say I like the weight of all the components that make up my CW 650 pano-kit, so I tweak it down every so often to see if there are any lighter-weight options in film backs (I replaced the Linhof in 2023), cases, etc. That is my #2 dislike: the weight. However, if the CW 650 were a flimsy camera, I would not even own it, so there’s that!

For photographers who may shoot 4×5 exclusively on a Cambo Wide, my #3 and final dislike: there is no rotational back for vertical shooting. The back is the aluminum body of the camera, which is horizontal. This works fine for my panoramic shooting, but not if you want to shoot 4×5 in a vertical orientation. Your tripod will have to compensate for this unless you can figure out how to securely attach an attachment shoe for your tripod on the body.

###

Coming up next addresses my #2 dislike, which involves more than just weight: packing all that bulk! About every two years, I change my packing method mainly to reduce weight and make it easier to carry and set up. The size and bulk of the Cambo Wide cameras make them the most awkward camera shape I’ve ever had to pack.

Keep in mind this is a rugged, diecast aluminum alloy 4×5 camera with ground glass and a sizeable, non-removable handle. Plus, the lens has rails, and you have to be careful of the lens’ helicoid mount. If the camera isn’t resting on its back with the lens up, then the lens is projecting from the mount without support, so you must pay attention to how you carry it in a pack.

I use small to medium backpacks (20L or less), whereas my male photographer friends carry massive backpacks compared to mine, so they may not find it as difficult to pack a Cambo Wide safely as I have. My packs are either too small, or I have to squeeze stuff in, and that I never like to do.

It begs to repeat: the Cambo Wide camera is not easy to pack. I do not think breaking it down by removing the lens from the front would help, but instead cause more storage space needs. Since I have only one lens, it is not too difficult to pack as it fits in a small case with a carry handle, as shown in the graphic above. The Ruggard Portable Dry Case with Dehumidifier (Black, 9.6L) (RPDC) fits the Cambo Wide 650 just right and is how I store it when not using it.

The CW 650 kit fits into a large Porta-Brace Sack Pack, with the camera in the RPDC case and the kit essentials stowed in a different case. I found a durable yet lightweight case for the essential tools here. Its foam inserts had to be removed to fit everything. Inside the case are all the tools seen in the middle photo in the above graphic.

The heavy Rollex Techno 6×12 magazine has been replaced with a Da Yi 6×12 magazine, the Minolta Spotmeter F is in its original case, and the Linhof Techno 65 viewfinder with a 60×120 mask, is in a small pouch. There is room left for either the Fotoman 6×12 viewfinder or the Cambo Reflex Viewfinder, and 120 film.

After placing both cases in the Porta-Brace Sack Pack, it became evident this was one way to carry the kit. The Sack Pack’s durable handles and rugged construction can handle this kit’s weight without problems. I would prefer a backpack, but I need to work on a way to organize the kit contents first. I’ll tackle this when the time comes.

I’m currently storing the CW 650 kit in a Think Tank Stash Master Pro, which holds everything in the kit, including the Cambo Reflex Viewing Hood and Minolta F light meter with room to spare for film. Then, it goes inside the Gura Gear Bataflae 26L.

I’m glad I kept the Bataflae in the closet and didn’t sell it off, as I had been considering it for a while. The Bataflae ended up in the closet because it feels a bit boxy on my back, but it fits the Stash Master Pro perfectly and is the only backpack I have that will fit it. Think Tank sells a 50L pack that the Stash Master Pro was made for, but the Bataflae 26L works, too. This is how I carry my CW 650 kit when hitting the trails.

The Bataflae has been discontinued, and I picked mine up from an eBay seller who was liquidating the last of the new stock a few years ago. What I have always liked about this backpack, which all the other packs I have used over the years do not have, is its handles. I load the pack in and out of a camper van, and its handles are incredibly comfortable and strong. Even though it feels like a cube on my back, it distributes the weight well.

The Stash Master is working well as a lightweight organizer for the Bataflae. I also purchased one for my Fotoman 617 kit, as switching the Stash Masters in and out of the backpack is convenient.

Above is a digital image created using a Hasselblad CFV 50c on my CW 650, employing a stitching technique to form this panoramic view. This image was made during the initial digital test of the CW 650 to check if the sensor’s plane in the digital back aligned correctly with the CW 650’s film plane.

The final stitched image measures 68.867 x 18.833 inches with a file size of 667.9 MB. Stitched images require each slice to be free of movement within the composition, which can be challenging with wind or even a slight breeze in the landscape. This often necessitates capturing images in a single frame, but when conditions are favorable, a vast digital file can be achieved with my equipment.

If I relied solely on digital capture and stitching for my landscape photography, I would likely come home disappointed more than half the time. Some of the most remarkable landscape images are taken in less-than-ideal weather conditions. It is well-known among landscape photographers that dramatic weather can enhance an image, while clear skies may render it unremarkable. Although I appreciate good weather, especially after experiencing numerous hurricanes, capturing a mood in landscape photography often requires the unpredictable help of Mother Nature.

Speaking of dramatic weather, I can shoot quickly with the CW 650 using hyperfocal focusing. Upon receiving my CW 650, I conducted hyperfocal lens tests to determine its focusing limits at various apertures. Testing cameras, backs, and lenses allows me to understand their capabilities and use the best shooting techniques for the equipment. I spent time learning the CW 650’s limits and found it one of the most straightforward 4×5 format cameras I’ve ever used. Its pancake-style design makes it incredibly user-friendly.

Buyers should beware when purchasing a digital plate for use on your Cambo Wide.

The plate in the green box above works fine with my CW 650, which I purchased off eBay for use with my Phase One P45. However, the plate in the red box, made for my Hasselblad digital back, does not align with the lens’s film plane at infinity. This plate works well on my Linhof and Sinar 4×5 view cameras with bellows focusing.

When I created the color panoramic photo at the bottom of this page, I used my Hasselblad CFV-50c (50c) with the CW 650. I had no problems focusing, and all the slices were processed smoothly in Lightroom. Later, I decided to dedicate my older P45 digital back to landscape photography because, as a backup for studio work, it does not see much action (thank goodness). The P45 lacks Live View (LV), but that is acceptable since I often use infinity focus or focus via ground glass with the CW 650.

The CW 650 has a helical mount Schneider Super-Angulon 65mm 5.6 lens that consistently produces sharp images, whether shooting film or the 50c. However, despite utilizing its LV and a new digital plate adapter, I encountered focusing issues at infinity with the newer Hasselblad CFV II 50c (II 50c). What was the problem?

The camera had not suffered any damage and had recently received a CLA and tune-up from Precision Camera Works. So, I investigated potential issues with the focal plane rather than the lens.

I concluded the problem was the new Graflok-style digital plate adapter I bought for the II 50c. When I upgraded from the original 50c to the II 50c, the Linhof plate I used for the 50c did not fit the prong openings of the newer II 50c, so I purchased a less expensive plate off eBay. Here lies the issue for anyone struggling with a helical mount lens not focusing at infinity with a digital back or film magazine via a Graflok-style adapter plate.

The digital plate images reveal that the non-aligning plate consists of two separate plates stacked together. This design flaw prevents alignment with a fixed film plane camera but works with bellows-focusing cameras, as they allow for back or front focusing outside the lens’s calibrated range.

With the plate that cannot achieve infinity focus, there is excessive distance between the digital back’s plane of focus and the CW 650’s film plane. In contrast, the functional digital plate is hollowed out sufficiently to match the fixed film plane and align correctly. For a digital plate to work on a Cambo Wide or similar camera, it must be within tolerance of the camera’s focal plane; otherwise, achieving acceptable focus will be impossible.

With the advent of Live View, digital plate manufacturers are making plates without a tighter tolerance for the camera’s focal plane. Be cautious if the plate you are considering combines two plates to create one. If so, the Cambo Wide series of cameras likely will not achieve infinity focus with the digital back without modifying the lens’s helicoid, which I would never do.

The Fotoman 6×12 Graflok Viewfinder with Ground Glass is marketed for creating 6×12 panoramas, but it has a slight issue: the entire 6×12 scene cannot be seen through the eyepiece. Despite this, its ground glass screen is the brightest I’ve ever used, making it ideal for focusing when using my digital back that lacks Live View. While it doesn’t provide a right-side-up image, it is lightweight and precise enough for my needs.

In image #1 above, you can see the ground glass of the viewfinder with its unique 6×12 window. Image #2 shows the viewfinder with Fotoman’s name, and you can also see where I’ve attached a close-up lens to the viewfinder using blue tape. I don’t know the exact diopter of the lens, but it works perfectly for my vision. Finally, image #3 shows the ground glass of the viewfinder with a mask for my P45 crop.

I made the mask by placing the digital back plate on my printer’s copy glass area and created a copy. After cutting out the mask, I reinforced it with clear packing tape for added strength and durability. Then, I used an X-Acto knife and metal ruler to cut out the window from the mask. This setup works like a charm when I want to shoot with the P45 and the Cambo Wide.

I bought it for US $99 on eBay, and while I do use it, I wish I could see the entire 6×12 view. That would make it an incredible tool!

Image #1 above shows a Calumet Protector for 4×5 Ground Glass. This protector slides snugly under the CW 650’s ground glass, performing its essential protection function. It is a must-have if you frequently transport your camera and often replace the ground glass, as I do when switching to the Cambo Reflex Viewing Hood (image #3).

In image #2, you see the Toyo 3.6x ground glass viewing loupe. What 4×5″ camera owner doesn’t have a similar tool? It’s essential to have a loupe available, regardless of how many viewfinders you own. I use this loupe for critical focusing with all my 4×5 field cameras and 6×17 Fotoman. It stays in a small pack of tools I keep together and store under the floor of my camper van when traveling. I never leave home without it!

As a 4×5″ photographer, I dislike using a dark cloth to view the ground glass. My first experience with this was in photography school, where I learned how a dark cloth could mess up my hair, even when tied back. Later, as I dedicated my spare time to landscape photography, I found another reason it didn’t work. Because I usually shoot alone in the landscape, I must stay alert for potential dangers, whether wild animals, snakes, or other people. With my head under a dark cloth, it feels like burying it in the sand—hardly ideal when you need to be vigilant.

My solution has always been a viewing hood of some type. If possible, I prefer seeing a right-side-up image, though my first viewing hood as a student was the Cambo In-Line Hood. These are hard to find today and do not provide a right-side-up image, but I would use one if I had it.

The Cambo Reflex Viewing Hood, shown in image #3, is an excellent option with a right-side-up but backward image. I first used this hood with my Ebony cameras after sending it to them to customize for use with their cameras. It’s lightweight and can rotate from horizontal to vertical. The only issue is that I am not always tall enough to be above the viewing window. I appreciate having rise on the CW 650 because it allows me to set my tripod at my preferred height and adjust the horizon accordingly.

08/01/2024

Let me present the case for shooting 4×5 film instead of 120 film for 6×12 panoramas. I do this when shooting with my Cambo 650 or Ebony 4×5.

Overall, I’ve found 6×12 film magazines disappointing and have had a few (Horseman, Linhof, and Da Yi). I sold a lovely but heavy Linhof Techno Rollex because it would not fit onto my Ebony camera, but it did work well on my Cambo and Linhof cameras. The weight got to me, but it was the smoothest of all the 6×12 magazines I have experience with.

My latest, the Da Yi, has a top winding knob that does not clear the Graflok slider all the way. I can push the knob out a bit to make it work, but that is not a permanent fix.

Removing the ground glass is an extra step when shooting with a 120 film magazine, which increases the risk of accidents, especially in the landscape. Now that I’m using the Cambo viewing hood T-20, shooting 4×5 film allows me to leave it on and slide the film holder between the ground glass and the camera body. It is convenient, helps me work quicker, and makes me worry less about dropping something.

Additionally, 120 film magazines are heavier than three 4×5 film holders loaded with six film sheets; I know this because I weighed them loaded (see graphic above). So, with an equal number of shots, the 120 magazine weighs more and can be difficult to load (my current Da Yi back is particularly troublesome—consider this a warning against purchasing it). Plus, it’s just one more gadget to carry if you want to shoot 4×5 film as well.

While 120 film offers a wider variety of choices, often at a lower cost, some 4×5 black-and-white films are competitively priced—and a couple are even cheaper!

As shown in the chart above from current B&H Photo prices, two 4×5 black-and-white films, Film Photography Project’s “Frankenstein 200” and Cat Labs’ “X 80 II,” are currently priced lower than the most affordable 120 films listed in the chart.

You might be able to find a 120 film brand that’s less expensive but doesn’t come in 4×5 sheets. However, I’ve focused on the films I’m familiar with and those that are likely the most popular. While I haven’t tried Frankenstein 200 yet, I can vouch for Cat Labs X 80 II, which I keep stocked in my freezer. As of this writing, B&H Photo has some Cat Labs X 80 II marked down to $29.99 (expiring 10/2024).

The cost comparison in the chart is based on six exposures from both 120 and 4×5 films. Interestingly, you don’t necessarily save money by purchasing 4×5 sheet film in quantities larger than 25 sheets, but it’s always good to check as film prices fluctuate frequently.

Currently, all the Kodak 120 film from B&H Photo are only available in pro packs (5 rolls). While Portra 400 is priced lower than Ektachrome in 120 format, Ektachrome is actually cheaper than Portra 400 in 4×5 format.

To calculate the per-sheet cost for 4×5 film from a box of 25 sheets, let’s use the popular HP5 Plus as an example:

$55.90 ÷ 25 sheets = $2.24 per sheet
Cost for six sheets = 6 x $2.24 = $13.42
Cost Difference (4×5 vs. 120) = $13.42 (4×5) – $8.71 (120) = $4.71

So, while 120 film might generally be more affordable, there are certainly cases where 4×5 can be a more economical choice.

Is it worth saving $4.71 by choosing a roll of 120 HP5+ over six sheets of 4×5 HP5+?

I will answer this myself as I have been considering investing in another 6×12 magazine, specifically a Horseman. Since they are no longer in production, I’ll likely have to purchase one used. Most available options are from Japan, where the largest supply currently exists. I’m aiming for one in mint to near-mint condition, but it would cost me at least $700, including shipping.

Let’s break down the numbers: $700 divided by $4.71 equals approximately 149 rolls of 120 film. That means I would need to shoot 149 rolls of 120 film in the 6×12 format to break even when compared to using 4×5 film.

It’s just not worth it to me. I prefer not to lug around extra gear or remove the 4×5 ground glass. These days, I shoot predominantly black-and-white film, and the reason I gave up color film was digital got ‘good enough.’

Regarding processing, the costs are relatively equal for me since I am developing my film. I can load a 120 reel as quickly as I can load six sheets of 4×5 onto a Mod 54 reel in the same Paterson tank, and the chemistry amounts are similar. However, if you’re not processing your film, this could shift your break-even point.

One significant advantage of 4×5 film is its larger negative, which provides more flexibility for cropping than 120 film. On the other hand, 120 film is easier to store—just one Print File page compared to two pages for (6) 4×5 negatives. But I’ve been reusing old pages, so the cost difference is minimal for me.

For now, I’m sticking with 4×5 film for panoramas (image above made 8/16/24), largely because the Da Yi film back is not fun to fiddle with. I’ve convinced myself that, economically and practically, 4×5 is the better choice for me right now, and I genuinely enjoy the process more.

If I ever change my mind, I’ll update this article! 🙂

DA YI 6×12 FILM MAGAZINE [ NO! ]

Because my lovely Linhof Techno Rollex 6×12 magazine would not mount properly onto my Ebony RSW and was probably too heavy for the small wooden field camera, I decided to sell it. I then acquired a used Da Yi 6×12 film magazine from a seller in the USA. While the Da Yi film magazine produces sharp images, it has been by far the most challenging film magazine I have ever loaded and unloaded—and I’ve handled many. Despite contacting the manufacturer for loading instructions, I never heard back. I consider this purchase a $450 loss, and I will not resell it because the next owner will have the same problems.

There is another issue with this model for Cambo Wide users: the top right-side winding knob does not clear the Graflok lever. Although I can lock it by pushing the knob out slightly, this is not a permanent solution. However, the back installs fine on my Ebony cameras.

My advice to Cambo Wide users looking for a 6×12 magazine is to avoid the Da Yi model I have. Although it did produce sharp images, it is a headache to load, and its top winding knob will not clear the Graflok lever on your camera. I will shoot strictly 4×5 with the Camo Wide (see above article), and this magazine is headed to the dumpster. 🙁