PDA

View Full Version : Over $4K for a technar



Frank Petronio
28-Nov-2005, 08:34
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7565168755&ssPageName=STRK:MEDW:IT

Geez. $4111 for an old Linhof Technar with an older 75mm. The funny thing is that the same era Cambo or Handy with a 75mm sells for less than half. Why doesn't Linhof wise up and start selling them since they have such a crazy demand?

Actually, all they really need to do is make some nice cone lensboards and we could build the rest from old 45S cameras sold for $300 on eBay...

jhogan
28-Nov-2005, 15:09
Don't use it -admire it. Put it on a shelf, show your friends. Fetishize it. It's a bargain now- it can only appreciate in value, right?

Why not buy two Fotoman 45s- one to use, the other to keep untouched in the box, for a higher value at some future auction.

From the Gruhn Guitars site:

Gibson Les Paul Standard, 1960, NM (one of the cleanest we have seen in years), spectacular tiger striped curly maple top, virtually unfaded cherry red sunburst finish, large 1959 style neck dimensions, vintage replica tuner buttons, OHC......$275000

What did it cost new? A couple hundred bucks?

Boomers like collecting. Knowing they have extra stuff gives them a feeling of security their Depression-era parents never had.

Expect a drop in prices when they die.

John_4185
28-Nov-2005, 15:53
technar, heck! Here's a Super-Super-Angulon 3" on a modified Printex body.

http://elearning.winona.edu/staff_o/jjs/ptmp.jpg

Of course, the body cracked real bad, but heck, I'm not a machinist!

Steve Feldman
28-Nov-2005, 19:15
But did ya notice? - The reserve has been met.

As in all things Ebay: "It pays to advertise". Someone advertises - Someone's gonna pay.

Frank Petronio
28-Nov-2005, 19:21
I like that classy Linhof grip...

Oren Grad
28-Nov-2005, 19:25
So JJ, tell us how you couple the rangefinder on that delicious contraption, to make it better than a mere Technar.

John_4185
28-Nov-2005, 19:37
Oren So JJ, tell us how you couple the rangefinder on that delicious contraption, to make it better than a mere Technar.

Rangefinder? oops! I kinda missed that little detail. :) You better buy that Technar.

BTW - I didn't find a small scale to weigh the standard Printex. Might have to wait until next weekend. I tried standing on the bathroom scale, then again with the camera, but it didn't register a signficant difference. (No smart comments . I know you guys. I'm all of 192 pounds so I didn't push the scale off the far end. But it would have been a good joke.)

John_4185
28-Nov-2005, 20:19
Frank I like that classy Linhof grip...

:) And that was before I found a white right-hand Linhof grip. Could have got real carried away.

Frank Petronio
28-Nov-2005, 20:35
Just in case you're not being ironic, the Technar doesn't have a RF, only the VF off one of the Pano cameras with a different mask (I think).

Oren Grad
28-Nov-2005, 20:48
JJ - thanks, no emergency, whenever it's convenient for you to get around to weighing the standard Printex is fine. I should say, I have a specific question in mind - whether a Printex with a rangefinder-coupled 127 or 135 will weigh less than a comparably equipped Crown Graphic. From the looks of that metal, I have to wonder, but...?

John_4185
29-Nov-2005, 14:51
When I post the weight, please reciprocate and post the weight of the Crown Graphic.

I didn't find a scale here today, and I won't be anywhere where I can use or buy one soon. Hang in there, please.

I suspect there is the trade-off between weight and ruggedness. And what's with this group's obsession with weight, anyway? What's a few ounces difference? Seriously.

Oren Grad
29-Nov-2005, 15:14
Afraid I don't have a 4x5 Crown Graphic, otherwise I'd be happy to post the weight. Sorry...

The reason I'm hung up on it is that I'd love to have a RF-coupled 4x5 that I could use hand-held once in a while, but there's a pretty hard limit to the amount of weight I can handle. My guess is that a Crown with a modern 135 and a film holder on board would come in somewhere between 5 and 5 1/2 pounds, which is still too much. If I could find a 4-pound camera that didn't cost an arm and a leg I'd give it a try for sure. That's probably too much to hope for, though.

John_4185
29-Nov-2005, 17:05
If I could find a 4-pound camera that didn't cost an arm and a leg I'd give it a try for sure.

I can certainly understand limitations. Have you considered various means to distribute the weight? For example, look at Linhof's handgrips - three different types: lefthand, right and under. One can also use the strap to help support a handheld camera. Many years ago there were chest pods, or whatever they called them, to help hold the camera around eye-level.

Frank Petronio
29-Nov-2005, 18:30
I think it would be hard to beat a Crown Graphic with a Linhof grip and a small 135 lens. I've tried a Dean Jones modified Polaroid 110 and a Sinar Handy. Both are clever but awkward to actually use handheld. They aren't balanced and the backs aren't as secure in gripping the holder in a light tight way, so pulling a darkslide or Readyload becomes a three handed operation. The Technika is, oif course, the most elegant camera but it is also heavy. Wheras the Crown is light, the back is secure, and your grip opposes the dark slide, so you only need TWO hands to operate it. Same for the Cambo Wide, which lacks the RF focusing that the lowly and inexpensive Crown has.

I'd buy a Linhof grip and bolt it onto a Crown with a modern 135 - that would be a very useful landscape and people camera. Hmm... maybe that's my next project too?

David Van Gosen
1-Dec-2005, 08:09
According to my Ikea kitchen scale, a Crown Graphic with top rangefinder & flash bracket, but no lens or board, is 4 lb, 14 oz.

The original lensboard & Wollensak 135 adds 7 oz.

David Van Gosen
1-Dec-2005, 08:17
And the ground-glass panel w/viewing hood is 14 oz by itself.

John_4185
1-Dec-2005, 08:26
Thanks for the data, David!

I can hardly believe I can't find a fish-scale to weigh the Printex, but I'm still asking around. (Sheesh, here I live on the Mississippi River and am surrounded by academic wimps who don't fish! oops - that includes me!)

Oren - I am considering sending you a Printex with lens and Linhof grip for your trial-use if the weight turns out to be less than the Crown Graphic. I'll have to substitute a Tessar 135mm for the current Planar 135mm. I'm just too fond of the later to risk mail-loss.

Well, off to the day job in a few minutes where ~3,200 lines of ASP have to be debugged; time to earn my pay. AFTER I shovel the walk!

jj in MinneSNOWta

Frank Petronio
1-Dec-2005, 08:29
An easy and accurate scale can be found in your grocery store's produce section. That's where I took the Pinewood Derby cars I made - err... my son made - for Cub Scouts. Gotta get the weight just under the limit...

Oren Grad
1-Dec-2005, 08:54
David, thanks very much for posting the weight of your Crown Graphic. That means by the time you put in a holder, it has to be getting up near 6 pounds. I doubt a side-RF Crown would be much different. Oh well...

JJ - thanks, please do contact me by PM if it looks as though it might be for real. Much appreciated. I can never complain about winter weather here - any superlative I can come up with re temperature or snowfall is immediately and easily topped by my brother in Minneapolis...

David A. Goldfarb
1-Dec-2005, 09:11
How about a 2x3 camera press camera to meet the light weight requirement? Of course it's not 4x5", but if the weight is key, it's an option.

I just got a Busch Pressman C to use exclusively with a 105/2.8 Xenotar that's been sitting too long on the shelf, and with the Xenotar (which is a heavy lens) and extras including a shade, lenscap, cable release, Graflex finder, QR plate, and a filmholder, it comes to a little less than 5 lbs on my bathroom scale (sorry I don't have anything more accurate that can measure in that range). Without all the extras and with a smaller lens, you could get that down to 4 lbs easily. Other cameras of this type would be the Crown Graphic 23 and B&J Watson (Linhof and Horseman, too, of course, but these are in a vastly different price and weight range). Depending on condition, lens, and extras, these cameras go for $50-150. Mine was $109 shipped with a Wollensak 101mm Velostigmat, 20 film holders, about 100 sheets of film, and a couple odds and ends (I already had the Xenotar, which was probably around $300).

You can get 2x3 sheet film from jandcphotography.com. It's really strange to load those little sheets.

Oren Grad
1-Dec-2005, 09:34
David -

Thanks for the good ideas. In fact, as I write this I've got some 2.25x3.25 holders on the way, as well as an order of Efke PL100 sheet film from JandC. They were out of stock on the Classic 400, which is a real pity - handheld work with the slower film will be a real problem. But for now, I just want to try it as proof of principle.

I have a Horseman VH-R, which is too heavy - with a really small lens (100 Apo-Sironar-N) plus rollholder, it gets up near 6 pounds. What I'm probably going to do is bag the rangefinder for the moment and try this with my VH instead, with one of those featherweight Cosina viewfinders in the shoe on top. With a cut-sheet holder instead of the rollholder, and the VH instead of the VH-R, weight should come down to maybe 4.5 pounds or so. If that works out, I can go on to try to find a 2x3 Graphic or similar that I can couple to one of my Rodenstock lenses.

There's also my quarter-plate Crown, which is what drove my recent queries here and on the Graflex board about finding someone to fix a Kalart RF.

For now, I'm going to have some fun playing with these different options, and see whether any of them really "clicks" as something to use more seriously.

Thanks again for the input - I know you've gained some good experience with your own press cameras...

Bob Salomon
1-Dec-2005, 09:52
"Linhof's handgrips - three different types: lefthand, right and under."

No more then that but none fit under the camera. Only right or left though. There is the left for the 23, the left for the 45 and there was the left for the 57. All three cameras accepted the same right grip. The 220 camera came with either a bottom, side or an end grip, depending on the model of the 220. but the bottom grip was not removeable and was a Rollei TLR modified grip. The end grip on the 220 models that used it was the Linhof Anatomical Grip but it too was built in. The Anatomical Grip was also made in special types for the Aero Technika, Aerotronika, Aero Press, Aero Electric, Press 70 and the Technar. Some on the Technika and Technar took the Linhof Solenoid Release and others the cable release. But none were bottom mounted Anatomical Grips.

David Van Gosen
1-Dec-2005, 09:54
Polaroid offered some two-lens ID cameras in 4x5 awhile back. They subcontracted these out to Cambo, who built them around the back section of their Cambo Wide. I got mine at auction for $100 or so.

I didn't weigh the body by itself, but my homebrew camera has a lensboard of aluminum stock, Schneider 65/8 and Bronica helical. Weight is 3 lb 12 oz. The Cambo box has a large left-side grip, a nice flat front and a Graflock back. It comes with a long snout for a pair of fixed-focus 125mm lenses. It's a good starting place for lenses from 65mm out to 127 or so.

John_4185
1-Dec-2005, 11:02
http://glennview.com/jpgs/vcam/linhof/grip/big_1.jpg

Bob Salomon: none fit under the camera

I guessed wrong at the above?

Where does it mount?

Bob Salomon
1-Dec-2005, 12:40
"Where does it mount?"

Interesting question. The adapter part is similar to the Linhof RZI 90° tilt arm but not the same. It appears to be the same vintage as the RZI head but is not illustrated in any of the Linhof catalogs of that vintage. That would also be the right vintage for the grip mounted on it. Nor is it illustrated in any of our Linhof brochures back to 1956. It could be used in either the top tripod mount of the camera or the bottom tripod mount but the only reason to possibly use this would be to hold the camera vertically as the Left or right grip would be under the camera which would put a lot of strain on your wrist to hold the camera by a grip on the bottom. If it was made for that purpose then the bottom or top tripod mounts would then become a side mount. But since the back revolves there would not be much reason to try to hand hold the camera rotated 90°.

Linhof has always been a OEM manufacturer for products sold by other companies. This could be an OEM product that was not sold as a camera accessory for Linhof. A recent example of this is the Multifocus Optical Finders we sold to Wilde for one of their aerial cameras. While it looks like a current finder it had additional stops for focal lengths only available on the Wilde camera.

If you can find documentation on the bracket we would always like to see a copy of it.

John_4185
1-Dec-2005, 14:40
http://www.glennview.com/jpgs/vcam/linhof/grip/big_2.jpg

OOPS! Sorry to trouble you, Bob!

These are from www.glennview.com (http://www.glennview.com) where he said Linhof anatomical grip, unusual model, even more rare than the Linhof right hand grip, I cannot find it in my Linhof literature [...]

It is interesting that Linhof kept their trademark red concentric-circles on something made for another maker. Another mystery!

Bob Salomon
1-Dec-2005, 14:53
JJ,

The Right Grip isn't rare . We normally stock it and it is currently in stock 002552.

John_4185
1-Dec-2005, 14:59
It is good to know the right-grip is still a stock item.

I got one quite easily. It became quite "handy" after I amputated my left thumb... get this ... while making a right grip for a fellow who was mildly left-handicapped. Then I couldn't make one for myself! (And he bitched at me for not finishing it!)