I suspect that many of us begin using large format equipment by an informed guess about camera choice, through use find qualities we like and don't like, trade or buy an additional camera and repeat this iteration some number of times until we get a mix of equipment that suits us. Below is a little journey I made and what I found.

At the beginning, let's do a little level setting to establish my prejudices:

Types of Photography: Architecture, landscapes, seascapes, nature close ups
Mobility: Usually carrying my kit long distances by foot, in public transportation, sometimes in a private car. 5 1/2 pounds is my upper limit for camera weight
Security: Often working on busy streets; quick setup and minimizing the swapping of fragile components are important
Format: I'm happy with 4 x 5 as an upper limit; I want the flexibility of using rollfilm on the same body

I've tended toward technical designs, partly because I was weaned on a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 Century Graphic and started my LF work much later in life with a 4 x 5 Crown and Speed Graphic. By then I found the fixed back on the Graphics to be much too limited in orientation and in my initial exploration of movements. A Graphic View and later a Cambo NX remedied the problem with movements and orientation, but gave me kits too heavy and bulky for most of my work. I experimented with a Super Graphic and a Gowland/Calumet Pocket View to lighten the load and better support movements. Both had rotating backs which seem now more like a necessity than a convenience. The SG was comfortable, but limited in movements; I liked the Pocket View's 3 pound weight, but found it unfriendly to lenses shorter than 100mm and a little too fussy to set up.

To feed my 'closed box' habit, I started shopping for under-$500 technical cameras. I considered Technikas, but issues of age, weight and cost argued against them. MPPs† were attractive, but most were across the Atlantic and expensive to ship. Meridians, made in New York, are of about the same vintage as MPPs and of a similar design--a kind of early Technika knockoff. I bought and tweeked a Meridian 45B, with back tilt and swing, that had been refitted with a Graflok back. After reading Doremus Scudder's Jan/Feb 2007 View Camera article on movements, my New Year's resolution was to consciously consider movements for every LF shot. This 'magic bullet' thinking led me to an insidious growing feeling that my normal antiquarian tastes might be leaving me mired in 1950s technology. What an excuse for buying a used, current production Wista VX!

Below I will give you my impressions of the four cameras that present the most attractive features for the work I do.

Packaging. The overall structural design of large format design affects weight, setup speed, general durability and protection of components. Press/technical design are turtle-like--when danger threatens, they can just withdraw all of sensitive parts into a hard shell. Three of the four designs here can do that, including protecting normal length and compact longer and shorter focal length lenses. These three--Super Graphic (SG), Meridian and VX--all have sturdy aluminum shells that I am willing to trust, well padded and sans ground glass frame, in checked airline baggage. They are quick to set up and drawing out the front standards on well-hinged metal beds leaves me feeling confident in their rigidity. This tank like construction, however, comes at the cost of weight--about 2 pounds more than the lightest field cameras and monorails can offer--and in limiting the range of movements. The metal case and bed of the technical camera get in the way when designers try to support a range and facility of movements. Monorail users seem to be constantly aware that they are confronting workarounds when using technical cameras.

The exception to turtle mentality in this review is the Gowland/Cambo Pocket View is a 3 pound monorail built from heavy gauge aluminum frames and castings. The goal here was sturdiness and light weight at the cost of sophisticated controls. Movements are locked by simple machine screws through slots in the standards. The standards and bellows can be removed from the rail and packed in a protective container, then reassembled on site, but this kind of breakdown between each shot increases setup time. Carrying an assembled Pocket View in a soft case is definitely bulkier because of the extended rail. In addition, the Pocket View has almost no 'guidance' or clamping mechanisms to establish the default position of components. Getting it set up and zeroed out or even mounting it assembled on a tripod takes more time than dropping the bed and drawing out the front standard on a technical camera. Please note that there have been many variations in the design of components of the Pocket View and my comments in many cases can only be taken to be relevant to the particular model I have. In Kerry Thalmann's review of the Toho 4x5, he has timed his setup of the unconventionally designed Toho and found it to be about the same as setting up a woodfield camera. My impressions here aren't as rigorous as that. How significant this is to you will also be influenced by how paranoid you are about damaging your camera. Getting it set up in the standard position definitely takes longer. When setup is complete, I have no complaint about its rigidity.

Viewing/Film Backs. It is generally possible and a good idea to upgrade the ground glass panels in classic 4 x 5 cameras. You may also want to consider a Fresnel lens; the level of controversy about these and their costs suggests exploring the forums for guidance. With similar quality panels, there should be little difference among these four cameras, except of course, you may spend nearly as much on the viewing panel as the camera costs. Most Super Graphics I've seen have had decent ground glass and decent Fresnel lenses. They may have come that way from the factory. The Calumet version of the Pocket View came with a lightweight rotating Cambo back with decent ground glass; this combination is a joy to use. Since I have a Calumet reflex viewer that locks on to the Calumet back, I often swap this GG frame with the viewer to the Super Graphic. Unfortunately, the retaining spring location on the Wista is slightly narrower and the Calumet viewing frame won't fit. My Meridian has been modified with a Graflok back ; as manufactured, Meridians had a Graphic-spring type back . Wista does offer two back accessories that I have found very useful. They have improved on the Calumet/Cambo design of a cast aluminum/cast plastic reflex viewer that is rather cumbersome, though not heavy, by making the Wista viewer collapsible. It also attaches to the Wista on a side bracket normally used for the swingaway viewing hood, which allows composition with the viewer, then fine focusing with a loupe. The other accessory is a combination 6 x 9 groundglass panel/rollholder back that attaches to the Wista's back rotation mechanism. While this makes swapping between 4 x 5 sheet film and 6 x 9 rollfilm for the same shot a little more complicated, it greatly improves normal 6 x 9 sequential shots.

Note that all of these cameras have rotating backs. I am sometimes clumsy and drop things on hard surfaces. A reversible back design for me is a deal killer. The rotation feature works smoothly on all of these cameras with notable detents every 90°.

Many large format photographers suffer from digital nibbling that offers constantly improving quality and lower per image cost. Those new to LF photography may not be ready to nail their ULF-b&w-only manifesto to the door, yet. Personally I want the flexibility of 4 x 5 sheet film and 120 roll film with the option of experimenting with different film holders to find a balance of quality, cost and portability. That means an unnegotiable demand is for a compatible G back.

Movements. The exact range of movements of each camera is shown in the table below. None have metrics that are found on modern monorails. The Pocket View has generous front and back full movements (though on this model, there is no direct rear rise/fall), limited mostly by a rather stiff tapered bellows. With a bag bellows, its very thin frame members and lack of a case, it could probably focus the shortest lenses on flat boards. With the regular Calumet bellows, movements for lenses shorter than 100mm are constrained. Because there are no channels or detents, movements happen by guiding with one hand and tightening with the other; in some cases one locking mechanism controls two movements. The Super Graphic has generous front movements, particularly swing, for this kind of camera and bellows are supple. The Super Graphic has back tilt so long as you don't want front forward tilt, since the front standard has only front tilt. The Wista uses the drop bed in the same way to provide rear back tilt, but it has both backward and forward tilt on the front standard; you just can't use rear standard and front standard back tilt at the same time. The Wista also has variable front tilt on the back standard, an improvement over the Graphic, whose only back movement is rearward tilt. The Meridian has more generous front tilt than the other technical designs and it is easier to combine front and back movements which operate independently. The Meridian's only significant movement limitation is in front swing which is limited by the design of the front standard clamp. Front shift is modest on the SG and very large on all of the others. In principle, the Pocket View should have the most flexibility in movements, but with the Calumet pleated bellows this is only so with lenses longer than 120mm; movements are impossible with a 90mm, and faint at 100mm, whereas the other cameras handle 90mm lenses at least with modest movements and sometimes more.

Lens Support. The Super Graphic is distinctly unfriendly to short lenses because it it necessary to pull the front standard out onto the focusing rack. Recessed lensboards are almost impossible to find and not simple to make. Reliable focusing with the rack starts at about 90mm. A bag bellows, even if you could design and make one, would not solve this problem. You can plan to focus 300mm lenses on the SG. In contrast the Meridian is a joy to use with short lenses. Bellows are reasonably supple and you can start focusing with the bellows completely compressed using the internal focusing rack; just drop the bed. Since the bed is relatively long very short lenses may catch the bed in the lowest part of the frame. The rack is well designed and will extend to focus 300mm lenses. The front standard for the 45B was redesigned and seems less rigid than its predecessor, so heavy, long lenses might be a problem; I've had no problems with my 270mm f/10 Apo Raptar. A future project will be to adapt a standard Calumet bag bellows with a front lens frame for the Pocket View, which should cure its aversion to short lenses. I haven't had enough time at this point to experiment with short lenses on the Wista. It will focus 65mm lenses without the bag bellows with no movements. A bag bellows/recessed board combination is available from Wista that looks very flexible, if expensive. The board is really an open frame with a lensboard on the back which attaches to the bag bellows. Wista and thirdparty suppliers makes other less ambitious recessed boards.

I often make extra lens boards. The Meridian takes standard .90 mil flat boards and the fancier Graphic view boards with the light trap will fit; because of the bellows connection design, the Graphic View recessed board will not fit, but the Graphic View adapter that allows the use of Pacemaker/Super Graphic extruded boards does fit. Making flat boards for the Meridian is easy. Making clone Super Graphic boards is not, though used and even thirdparty new boards are readily available. Boards for the Wista are only a little harder to make than for the Meridian, though Technika owners are likely to be unimpressed with .64 mil flat aluminum board that have not been precision fitted by elves from der Schwarzwald.

Handling. While you can analyze individual feature operation, there is a gestalt of handling that can also be assessed and described. The biggest danger to a valid analysis here is that those things which we have used the most are likely to seem the most comfortable, so my comfort with press/tech designs goes a long way back and clouds my objectivity. If I think I can get away with just the use of front movements when I go out for a day's shooting, the Super Graphic offers quick setup, lightness, smooth controls and the movements I am most likely to need. If I think I will need to use a 75mm lens, I have to look elsewhere. The Meridian adds about a pound of weight, but greatly improves movements, accepts the same Graphic lens boards, trades an easier to use front standard for a somewhat fussier one with greater movements and the Meridian has a moveable back. Another handling convenience is that lenses and accessories, including the Calumet reflex viewer fit both cameras. My impressions of the Wista VX are still early ones. It is well made and mechanical operations are smooth. The actual weight of the Wista VX is within ounces of the weight of the Meridian, yet subjectively it seems significantly heavier. The Wista collapsible reflex viewer that swings away for critical loupe focusing is very convenient, compact and reduces the likelihood of dropping the viewer while changing it. The groundglass/rollholder combo really improves workflow and again, safety in reducing swapping operations. I suspect that my eventual choices will be the Wista for many of the reasons just sited and the Pocket View. Toward this conclusion I am working on a conversion of the front standard of the Pocket View to accept Wista lensboards on either its conventional or a bag bellows.

Each of these cameras is reviewed more completely on this site. Click and image at the top get to these reviews.

•  Swing

•  Shift

•  Rise

•  Fall

•  Swing

•  Shift

•  Rise/fall