Cambo SC-2, who has one?

[Luseboy]

Hello,
So i finally just now was able to identify which model my cambo is, and it is an sc-2. I was wondering who else uses an sc-2, and what everyone thinks of them? I'm really just curious is all. I personally love the camera and don't see what more you need except maybe a lighter camera, and one that has more bellows. Anyways, just wondering if I've got a desirable camera or not haha.
-Austin

 

[Rick A]

I have one, like it well enough. For more bellows I'll sell you a Calumet cc-401, with 22" of bellows, or pick up another bellows, an extension rail, and extra standard. You can extend all you want that way.

 

[Dan Fromm]

Um, er, ah, SuperCambos and derivatives have one-piece rails that don't accept extensions. If you want a longer rail, get a longer rail. The least expensive longer rails are 1" x 1" t-slotted aluminum extrusion sold by, e.g., 80/20. I use 'em with my 2x3 SC (has the same size rail as larger SCs). T-slotted extrusion's only drawback is that doesn't have stops at the ends to keep the unwary photographer from running a standard off the rail.

IMO SCs' (includes the SC-2) major limitation is hostility to short lenses.

I also have a CC-401. Very capable camera but with fixed bellows.

 

[Rick A]

I can run a 105mm on my SC II without recessed lens board. Have a deep recessed board for same using my cc-401, but I can put some serious long lenses or work super close with the cc-401. The Cambo is a lot more convenient for packing, and more movements,not really any less weight.

 

[bkarasek]

What is the secret to identifying the various Cambo 4x5 variations that use the 1"sq monorail? I have bits and pieces, enough to make three Cambos and still have parts left over. What distinguishes the SCII from the other Cambos, like the SC and the N?

 

[BrianShaw]

IMO SCs' (includes the SC-2) major limitation is hostility to short lenses.

I have one. For a monorail-type camera it has met my needs since I bought it new in the 1980s. I can't imagine needing a longer rail.

But Dan's comment reveals the only negative I have ever experienced... even with a 10 (or is it 9?) inch rail. "Hostile" seems to start at 90mm. With recessed board and bag bellows I can make it work, but then have to make sure the standards are both on the same side of the tripod mount... and deal with the excess rail that makes getting close to the GG difficult. I get a 1-inch square contusion on the chest when shooting with a 90 because moving the standards from the long rail to the short rail takes more effort than it does cure cure problems.

OK, if I were to be totally honest... I sometimes suffer a buised ego when folks keep implying that the Cambo is a "cheap" camera and Sinar is better. I see the advantages, but none of them would probably improve my photography.

 

[BrianShaw]

p.s. Regarding your question of wheter you have a "desireable" camera or not... the only answer is to be provided by you in response to htis question: Does this camera do what I need it to do and enable me to make the images I imagine?

 

[Dan Fromm]

bkarasek, SC is short for Super Cambo. The SC was made in four sizes: 2x3, SC1; 4x5, SC2; 5x7, SC3; 8x10, SC4. 4x5 SC = SC II. Clear?

The Super Cambo underwent continuous development; components, e.g., knobs, and the materials they were made from changed over time. The SCN is an economy version of a late SC2. Shorter rail, reversible instead of rotating back. I'm not sure whether the N's reversible back is Graflok or a bail (spring back that opens very wide) back.

Most components are interchangeable across vintages of SC, some across sizes. For example, SC2, SC3, and SC4 all use the same front standard and boards. The SC1 is the big exception, has its own standard, bellows, boards, and backs but uses the normal SC rail clamp and rail. I said standard because the SC1's front and rear standards are identical. So are the SC2's, but they're larger than the SC1's.

About component interchangability: I use a mutilated SC2 standard on my SC1 as a crutch to support long lenses. I use a 2x3 SF bag bellows; it fits the SC1 standards and is much nicer than the old SC1 bag bellows that came with my camera.

 

[Alan Gales]

I have one. For a monorail-type camera it has met my needs since I bought it new in the 1980s. I can't imagine needing a longer rail.

But Dan's comment reveals the only negative I have ever experienced... even with a 10 (or is it 9?) inch rail. "Hostile" seems to start at 90mm. With recessed board and bag bellows I can make it work, but then have to make sure the standards are both on the same side of the tripod mount... and deal with the excess rail that makes getting close to the GG difficult. I get a 1-inch square contusion on the chest when shooting with a 90 because moving the standards from the long rail to the short rail takes more effort than it does cure cure problems.

OK, if I were to be totally honest... I sometimes suffer a buised ego when folks keep implying that the Cambo is a "cheap" camera and Sinar is better. I see the advantages, but none of them would probably improve my photography.

There seem to be more parts easily available out there for Sinar. The Sinar shutter is an advantage to some. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using a Cambo or Calumet. They are fine cameras.

As for as improving your photography, I think you have to buy a new Arca Swiss F line or Ebony for that to happen!

 

[Alan Gales]

That should read, "As for improving your photography....".

I really need to start wearing my glasses when I post!

 

[Marc B.]

OK, if I were to be totally honest... I sometimes suffer a buised ego when folks keep implying that the Cambo is a "cheap" camera and Sinar is better. I see the advantages, but none of them would probably improve my photography.

HaHaHa, +1 Ditto!
I just let the pundits remarks roll off. I've got a Ducks back, however...my Cambo doesn't.
Nice Cambo...(pat rear standard). Nice Camera...(pat front standard). Repeat!