Why would you buy a linhof 617 over a gaoersi 617?

[Momentz]

Using the same lens on both cameras, for arguments sake a schnieder 90mm, Why would you buy a llinhof 617 over a gaoersi 617? is there something special in the body? or is it a brand thing? They both take the same film, and using the same lens the photos would be just as sharp would they not? so why pay $7000more

[Michael Graves]

Features, ease of use, comfort and prestige. Me? My idea of a big splurge was a Mamiya 7 that my wife still won't let me live down.

[Aender Brepsom]

If film flatness is the same, then the result should be the same, yes.
I have never used a Linhof, but the Gaoersi 617 I had, was a very fine camera. It was well built and worked just perfectly. I would buy it again, if that type of camera was my first choice. The price is more than excellent. But the Linhof operates probably in a smoother way. The Gaoersi viewfinder sure is not as good as the Linhof one.

But, if it all comes down to just getting a perfectly sharp 6x17 slide or negative, then you can't go wrong with the Gaoersi.

I have briefly mentioned my reasons not to keep the Gaoersi in one of your threads:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=30390

but as I said, it was not because the Gaoersi as a camera were bad, not at all.

[Bob Salomon]

Linhof tests their lenses and the 72, 90, 110mm (shift and non-shift lenses) and the 180 and 250mm lenses (non-shift only) have been specifically selected for their performance within the 617 camera's format area. While the lenses are physically identical to other lenses from Schneider with the same name the performance is ideal for 617. They may be very poor performers on a 5x7 camera.

The Linhof 617 images have always stood up to comparison to other 617 formats. That is one reason Kodak chose the Linhof 617 to make the Colorama transparencies for Grand Central Station and for the opening stadium shots at the Olympics and why magazines like Newsweek has used it for the Presidential Inauguration shots at the swearing in ceremony. The detail that this camera has repeatably captured is outstanding. And in all environments and in all conditions.

[Scott Davis]

While the lenses are physically identical to other lenses from Schneider with the same name the performance is ideal for 617. They may be very poor performers on a 5x7 camera.


Bob- I know it's your job to be the Linhof marketer here in the US, but please, don't shit on my shoe and tell me it's snowing! If lens A performs well on 6x17, it will also perform equally well on any film format you put behind it within the bounds of its image circle. A 90mm Super Angulon is a 90mm Super Angulon is a 90mm Super Angulon.

[Steve Hamley]

According to triginometry, 6x17 cm has a diagonal of 18 cm, 5x7 has a diagonal of 21.85 or about 22 cm. That's a difference of about 4 cm or 1.6 inches. It would certainly be possible for a lens to cover 6x17 sharply but not 5x7??

Steve

[Doug Dolde]

My question is why would anyone buy a Chinese piece of crap ?

[Steve Hamley]

Doug,

If your finances/wife/SO/etc can't justify spending $7K on a hobby but can justify the Chinese camera. If you're Kodak shooting for Grand Central Station or a pro making a living (not to mention maybe history) with it, $7K is not an issue.

Steve

[Aender Brepsom]

Doug, have you ever used a Gaoersi? Or do you call every chinese product "crap" just to make sure you don't look tolerant?

[evan clarke]

I agree with Aender's previous post about focusing. I have a Fotoman which is OK but have also outfitted an Ebony 45s with the ShenHao 6x17 back which I can use vertically or horizontally with all movements. It is a really great setup, easy to focus and use and light in weight, but it's still roll film. I far prefer to expose a 5x7 sheet and crop it. It has been my long standing practice to expose two identical sheets as a fail safe for a second development of prized negatives...EC

[Bob Salomon]

Scott,

If you have not compared them personally you don't know.

[Doug Dolde]

Yes I think everything from China is crap.

[Colin Robertson]

What? Even chicken in ginger and sweet chili sauce????

[Scott Davis]

Bob- so you're telling me that if I pulled that 90mm Super Angulon off the 617, which you claim is the same Super Angulon coming down the same assembly line as all the other 90mm Super Angulons, that it will not have the same angle of coverage and project the same image circle? That if the lens projects a 259mm image circle (more than enough to cover 5x7) when mounted on a Linhof Technika board, somehow mounting it in a 617 lens cone is going to make it project MORE? or that it will project BETTER, being mounted in a cone instead of on a flat panel?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Bob- so you're telling me that if I pulled that 90mm Super Angulon off the 617, which you claim is the same Super Angulon coming down the same assembly line as all the other 90mm Super Angulons, that it will not have the same angle of coverage and project the same image circle? That if the lens projects a 259mm image circle (more than enough to cover 5x7) when mounted on a Linhof Technika board, somehow mounting it in a 617 lens cone is going to make it project MORE? or that it will project BETTER, being mounted in a cone instead of on a flat panel?

Look at it this way, in every manufacturing line there are hiccups. Otherwise we would not have lemon cars, right? It is the same with lenses, specially in the critical step of polishing the glass (remember the Hubble?). What Linhof does is select from the line those lenses which they feel meet their standards. Now these standars might be really picky in some areas and not so in others. In essence what you get when you buy a Linhof select lens is the assurance that the elements are perfectly aligned, there are no aberrations due to a mistake, the coating is perfect, etc, etc. To some this is worth it, to some it is not.

Could we tell the difference between a Linhof select lens and an off the line lens? Maybe, maybe not, depending on the problem.

MOre important is how transparent is the camera to the user. Having never seen the Gaorsi I don't know how easy it is to use, but I had the chance to use a Linhof and I loved the ease of use and the buttery perfectly machined controls in the camera. Once again, to some this is worht it, to some it is not. To me it is, there is nothing I hate more than being in the field and having to think which knob I have to turn to make the camera do something.

So relax and give Bob a break... :)

[Bob Salomon]

Bob- so you're telling me that if I pulled that 90mm Super Angulon off the 617, which you claim is the same Super Angulon coming down the same assembly line as all the other 90mm Super Angulons, that it will not have the same angle of coverage and project the same image circle? That if the lens projects a 259mm image circle (more than enough to cover 5x7) when mounted on a Linhof Technika board, somehow mounting it in a 617 lens cone is going to make it project MORE? or that it will project BETTER, being mounted in a cone instead of on a flat panel?

No Scott,

I am saying that there may be some aberrations outside the 617 picture area that would normally make Linhof reject the lens for view camera use but none within the area that is used on the 617 camera. The lenses that they use on the 617 and the 612 are especially selected to perform optimally within the 612 and 617 area.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

The same reason that anyone buys a real expensive camera (Ebony, Hassleblad, Leica, etc.) when there are just as good, much less expensive alternatives- it's a status symbol to show off to your buddies. The pictures made with them will be no different than with a cheaper camera with the same lens. No one who sees the final pictures is going to know (or care) about what kind of camera you used to make them. I prefer the cheap cameras, because I can take them into harsh outdoor conditions and not worry about scratching them up. Many of my best images, which involved an amount of risk to the camera (which has many battle scars), would not have been made if I was worried about keeping an expensive camera in good shape.

[David A. Goldfarb]

I have a DaYi 6x17 back that I usually use on my Linhof Tech V, and I like being able to use my view camera movements, the same lenses as I use for 4x5", and even the rangefinder with a 150mm lens for handheld panos.

Based on my experience with Linhof rollfilm backs, though, I suspect that the Linhof 617 has better film flatness than the DaYi, Shen Hao, and Gaoersi backs, which all are of similar design.

Film flatness problems are the sort of thing one doesn't notice until one has tried something better.

[Doug Dolde]

I should have said that even though I would never buy a Chinese camera, I'd never fork out what Linhof wants for the 617. They are absurdly overpriced and way too specialized to spend that kind of money on.

The Noblex makes a lot more sense to me. But frankly I'd not consider a roll film camera these days anyway..digital is better quality. Check out these deals.

http://www.digitaltransitions.com/newsletters/10_07_3/index.html

I think Linhof is going the way of the dinosaur.

[Steve Hamley]

I'd love to try a Linhof 617 and 2-3 lenses. Alas, I fall in the hobbyist definition, and although I might be able to afford it, the barrier is what I'd have to give up to do it. Maybe when I retire in a few years and have the time to justify the camera. I like Ken Duncan's work/way of seeing a lot, but just for the record I don't for a minute believe the Linhof would make me a better photographer except in the sense that Jorge mentioned; you need a transparent and dependable camera.

Steve

[Brian K]

Yes I think everything from China is crap.

I use Sinar p2 and f2, Linhof Technika 3000, Fuji GX617, Mamiya 7II, Rolleiflex 6008i, fuji GX680III AND Fotoman 612. In spite of having what many would argue are the best of German, Swiss and Japanese cameras one of the systems that I have decided to narrow down to and use as a preferred system for my work is Chinese.

The reason I chose the fotoman is simple, it's simple. Very few moving parts, very little that can break, zero electronics and the ability to use almost any lens made by any of the lens manufacturers. Would have I preferred a Linhof 612 panoramic? Maybe if I had the lens options, but I'd rather choose from 50 lenses than 5. I currently have the 80 mm SuperSymmar XL, 90mm Grandagon, 120mm Symmar-L, 135mm Sironar-S, 180mm Sironar-N, 270mm tele ed nikkor and even the nikkor 360mm tele on the fotoman. If linhof offered a 300-360mm for their 612 camera I might have considered their 612 pano camera.

As for film flatness, I find the film flatness of the fotoman to be at least as good as and probably a little better than that of my Sinar Zoom and Zoom II backs. The simple film advance of the fotoman, that is 2 simple knobs, enables you to tighten the film, by rotating the knobs away from each other, just prior to exposure. Is it machined as well as a Linhof? Certainly not, but I use my cameras, they are a means to and end for me, and the quickest, easiest, most reliable and cost effective way to those ends are what matters to me.

Could you tell the difference between an image I shot with a Fotoman or with my Sinar P2 or Linhof MT3000 with Zoom backs? I can't.

[Momentz]

Doug,

I am trying to justify spending $7000 more and say "Digital is the way to go" and then show a link to $18000 backs? just to get the same result as film anyway, your way of thinking is very twisted

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

The same reason that anyone buys a real expensive camera (Ebony, Hassleblad, Leica, etc.) when there are just as good, much less expensive alternatives- it's a status symbol to show off to your buddies. The pictures made with them will be no different than with a cheaper camera with the same lens. No one who sees the final pictures is going to know (or care) about what kind of camera you used to make them. I prefer the cheap cameras, because I can take them into harsh outdoor conditions and not worry about scratching them up. Many of my best images, which involved an amount of risk to the camera (which has many battle scars), would not have been made if I was worried about keeping an expensive camera in good shape.

I get the feeling you have never used a more expensive camera or you would not be saying this. As to taking them on bad weather....I do take mine out in bad weather knowing that it will stand up to greater abuse than a poorly made cheaper camera. Yes the picture would be the same, but nothing sucks the joy out of making photographs than having to wrestle with the camera in the field.

[Michael Alpert]

I should have said that even though I would never buy a Chinese camera, I'd never fork out what Linhof wants for the 617. They are absurdly overpriced and way too specialized to spend that kind of money on.

The Noblex makes a lot more sense to me. But frankly I'd not consider a roll film camera these days anyway..digital is better quality. Check out these deals.

http://www.digitaltransitions.com/newsletters/10_07_3/index.html

I think Linhof is going the way of the dinosaur.

Doug,

Since you know nothing about either camera (although you have large silly opinions about Chinese products in general and about film-cameras in general) and are not going to purchase anything anyway, why are you answering the question? (Actually, I don't care why, so please don't respond.)

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I should have said that even though I would never buy a Chinese camera, I'd never fork out what Linhof wants for the 617. They are absurdly overpriced and way too specialized to spend that kind of money on.

The Noblex makes a lot more sense to me. But frankly I'd not consider a roll film camera these days anyway..digital is better quality. Check out these deals.

http://www.digitaltransitions.com/newsletters/10_07_3/index.html

I think Linhof is going the way of the dinosaur.

Pre owned digital backs that range from 11 to 18 K are a deal?!? Let me see if I understand this, you think a Linhof for 7k brand new is too expensive, a camera that will last a lifetime, will work as long as film is available and you won't have to carry bateries, is a worse deal than a pre owned digital back that will be obsolete in a couple of years?

[Scott Davis]

No Scott,

I am saying that there may be some aberrations outside the 617 picture area that would normally make Linhof reject the lens for view camera use but none within the area that is used on the 617 camera. The lenses that they use on the 617 and the 612 are especially selected to perform optimally within the 612 and 617 area.

I still think that's a bit of a specious argument, since any optics Linhof would be selecting would still have to pass Schneider's QC first, and I'm pretty sure they're not going to be dumping a pile of seconds on the table for the Linhof folks to pick through. Actually, what you just said is that relative to the factory of origin specifications, the lenses on 612 or 617 are defective because they are only good enough to cover 612 or 617, and so are relegated to the smaller formats, but perform inadequately at factory specified performance limits.

I'd be more convinced about the superior quality of a Linhof 617 vs a Shen Hao or a Gaoersi if you wanted to talk to me about manufacturing tolerances and film plane flatness, quality of materials, smoothness and precision of operation. Those are definitely arguments I'd buy, and could well justify the difference in price.

[Brian Vuillemenot]

I get the feeling you have never used a more expensive camera or you would not be saying this. As to taking them on bad weather....I do take mine out in bad weather knowing that it will stand up to greater abuse than a poorly made cheaper camera. Yes the picture would be the same, but nothing sucks the joy out of making photographs than having to wrestle with the camera in the field.

Yes, Jorge, I've used several different expensive cameras, and while they may have been a bit prettier or more refined than some of the inexpensive Chinese cameras, I'll take the cheap ones any day. I don't want to be having to worry about a $7,000 camera getting damaged or stolen on one of my trips. If something happens to an inexpensive camera, it's not that much of a loss. My Shen-Hao is very well built and stands up at least as well in the field, if not better than, several expensive 4X5s I've used that cost 3-5 times as much. As far as "wrestling with cameras in the field", some of the expensive ones, with more sophisticated controls, are actually a lot more complicated and less intuitive to use. I get the feeling you've never used an inexpensive camera, or you wouldn't be defending the expensive brands. ;)

[chilihead]

If you had the money would you buy a Rolex or a timex?

[Ted Harris]

The Noblex makes a lot more sense to me. But frankly I'd not consider a roll film camera these days anyway..digital is better quality. Check out these deals.


Doug,

Just a note that it is an apples to oranges comparison. The Noblex is a swing lens camera with a much different field of view. Having said that, I use one and it is the only camera I own that paid for itself on one job.

[Brian Ellis]

I've used a lot of Linhof gear over the years. I've been willing to pay the price for the pleasure of using such well made, well designed, smooth as hot butter, solid as a rock instruments. But IMHO anyone who thinks there's a direct, proportionate relationship in quality between the cost of say a Shen Hao and the cost of say a Master Technika is kidding themselves. Certainly some of that cost differential is reflected in the equipment but a very large part of it is a function of wages and benefits in Germany, currency exchange rates, indirect costs such as transportation and duties, and (very important) the number of middlemen between the factory and the consumer.

[Doug Dolde]

I think it's more like comparing apples to pears or oranges to tangerines. They are both panoramic cameras. I've owned both the Fuji and Linhof 617s and wasn't satisfied with either of them.

Despite being touted as half a 5x7 sheet, they are still a flat plate and lack a true perspective like the Noblex gives with its swing lens. The Noblex is reputed to have a much sharper lens and it's only 50 mm so there is an inherently greater DOF. I've not used the Noblex, but if I wanted to have a FILM panoramic camera it would be my choice.

That said I will probably never buy another film camera beyond my current Arca Swiss 4x5 Field. If I want a panoramic image I shoot two sheets of 4x5 using +/- 50mm back shift.

I've stitched 3-4 shot frames with a Kodak 16mp Pro Back and got more well defined results than I ever got with a 617 film camera. If you want an example click on the image on this page to see an actual pixels crop. Try it wilh a roll film camera; I guarantee you won't get close to this level of detail even with a drum scan. Film is dying a slow death. Like it or not its a fact. I know some of you old codgers will disagree but hey the earth isn't flat after all.

http://www.painted-with-light.com/AS6.html

[Frank Petronio]

Once I rented a Fuji and Linhof 617 for a large group portrait -- both had 90mm lenses, same settings -- the Linhof blew the Fuji away...

Not saying the Chinese camera isn't as sharp or better than the Linhof, but for the kind of money involved it makes sense to rent and compare.

If I could afford one, I'd get the Linhof simply because it is so "nice". Imagine your grandchildren marvelling over it in 2057....

[CantikFotos]

My question is why would anyone buy a Chinese piece of crap ?

Where was your computer made?

[ourayphotography]

Everyone missed the main point. Sadly, The China cameras only use 120 film and the finders are awfull. But, on the newer ones you get removeable backs and can use a midroll ground glass.

[Bob Salomon]

Everyone missed the main point. Sadly, The China cameras only use 120 film and the finders are awfull. But, on the newer ones you get removeable backs and can use a midroll ground glass.

So you are up to date.

All Linhof Technorama 617 SIII cameras can use a ground glass back. The ground glass back accepts an accessory magnifier that slides across the 17cm width. All of them accept 72, 90, 110, 180 and 250mm lenses. All of them accept the shift back which can be used with the 72, 90 and 110mm lenses. All of them use 120 or 220 film.

The latest version of the Technorama 617SIII also has a darkslide so mid roll lens changes are easily done.

All of them have very accurate viewfinders with a scribed horizon line and a level that works in both horizontal and vertical positions and indicates when the camera is perpendicular to the subject. The level is visible both in and on the finder.