What's the deal with Linhof Tripods ?

[Ron Bose]

Hi Folks,

eBay is full of used Linhof tripods, from the heavy-duty beasts (with disintegrating rubber feet) to super-lightweights.

The beasts look like they were great studio tripods, but too heavy for field use.

Now the lightweights look great, but do they have a better weight carrying capacity compared to their equivalent weight Gitzo or a Manfrotto/Bogen ?

Are the lightweights anything special ? Or are they as wimpy as their equivalent weight Manfrotto competitors ?

I just received an ill-conceived eBay purchase: a little Linhof lightweight, in gorgeous condition, 17" short when collapsed and only 46" tall when extended. It's too wimpy for 8x10 and too short for anything else .... what was I thinking ???

So, I ask again, what's so special about the lightweight Linhof tripods ?

Thanks,
Ron

[Bill_1856]

Ron, I have an (unfortunately) large collection of Linhof tripods, and you're right -- they're almost always either too huge or too short. But they are sturdy, and light, and easy to set up with their flip leg locks. Many of them have integral heads, which saves a lot of weight. They're really excellent for 35mm and TLR cameras. And, like Linhof cameras, there's a precision about them which contributes to the pleasure of using them.

[Walter Calahan]

Perhaps the large number of Linhof tripods for sale on eBay is a sign that others don't like them either. Just because it says 'Linhof' doesn't mean its always good.

[Michael Kadillak]

Perhaps the large number of Linhof tripods for sale on eBay is a sign that others don't like them either. Just because it says 'Linhof' doesn't mean its always good.

It has been my experience that Linhof products are designed and engineered to the highest of standards and hold their values fairly well. I have purchased many Linhof items in the secondary markets and they do exactly what they were designed for. Recently I acquired a heavy duty tripod with a rising column that is probably 25 years old. The rubber feet were worn out and I needed a 3/8" mounting plate. I called Linhof and got both replacement parts at reasonable prices to bring my tripod back to new condition. There is not one other tripod that I would consider putting my 11x14 Wisner on and using the rising column on for making photographs with.

Cheers!

[Ted Harris]

I think you will find that most of the commenets above and the eBay auctions are all related to "vintage" Linhof tripods. I am a real fan of the current line of Linhof tripods, I own and use two of them. Bill's cooment about being either too huge or too short no longer applies. My standard, everyday tripod is a Linhof 3414 which folds to 25 inches and opens to ~ 5 feet without the center column (maybe a it higher). It weighs 5 pounds. It is absolutely rigid with a Toyo AII and with a Canham T57 with a 450 lens mounted and a reasonable amount of extension. It is rated at 13 lbs. but like everything Linhof that is pretty conservative.

I also have a Linhof Profi Port tripod for travel; it folds up to around 16 inches and fits in any carryon bag or straps to the top of my Orvis Kit bag. Fully opened without using any center column it is a bit shorter than I would like and its load capacity is a bit lower than I would like but it works fine and the size is the tradeoff ... it is the equal of or better than any other tripod I ever found that folds up this small. As long as there are no hevy winds it works fine with the Toyo AII

The current generation of Linhof tripods use "U" Channel legs and flip lock levers as opposed to the round legs with either collars or flip levers that are more common. I have Gitzos,Bogen/Manfrottos, Davis & Sanford and Majestic tripods sitting in closets and cannot recommend the Linhofs highly enough. I can't imagine ever needing another one but if I do it will be another Linhof.

[Frank Petronio]

I got the Linhof 3-D head last month and it is a thing of beauty, craftsmanship, and intelligent design. I can't imagine their tripods are anything less (but I also love the new CFs).

If I could afford to get into serious ULF I would get one of their large vintage monster tripods as a matter of course. They look even stronger than the biggest Gitzos.

[Bill_1856]

One good reason that there are so many used Linhof tripods of a certain vintage on ebay is that several years ago there was a tremendous sale of these high-end units at truly incredible bargain basement prices (by Olden Camera?) which must have saturated the entire tripod market with them for years.
I really wish that I had a 3414, but I think they are overpriced to be other than carbon fiber.

[Ted Harris]

I really wish that I had a 3414, but I think they are overpriced to be other than carbon fiber.

Bill, you save a 1 pound 4 ounces (if memory serves) with the closest comperable Gitzo CF pod and spend $215 more. Nor do I think you get as much maximum height with the Gitzo. CF is great if you need to squeeze every ounce out of your kit but in reality it will save you oly about 30% in wieght.

[Ron Bose]

Is this 'pod any good ?

28" closed, 60" extended and weighs 5.1 lbs ...

[Ted Harris]

Not the current 3414 but close ... maybe a generation older.

Calling Bob Salomon

[Bill_1856]

Ron, I have one like that, and it's a really great tripod. It's absolutely perfect for a MF camera. The problem is that to get the full 60" height, the center column has to be fully extended which could be be a little wobbly supporting a 4x5 camera. (The height with the column unextended is 46".) A lot of weight is saved by having an integral pan head. I just weighed mine at 4# 3 oz.

[Bob Salomon]

Ron,

You received a Report version which is too lite for view camera work. The Report series is no longer made.

The tripods that are made that are of interest is the 3414, 3449, 3317, and the two extra large tripods, the Heavy Duty Pro and the Profi III models.

Non Linhof tripod is currently made waith a head.

[neil poulsen]

I'll attest to bad design of early Linhof products.

For example, I have a heavy-duty Lihnof ball head, where the ball mechanism works great. HOWEVER, the 1/4" threaded tripod connection hole was put in a small metal disk about 3/4" in diameter and an eighth of an inch thick, and this disk was pounded into a centered receiving hole on the bottom of the head that was a necessary tight fit. But tip the camera or tripod at all, and this disk would pop out. Of course, this small disk remained securely fastend to the tripod, while rest of the head and the camera went careening to the ground. As I said, THIS WAS THE DESIGN OF THE HEAD!!! I couldn't believe it, when I discovered it. Fortunately, I was able to catch the wooden 8x10 camera before it crashed.

In another gaff of design with the huge tripod, there's a rod with a small handle that extends up the middle of the 3" center column, so that one can twist the handle from the bottom of the column to attach a head to the tripod at the top of the column. At the top end of this rod is an adaptor that has a 1/4" thread on one side and a 3/8" thread on the other. Through a third and larger thread on both sides, the adaptor screwed into the rod, thereby "enabling" one to use heads with either large or small holes by screwing the adaptor into the rod one way or another. So imagine, one turns from the bottom of the tripod column to fasten a head at the top of the column. Of course, one wants to apply enough torque, so that the head is securely fastened to the tripod. But, when it came time to remove the head, instead of unscrewing from the tripod head, it unscrewed where the adaptor connected to the rod, leaving the head still securely fastened to tripod clear up inside the 3" center column! I had to disassemble the entire center column to remove the head. Fortunately, this was possible. Unbelievable! This was a problem of design.

There's also been threads here in which people have complained about Technika's. If one uses a 360mm lens, part of the internals of the camera shadows onto the edge of the film. This is an error in design. It was explained that, when Linhof adapted the early 9cmX12cm Technikas to the larger U.S. 4x5 standard, they didn't correspondingly enlarge the camera body along with the film back. So, problems occur at longer focal lengths. For me, that's a head-shaker.

I don't mean to have this be a rant on Linhof. If one owns a Linhof, they can behold Linhof's solid build of their cameras. That is a thing of beauty. But good design on early equipment? Not from my point of view.

Perhaps this has changed recently, but when I think of intelligence of design, Linhof doesn't come to mind.

[Bob Salomon]

Neil,

You are appearing to be describing a Nuline 3 tripod which was designed by the then USA Linhof Distributor, Berkey Marketing. The Nuline series was made to Berkey's specifications by Linhof and were all tripods with a built-in head. One from the Report serise, one from the Light Weight series and one from the Twin Shank series. All had a special top plate that attached the head from inside the column.

No Linhof tripod has been made that way for over 30 years except for a small report tripod that Ron has acquired.

Linhof changed their ball head design over twenty years ago. What you are describing with your head was a problem with a series of tan ball heads previous to the current all black Profi II and Profi III heads.

Time marches on and so does condtruction.