6x12 Backs - Horseman or Sinar Zoom or ?

[John Schneider]

I have the Linhof, Horseman (SW612 variety) and Sinar Panorama. The Linhof has the largest image area and it has the build quality of a Mercedes, but it's heavy. Other than that it is a joy to use. The Horseman is simple and rugged and pretty intuitive to use, somewhat more so than the Linhof. The Sinar has the advantage of being able to be slipped under a GG, but it requires a special film cassette, special loading/operation procedures, and appears IMO finicky and somewhat fragile. Both the Linhof and Sinar accept either 120 and 220, if that makes a difference.

So in the end, go for the Linhof if you like the larger image, require the use of 220, and have the wallet and back to carry it. Get the Sinar if you need the slip-under-the-GG capability. Otherwise, get the Horseman, which IMO is the best overall solution.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I mostly use a Sinar anyway, thanks

If you're using a Sinar (I don't know if this works with the older Norma back), there are pins on the Zoom back that lock the holder in place when you have the curtains open, so you can't remove the holder without closing them. Of course, if you're determined, you can still ruin a frame by doing things like inserting the holder and opening the curtains before closing the shutter (unless you have DB lenses and a Sinar shutter with appropriate cables to make everything work automagically).

[Bob Salomon]

The extra 8mm (.315 inch) is nice but I wouldn't make that the deciding factor. I suppose if I routinely cropped to 2:5 or 1:3 ratio then it would be important but since I'd rather shoot two images via shift-n-stitch that extra width won't help me.

That extra length makes the lens effectively wider. So it can be material.

[Old-N-Feeble]

Hey Bob... I didn't state that the extra width is immaterial in general. I stated, due to "my" shooting practices, it doesn't matter to "me". I concede that it may matter to others.

[Phil Hudson]

Not sure if this has already been covered but the Sinar slip-in types don't fit all non-Sinar cameras. The design prevents it from being fully inserted in some g/glass backs (it depends on the length of the finger tabs that help you pull the focus panel out the insert a dark slide). I have the Sinar Panorama fixed 6x12 and a Horseman 6x12; I find the Horseman is easier to load but I like the captive dark slide and long film path of the Sinar.........

[jan staller]

Horseman backs are very compact and much faster to load than Sinar Zoom 2 backs. The ability to change formats is a welcome advantage offered by the Sinar. I have used the same Horseman holders since 1989, and they have needed repairs only a few times. I will sell you two Sinar ZOOM 2 Backs if you like. I also have a Linhof 6x12 Techno Rollex in near new condition, which I have listed on Ebay but will sell directly. It's just an amazingly well made tool and makes all the other holders seem like toys. Not cheap, but it does offer true 6x12 cm size and not the 6x11 or so of the other backs. Regarding the Calumet- I tried that many years ago, and it's workmanship was very crude and as I recall, the film was not very flat due to lack of tension between the take up and supply rollers and poor engineering for the film path.

[Tim Stahl]

I have used the Linhof 6x12 back for over a decade now. I have never had an issue with it beyond weight, it's heavy like a brick. That being said, it keeps the film flat and is a joy to use knowing that it will work (from -20 in Alaska to 100 on the beach in Galveston) and help me make the images I want to make (assuming I'm not a klutz).

[Kodachrome25]

I have been using a pair of DaYi backs strictly for infrared work in 6x12 the past two weeks, love them. The two together were less than one Horseman. Build quality is decent as is function and the resulting images have been great. They seem fairly light too which is key since I am hauling them thousands of feet up mountains.

Just my two cents...