Should I buy a Linhof?

[Darin Boville]

O.K., I'm thinking of selling my Chaminoix and buying a Linhof IV or V.

I like the Cham--it is great, I think--but not really aimed at my needs. I need portability but not the ultra-light aspect. I don't backpack with it. I'd rather have the ability to keep one lens mounted and don't mind gaining weight to have a metal camera. Wouldn't mind the potential for handheld 4x5, either.

Why Linhof? Because I used to have a Toyo 45AII and I really liked it. I'm told the Technika is sort of the same thing only better. (True?)

I know the Linhofs vary within models and it all gets so confusing all too quickly.

If I'm looking at IV and V models what should I beware of? I'm only interested in clean units so that may avoid a lot of potential problems but what of the plastic knobs I read about somewhere?

Also, any guesstimates what I should pay for a nice IV or V? Are repair prices reasonable should I need it?

Linhof newbie questions, I know.

--Darin

[Brian Ellis]

If you want a metal camera Technikas are great choices. They don't vary that much within models except for the Technika III and you aren't thinking of a III. The IV and the V are basically the same camera except that the front rise mechanism is at the front of the V and is at the back of the IV - more convenient in front. And of course the leatherette is a different color. But otherwise they're pretty much the same and I don't know of significant variations within either model.

Technikas are very well made, I've owned a V and a Master. No problems that I've ever heard of with "plastic knobs." That may refer to the four knobs used to open and close the back but I don't know of any problems with them. Guesstimate for price would be $1,000 range for a IV and $1500 range for a V, assuming excellent cosmetic and mechanical condition. You could check completed sales on ebay and probably find some that have sold recently. Repair prices are expensive when done by Marflex, the U.S. authorized repair center, but worth it in my experience.

Better than a Toyo 45AII? I don't know, I've never owned the Toyo. But I've played around with them and they seem like very nice cameras. You'll have to check the specs and see how they compare with a Technika and which would better suit your needs. The bellows on the Technika is about 2 1/2 - 3 inches longer than the Toyo and that could be important because it allows you to use a normal 300mm lens which you can't do on the Toyo without a "top hat" extender or some similar accessory.

If you're seriously thinking of hand-held then you'll need to make sure the rangefinder works and ideally the camera should come with a lens and the original cam for that lens. You might be able to get a cam cut by Marflex for one of your lenses but that's expensive - $250 when I checked quite a few years ago.

[Frank Petronio]

Like Brian said, the Toyo is no slouch, the Linhof is mainly about pride of ownership at a certain point... it has an Old-World quality that is impossible to replicate with stamped metal and plastic.

I've owned both and I'd get a IV next time around, if there is a next time. I'd look for a un-corroded but well used beater and send it off to Marflex for a CLA and a new bellows. Plus repair or replace the focusing hood, add or adjust a fresnel, and the $$$ camming of your favorite lens(es).

The bellows are thin, long, and flexible but that also means they won't last 50 years without needing replacement, even the early Master Technika bellows can be too old by now. Somebody has to do it, either get a camera that needs them and pay less or find a camera with a >10 year old replacement.

Some abusers will gum or grit things up on the track or movements but those are buyer-beware type abuses -- usually some external rust-oxidation-rotten leather is a sign of interior crapiness. But even then, the missing teeth can be smoothed over and made to work OK.

The latch that holds the camera closed is easy to break on all of these and is expensive to replace, so be careful of it!

On the V the front rise lever is prone to strip its gear teeth and the older ones with the white plastic tip are broken more often than the later or replacement ones with the metal tip. I prefer the IV's simple rise but it is harder with the front standard retracted when you're using a wide angle lens. You end up pulling the front out, making the rise, then pushing the front standard back into position. And so on....

Otherwise, the only other big difference is that the V and later models use standardized cams that can be interchanged with other V or later Techs. In theory at least, since a round trip to Marflex is still a good idea with any lens you want cammed to any Technika.

The IV seems to sell from $700 to $1000 and the V from $900 to $1400, although you see plenty of overly ambitious hopefuls asking for more. Of course a new bellows, CLA, multi-finder, grip, and an already cammed lens all add to the attractiveness of the deal. If a recently CLA V with the later zoom finder and ergo grip came up under $1800 I'd jump on it; likewise a similar CLA IV with the older finder and grip might have tipping point of around $1300. (Although the older finders aren't that great imho - the wire frame finder is actually a lot more useful).

One mod that Marflex or someone a bit handy can do is to replace the original leather-sided focusing hood with the more durable Graflex Graphic folding metal hood. Note that you will lose about 1/4" of your screen view doing this. Also you may give the Linhof guy a conniption. For that matter, if you are handy and only use short lenses, you can use the indestructible Graphic bellows as a cheap replacement. Note it is thicker and on 12" long, negating one of the main advantages of a Technika -- it holds longer lenses steadier than any other folder.

Cameraleather.com has replacement black leather covering for about $50 and it really looks so much nicer than the old beige covering, even though it is only cosmetic. Once I stripped a beater to bare aluminum and told people it was from a NASA Apollo mission, I fooled a few and sold the camera for $40K.

That's a joke. Really NASA used a Toyo but they left it on the Moon for the Aliens to admire.

[Lachlan 717]

Why not go to 8x10 if weight isn't an issue? A Toyo 810M is relatively portable.

Or a Speed Graphic if you're thinking about handheld 4x5 and save the $$$. You also get the advantage of having a shutter within the camera, making older/barrel lenses usable as well?

Just a couple of questions that popped into my mind when I read your post... There's no doubt that a Linhof is a better camera than a SG, but that doesn't equate to making better images.

[Bob Salomon]

"Really NASA used a Toyo but they left it on the Moon for the Aliens to admire."

Not really. NASA used the Aero Technika for their 4x5 work on the Space Shuttle.

[Lachlan 717]

"Really NASA used a Toyo but they left it on the Moon for the Aliens to admire."

Not really. NASA used the Aero Technika for their 4x5 work on the Space Shuttle.

Bob,

Which crater on the moon did the Shuttle land in?

[Patrick Dixon]

There's a Technica V (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?p=586510#post586510) in the FS section of this forum at the moment.

[Bob Salomon]

Bob,

Which crater on the moon did the Shuttle land in?

Fortunately, considering the cost of a NASA modified Aero Technika they brought all of them up and back on the shuttle flights. Along with the Rollei 6008 systems that they also used on many Space Shuttle missions.

[Lachlan 717]

Fortunately, considering the cost of a NASA modified Aero Technika they brought all of them up and back on the shuttle flights. Along with the Rollei 6008 systems that they also used on many Space Shuttle missions.

I was trying to point out that Apollo went to the moon, not the Shuttle.

Perhaps Frank was referring to the Apollo missions... Or just having a laugh.

[Patrick Dixon]

Fortunately, considering the cost of a NASA modified Aero Technika they brought all of them up and back on the shuttle flights. Along with the Rollei 6008 systems that they also used on many Space Shuttle missions.

Even the Challenger and Columbia ones?

[Frank Petronio]

That $40K I got for the NASA fake just about paid for a new Technika ;-)

True a Speed Graphic will take the same quality photo in most situations, and I even moved to a Crown Graphic in order to save weight and money. But Linhofs are like Rolleis and Leicas, they may just be inanimate objects to some but if an object could have personality, then these classic German cameras would have it in droves.

To me, you see a whole system of thinking, pride, and intelligence in the minds that created them. They were really designed to fit the way a photographer would use them, with rounded corners and controls "just right".

Also, unlike the Graphics, Wistas, Toyos, etc. these babies remain absolutely rock solid extended all the way out. Not that I ever needed to use them that way, but that is part of their culture too -- overbuilt and overengineered -- rather like their automobiles.

[Bob Salomon]

Even the Challenger and Columbia ones?

No, they were not on those missions.

[Paul O]

Look at Walker cameras too? An alternative to metal and wood.

[Ari]

Short answer? yes.
If you can afford it, and get used to its quirks, it's grrrreat!

[Bill_1856]

Keep the Chaminoix, forget the Linhof.

[Patrick Dixon]

No, they were not on those missions.

Well if I was an astronaut, it would be "if the cameras don't fly, then neither do I" then.

[Bob Salomon]

Well if I was an astronaut, it would be "if the cameras don't fly, then neither do I" then.

Actually the choice of which camera systems fly is not up to the astranaut and in some cases not up to NASA. Some are on missions for other agencies.

[williamtheis]

if you want to broaden your search, look at the Arca Swiss and Sinar's in addition to Linhof & Toyo. Extremely refined and rigid.

[E. von Hoegh]

In a word, "Yes".
That is, if it suits you - you can only determine this by giving one a try. I've been using my ST IV ( factory matched three lens outfit, zoom finder, anat. grip, etc) since 1987. It has the original bellows wich are still perfectly light-tight and flexible; the longer I use it the more I like it. YMMV!

[Darin Boville]

Thanks for all the great info.

I have thought about the Speed Graphic--my first 4x5 was a Crown Graphic (I still have it) but I somehow sheared off part of the inner focusing rail. That's when I bought the Toyo 45A (which, as I said, I like quite a bit). I thought this time I'd try the Linhof and see if it overkill--if I buy it right and don't damage it the money actually at risk seems quite small.

I'm intrigued by the Toyo 8x10 field but I'm just now dipping my toes in the 8x10 waters with an Arca Swiss that I bought here a few months back (the one Frank talks about). Maybe I'll go the 8x10 route in the long run, maybe not (heck, maybe both).

I *do* like the Cham--except for the very things they did to design it to weigh less (the detachable front standard, the rear focusing, etc). These are huge pluses for other people, I know.

I did see the camera on the big sale thread that listed the Technika V but, as far as I can see it is really a Technika IV (based on the lack of front rise lever)--his asking is $905 US for the body with no grip, etc. It has minor cosmetic issues.

I'm in no hurry whatsoever. I shoot a variety of cameras, sometimes even work with no camera at all, and I plan to buy the Linhof before I sell the Cham so I can look at both at the same time.

If I get a IV I'm going to have to do something about that tan leather. I don't usually care cameras, etc--not much into the fetish thing--but that tan is so damn ugly :)

Are there any variations with the IV and V (that is, something that makes one IV better than another IV, etc) that I should watch out for?

--Darin

[Brian Ellis]

. . . Otherwise, the only other big difference is that the V and later models use standardized cams that can be interchanged with other V or later Techs. . . . .

I'll certainly bow to Franks' or someone else's superior Linhof knowledge on this but I don't think that's right. The difference in cams, I thought, between the IV and the V is that to have a cam cut for a IV you're supposed to send both the camera and the lens to the person doing the cutting. With the V you're supposed to be able to send just the lens. But both are supposed to require a cam specifically cut for the lens in question, not a generic cam. If wrong, Frank, Bob Salomon or someone else can correct me.

Even if I'm right, as a practical matter it really doesn't make any difference. If you call Marflex and ask about having a cam cut for your Technika V they'll ask you to send the camera in with the lens because they don't generally keep old Vs sitting around that they can use.

And while on practicalities - generic cams (i.e. cams cut for other cameras and lenses) may work with either the IV or the V. I bought a cam on ebay for my Tech V and while I never actually made a photograph using it, when I installed it and played around with the rangefinder everything seemed to work fine.

[Frank Petronio]

What Brian said, I stumbled/mumbled it. In practice you have to send the camera and lens off "just to be sure" since camming isn't cheap and you want to be sure.

[Bob Salomon]

1: The IV is a very old camera. The factory no longer makes repair parts for some of the IV models. Actually they only have parts that are interchangeable with the V or MT.
2: Using the rise on the IV with short lenses is very difficult as the knob that controls the rise is behind the front standard, at the bottom. The V and Master have a much more convenient crank in front of the standard that is very easy to use and not prone to breaking.
3: The V and Master have more movements then a IV.
4: The III and the IV had a ground glass that was not zeroed. The V and Master GG is zeroed. That means that cams are interchangeable between a V and a Master (whose GG is in the correct, factory calibrated position) and the cams are fully interchangeable between any V and any Master.
On the III and IV the ground glass position varies from camera to camera so the cam has to be cut to the specific camera. It is very easy to tell what camera the cam was cut for. If their is a serial number on the top of the cam for the lens and one on the bottom of the cam for the camera it is a IV cam. If there is only the lens serial number then it is a cam for the V and MT.
As for camming, that includes several things:
1: Plotting the curve for the lens and transferring it to the cam and hand cutting the curve into the cam - mess up and throw the cam away and redo it.
2: A pair of infinity stops. If you install the stops and position them incorrectly you will leave small dimple pit marks on the polished chrome rails that they attach to. Linhof supplies a special chart to determine the correct position so the rails don't end up with pit marks. There are both left and right infinity stops as well as special ones that allow them to be "stacked" when their placement requires one on top of the other.
3: The focusing scale, from 72 to 360mm for the specific focal length lens you are coupling. The Focusing scale stage holds up to 3 focusing scales and additional stages are available if more then three lenses are cam coupled. The stages slide on and off the camera.

So no, Marflex does not require that you send a V or Master in for camming but they might have to borrow one of ours. And when they do the camming it includes the cam, cutting the cam, the infinity stops, installing the infinity stops and the focusing scale and installing it.

[Darin Boville]

O.K., Bob seems to be making the case that the "great divide" between Linhof models isn't between the III and IV as most people say, but between the IV and V. (Or maybe there are two divides.)

In any event, let's focus on the V.

I've read that the earlier V's have the plastic tip on the front lever, later nes are metal. Are there any other clues that would help me tell an old V from a new one?

Bob, in another thread recently you mentioned that Linhof has used CNC for their parts for... I think you said "decades." Were all the V's done with CNC? None?

--Darin

[Bob Salomon]

O.K., Bob seems to be making the case that the "great divide" between Linhof models isn't between the III and IV as most people say, but between the IV and V. (Or maybe there are two divides.)

In any event, let's focus on the V.

I've read that the earlier V's have the plastic tip on the front lever, later nes are metal. Are there any other clues that would help me tell an old V from a new one?

Bob, in another thread recently you mentioned that Linhof has used CNC for their parts for... I think you said "decades." Were all the V's done with CNC? None?

--Darin
No, CNC was added in the Master production, well after it was on the market (introduced in 1976).

We do not get complaints from actual owners regarding the tips of the crank. I have received more complaints about the baseboard hinge breaking (one from Bruce Barnham on his Master since 1980) then the tip breaking on the lever - except from users who did not know how to change from up crank to down crank and broke the mechanism from improper use and too much force!

And there are two divides, the III is an orphan. It does not accept lens boards, cams, most back accessories or ground glasses and fresnels from any camera made after the III.

The V and Master share greater movements and ease of camming with each other over the IV.

[Brian Ellis]

1: . . . So no, Marflex does not require that you send a V or Master in for camming but they might have to borrow one of ours. And when they do the camming it includes the cam, cutting the cam, the infinity stops, installing the infinity stops and the focusing scale and installing it.

Actually Bob, when I called Marflex about making a cam Martin did require that I send my Tech V in. He said they didn't have a Tech V handy that they could use.

[Frank Petronio]

The problem with the V's front rise crank is that you need to rotate the tip to switch between rise or fall. While it is marked, it is ambivalent ~ to brain dead farts like me ~ and those of us with dead brains will sometimes forget and try to crank it for a rise when it is set to fall, stripping a few teeth in the process.

While I freely admit that I'm not the brightest bulb, Linhof should have figured out a more obvious indicator of whether the crank was set for going up or down.

I still think the IV is the best unless you need to go wider than a 90mm. The front standard is the largest and strongest.

[Bob Salomon]

The problem with the V's front rise crank is that you need to rotate the tip to switch between rise or fall. While it is marked, it is ambivalent ~ to brain dead farts like me ~ and those of us with dead brains will sometimes forget and try to crank it for a rise when it is set to fall, stripping a few teeth in the process.

While I freely admit that I'm not the brightest bulb, Linhof should have figured out a more obvious indicator of whether the crank was set for going up or down.

I still think the IV is the best unless you need to go wider than a 90mm. The front standard is the largest and strongest.

The instruction book shows very plainly how this operates. Or when id doubt - ask us!

[rdenney]

The instruction book shows very plainly how this operates. Or when id doubt - ask us!

Bob, no offense intended to you, but this sparks a mini-rant. I have worked frequently with German engineers, and I find that they have the greatest difficulty with requirements-driven design processes. Designs should not be driven around what instruction books say, but rather what users do. If someone as experienced at Frank has trouble with the intuitiveness of a control, the control's design should be reconsidered. The ideal design should be intuitive to the activities of an otherwise qualified user sufficiently to allow proper use without reading the instructions.

Rick "who doesn't read the owner's manual of rental cars before driving them off the lot" Denney

[Darin Boville]

Just posted my wtb thread on the Linhof here

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?p=587128#post587128

I'll no doubt have more questions and need advice should a seller surface...

--Darin

[Bob Salomon]

Bob, no offense intended to you, but this sparks a mini-rant. I have worked frequently with German engineers, and I find that they have the greatest difficulty with requirements-driven design processes. Designs should not be driven around what instruction books say, but rather what users do. If someone as experienced at Frank has trouble with the intuitiveness of a control, the control's design should be reconsidered. The ideal design should be intuitive to the activities of an otherwise qualified user sufficiently to allow proper use without reading the instructions.

Rick "who doesn't read the owner's manual of rental cars before driving them off the lot" Denney

Then you suggest that we do not need to go to the bother or expense of writing a book to explain how a complex camera functions or how its controls work?

[rdenney]

Then you suggest that we do not need to go to the bother or expense of writing a book to explain how a complex camera functions or how its controls work?

No, I'm saying that a camera that didn't need such a book when used by an expert would represent a design that fulfills the requirements of that expert fully.

But don't miss my point: I'm not advocating a design that requires expertise, I'm advocating a design that rewards expertise. If an expert confuses the controls and therefore requires instruction, then one must wonder who the controls were designed to serve (or if the design expectation is that the user serves the controls).

Of course, Linhofs are models of wonderful design--I'm addressing one feature, and the response to a complaint about the intuitiveness of that one feature.

Rick "who sometimes can't escape thinking like an engineer" Denney

[Bob Salomon]

Rick,

Since the late 70's you are the first to voice that complaint to me and I am not sure that you are a user of a V or Master.

That feature was built into the V when the V replaced the IV in 1963. The reason that it was moved to this position and made this way was the inconvenience of operating the knob on the IV and III which was at the bottom of the rear of the front standard and virtually impossible to easily use with wide lenses.

Perhaps if there is ever a total redesign (very unlikely) they can come up with a different system but even the latest Master Technika 3000 operates that way.

And yes, Linhof always welcomes constructive suggestions from users of their equipment and some employees at the factory are photographers who also work with photographers for Linhof.


No, I'm saying that a camera that didn't need such a book when used by an expert would represent a design that fulfills the requirements of that expert fully.

But don't miss my point: I'm not advocating a design that requires expertise, I'm advocating a design that rewards expertise. If an expert confuses the controls and therefore requires instruction, then one must wonder who the controls were designed to serve (or if the design expectation is that the user serves the controls).

Of course, Linhofs are models of wonderful design--I'm addressing one feature, and the response to a complaint about the intuitiveness of that one feature.

Rick "who sometimes can't escape thinking like an engineer" Denney

[rdenney]

Rick,

Since the late 70's you are the first to voice that complaint to me and I am not sure that you are a user of a V or Master.

It wasn't me who voiced the complaint, so there is no need to discredit me. It was Frank Petronio, who is a user, in this very thread. I was responding to your reaction. He mentioned a problem, you said, in effect, to read the manual. I'm assuming Frank is enough of an expert to know what he is complaining about. Based on that assumption, the way experts like him use stuff should drive engineering decisions, not be driven by them.

It may be that Frank is out on the tail of the distribution in the way he approaches the camera. If Linhof's engineers have already considered the issue, then there is no problem and you have nothing to fear from my comments. If their response was like yours--read the manual--then maybe my comments are worth considering.

Rick "whose expertise is engineering process, not Linhofs" Denney

[Bob Salomon]

Rick,

I have no idea if Frank read the manual. I don't even know if he received a manual as he bought the camera used. But there are lots of threads all over the internet on how the lever works and he couald always ask us if he was not sure how any part of his camera works.


It wasn't me who voiced the complaint, so there is no need to discredit me. It was Frank Petronio, who is a user, in this very thread. I was responding to your reaction. He mentioned a problem, you said, in effect, to read the manual. I'm assuming Frank is enough of an expert to know what he is complaining about. Based on that assumption, the way experts like him use stuff should drive engineering decisions, not be driven by them.

It may be that Frank is out on the tail of the distribution in the way he approaches the camera. If Linhof's engineers have already considered the issue, then there is no problem and you have nothing to fear from my comments. If their response was like yours--read the manual--then maybe my comments are worth considering.

Rick "whose expertise is engineering process, not Linhofs" Denney

[rdenney]

Rick,

I have no idea if Frank read the manual. I don't even know if he received a manual as he bought the camera used. But there are lots of threads all over the internet on how the lever works and he couald always ask us if he was not sure how any part of his camera works.

And thus we have come full circle.

Rick "with no further comment" Denney

[Patrick Dixon]

Rick,

I have no idea if Frank read the manual. I don't even know if he received a manual as he bought the camera used. But there are lots of threads all over the internet on how the lever works and he couald always ask us if he was not sure how any part of his camera works.

I think Frank knew how to use it - he just found it un-intuitive. And when presented with with a semi-naked lady to photograph, he was apt to strip a gear.

Patrick "who can't imagine who'd want to read the manual in the presence of a naked women" Dixon

[Jfnphotography]

I have a Linhof III and a Chaminoix. The III is nice but the Chaminoix is so much lighter and easyer to use, especialy with wide angle lens, the ground glass is a lot brighter. The Linhof V is better then the III with wide angle but still weighs a ton. The rear movement on the Linhof is also harder to work. I do like the gear movement on the Linhof. And the name Linhof turns a lot of heads.

[Bob Salomon]

And thus we have come full circle.

Rick "with no further comment" Denney

Maybe it would help to explain how the crank works.

On the older versions the end of the crank handle would pull out to go in one direction and push in to reverse direction. End pushed in and the front standard rises as you crank the lever. End pushed in the standard moves down as you crank it.

On later models the end of the crank has a cap with a white dot one side. White dot facing up and the front standard rises as you crank the lever. Cap with white dot rotated and facing down and the standard moves down as you crank it.

These actions are not things that are difficult to figure out without the manual. But perhaps are faster to learn with it.

[Darin Boville]

End pushed in and the front standard rises as you crank the lever. End pushed in the standard moves down as you crank it.

O.K. now *I'm* confused... :)

--darin

[Bob Salomon]

O.K. now *I'm* confused... :)

--darin

Call me and ask away. I will be in the office on Tuesday in the SF Bay area the rest of the week. 800 735-4373.

And now I see why. End pulled out for down, pushed in for up. Sorry about that.

[anchored]

Frankly I see no problem, or for that matter a more intuitive approach to the front crank... easy enough I thought to figure out without a manual. If you crank the lever the wrong way all ya' gotta do is flip the end and it goes in the direction you desire. Well... perhaps small arrows might'a been nice instead of colored dots.....

The hardest parts of using the Linhof (at least it was for me) was trying to figure out how to fold up the beast after use (and at times have to think about it after using the MT for 2-years) and figuring out how to use a 75mm lens on it without including the front platform in the image.

As for the manual... it's really not that much of a help for anything... far too simplistic for such a rather complex device... at least for one learning how to use a camera of its type for the first time.

To answer the original question... in my personal opinion: There is no better camera made of its type. Built like a tank... everything locks up tight... controls not all that hard to figure out even without a manual. I would highly recommend a Linhof (V or Master) to anyone.

[Darin Boville]

Update on my search...

An awful lot of Masters on E-bay, some selling not far north of $1600. The other good one I liked vanished early, all bids canceled.

Here I'm see a IV for $900 + overseas shipping, no viewfinder or grip in that price. Another IV is $1350 with grip but no finder--but with new bellows.

I think I'm still looking :) No particular hurry.

--Darin

[Frank Petronio]

FWIW, I appreciate Bob Salomon's advice and insight on all things Linhof on this forum. I doubt he sees any return from helping some cheapskate like me deal with a 50-year old used camera. It's a testament to Linhof's quality and a bit of a shame that they are their own toughest competitor.

It's not like worrying about the rise lever kept me up at night, I still loved the camera ;-)

As for used prices, just be patient. There are plenty of deaths, divorces, and layoffs coming, so sooner or later your perfect camera at a great price will arrive!

[raizans]

what's the biggest lens that can fold up into a technika?

[Allen in Montreal]

O.K., I'm thinking of selling my Chaminoix and buying a Linhof IV or V........

--Darin

Darin,

I have not read this whole thread, I am just killing some time in an airport,
so forgive if I am repeating what has been said, but...

I had a 1V, traded up for a V, later sold it and a TK45 for an Arca.
Big mistake selling the V. The V is a great camera.
Buy the V, don't sell the Cham, they are two different beasts.

[Bob Salomon]

what's the biggest lens that can fold up into a technika?

150mm on the 001015 "Comfort" lensboard

[seabird]

what's the biggest lens that can fold up into a technika?

I'm not sure what you mean by biggest: physically largest or longest focal length? If the latter, and while I dont know whether its the longest, please note that I can close my Tech IV with a Nikkor-M 200/f8 mounted on a flat panel complete with single front filter and caps - but no cable release. You do, however, have to "reverse mount" the lens/panel combo on the front standard (ie front element of the lens facing the ground glass). While it will fit, I'm not keen on doing it as the front cap is snug against the ground glass (its a better fit without the filter)...

On the other hand, my 135/f5.6 Apo-Sironar-S normally lives inside my Tech IV. Again mounted on a flat panel, single front filter, caps AND cable release all attached :-)

Cheers

[Darin Boville]

O.K, I'm looking at another one. Two questions:

1) How old is it? The serial number is 82485 so clearly it was made in 1962 :)
But is it a IV or a V?

2) It does have the front standard gizmo, which would suggest it is a V, but that gizmo is not working....is there a chance it is NOT stripped? If actually damaged, what sort of repair bill are we talking about? Can the front standard be used without the gizmo?

Thanks!

--Darin

[Frank Petronio]

Yes it is not a design flaw and it rarely is a problem, except that half the Vs you try are missing teeth from all those non-instruction-book-reading photographers.

You might be able to "help" it rise and fall with a little finger pressure. There is a locking knob so it should hold even toothless, it is just less precise and funky.

I don't know for sure, but when I had it done and I think it was ~$200. Very few individual Linhof repairs cost less than $200.

You have to call Martin at Marflex (252) 652-4401. The guy is great, old school, don't even bother emailing. He's in NC and semi-retired so don't call too late.

What Allen said if you can afford to have both... I was playing w a Cham at Eddies and it was a darn nice camera. Complicated and slower to set up though. I'd hate to be a beginner with it but it seems like a great backpacking camera.

[Bob Salomon]

O.K, I'm looking at another one. Two questions:

1) How old is it? The serial number is 82485 so clearly it was made in 1962 :)
But is it a IV or a V?

1964/65 V

2) It does have the front standard gizmo, which would suggest it is a V, but that gizmo is not working....is there a chance it is NOT stripped? If actually damaged, what sort of repair bill are we talking about? Can the front standard be used without the gizmo?

No, it must work to have rise. Linhof service is the only place to ask for costs. 252 652-4401 in the USA.

Thanks!

--Darin

[sgelb]

O.K., I'm thinking of selling my Chaminoix and buying a Linhof IV or V.

I like the Cham--it is great, I think--but not really aimed at my needs. I need portability but not the ultra-light aspect. I don't backpack with it. I'd rather have the ability to keep one lens mounted and don't mind gaining weight to have a metal camera. Wouldn't mind the potential for handheld 4x5, either.

Why Linhof? Because I used to have a Toyo 45AII and I really liked it. I'm told the Technika is sort of the same thing only better. (True?)

I know the Linhofs vary within models and it all gets so confusing all too quickly.

If I'm looking at IV and V models what should I beware of? I'm only interested in clean units so that may avoid a lot of potential problems but what of the plastic knobs I read about somewhere?

Also, any guesstimates what I should pay for a nice IV or V? Are repair prices reasonable should I need it?

Linhof newbie questions, I know.

--Darin

you will not find a more sturdy and rigid camera with a lot of wonderful movements.

[cjbroadbent]

Small considerations from a long-time user.
The IV is more comfortable to use than the V. Stick with a press shuttered* 180 for everything, it lives inside and nothing hangs out so you don't need a bag. You will never use the rangefinder so any old cam will save the cam-fork from damage and you can get the best 180 on the market. The Technika 5x7 is hassle-free, fumble-free photography at it's best.
*(no-fumble portraits)

[Brian K]

I own an MT3000, it is a superbly designed and built camera. That said I do find the little rise selector knob to be less than intuitive, and while I have read the manual, and do not face the distractions of nekkid ladies like Frank does, I use several different camera systems so there can be a period of a year or more in which I never use the Linhof and forget the way the little knob is to be positioned. However I simply make sure to use the rise lever with caution until I see which direction it intends to move.

[Bob Salomon]

I own an MT3000, it is a superbly designed and built camera. That said I do find the little rise selector knob to be less than intuitive, and while I have read the manual, and do not face the distractions of nekkid ladies like Frank does, I use several different camera systems so there can be a period of a year or more in which I never use the Linhof and forget the way the little knob is to be positioned. However I simply make sure to use the rise lever with caution until I see which direction it intends to move.

It should be pointed out that Linhof's crank mechanism has a slip clutch built into it so once the front standard is all the way up or all the way down additional pumping of the crank doesn't do anything.

[Bob Salomon]

I own an MT3000, it is a superbly designed and built camera. That said I do find the little rise selector knob to be less than intuitive, and while I have read the manual, and do not face the distractions of nekkid ladies like Frank does, I use several different camera systems so there can be a period of a year or more in which I never use the Linhof and forget the way the little knob is to be positioned. However I simply make sure to use the rise lever with caution until I see which direction it intends to move.

It should be pointed out that Linhof's crank mechanism has a slip clutch built into it so once the front standard is all the way up or all the way down additional pumping of the crank doesn't do anything. There are also two small screws on the bottom of the front standard that can be tightened to increase the power of the rise mechanism in case very heavy lenses are being used.

[Darin Boville]

Another update in my quest:

Found a V that looked very clean--but had a stripped front standard gear. Upon reflection the seller (wisely--it was nice camera) decided not to sell. Another seller had a IV that had some leather issues and a few scrapes on the back. Not bad enough to bring the price ay down, yet not clean enough to be interesting at a higher price. Sort of "value limbo." I passed on that one....

And as I look price-creep starts to kick in...I'm eyeing the Master model...

--Darin

[Brian Ellis]

Another update in my quest:

Found a V that looked very clean--but had a stripped front standard gear. Upon reflection the seller (wisely--it was nice camera) decided not to sell. Another seller had a IV that had some leather issues and a few scrapes on the back. Not bad enough to bring the price ay down, yet not clean enough to be interesting at a higher price. Sort of "value limbo." I passed on that one....

And as I look price-creep starts to kick in...I'm eyeing the Master model...

--Darin

Good idea I think. Parts and repairs will be easier with the Master, the flap on the top of the rear housing is useful when you want to use front rise with a short lens, and even though the V and the Master look virtually identical (especially when the V has black leatherette as mine did) I think Linhof made quite a few changes inside that you don't see but that presumably are improvements (e.g. the internal mechanism for the back knobs is totally different between the V and the Master even though everything looks the same from the outside). Of course like most things, it all comes down to money - how much you have and how much you don't have.

[Darin Boville]

>>even though the V and the Master look virtually identical (especially when the V has black leatherette as mine did) I think Linhof made quite a few changes inside that you don't see but that presumably are improvements (e.g. the internal mechanism for the back knobs is totally different between the V and the Master even though everything looks the same from the outside).<<

Hey Brian,

Interesting--it isn't exactly a strictly price issue, is a sort of what do I really need issue combined with "how much can I sell if for" if I bail out later on.

Bob--is there a list of what was changed on the Master--the hard to see stuff that Brian is talking about?

--Darin

[Bob Salomon]

>>even though the V and the Master look virtually identical (especially when the V has black leatherette as mine did) I think Linhof made quite a few changes inside that you don't see but that presumably are improvements (e.g. the internal mechanism for the back knobs is totally different between the V and the Master even though everything looks the same from the outside).<<

Hey Brian,

Interesting--it isn't exactly a strictly price issue, is a sort of what do I really need issue combined with "how much can I sell if for" if I bail out later on.

Bob--is there a list of what was changed on the Master--the hard to see stuff that Brian is talking about?

--Darin
No, The changes are the top flap for increased flexibility with wide lenses and then things that moved around (locking knobs for back movements for one) things that were removed (front bed cable release socket), etc. The Technika is perhaps the best example of a camera evolving over time and that includes differences between a IV to a V to a Master and from Master to Master since it has been made since 1976.

[raizans]

The Technika is perhaps the best example of a camera evolving over time and that includes differences between a IV to a V to a Master and from Master to Master since it has been made since 1976.

you could say that again. there are so many variations of the master, i can't keep them straight!

[Darin Boville]

Hmmm. As I've been looking for the right Linhof I couldn't help but notice the Wista SP. Seems nice--maybe perfect?--but I've never seen one in real life. People seem to like them.

Your thoughts? Comparisons? Can you focus a 300mm at all close?

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

Just found this older thread, which answers many of my questions:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=49900&highlight=wista

Additional thoughts are welcome, of course. I think I'm still leaning towards a Linhof.

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

I've wandered all about in my thinking, from the Linhof, to the Wista SP/VX, and to the Toyo field and I'm back again looking for a Linhof. I'm not seeing much in the range of Frank's price guidance....maybe I should go higher?

How easy is the Linhof to use handheld vs. the Polaroid 600 SE? Maybe I'll sell the 600 and add the cash to my Linhof "war chest"...

If know if a Linhof for sale think of me :)

--Darin

[Darin Boville]

So.....I just bought a Linhof. Great condition other than a few problems that were known in advance (and adjusted for in the price).

A few questions to get me rolling.

1) What is the size of the ground glass. Believe it or not one of the first things I did was break the gg. First one I've ever broken in my life. Totally my fault. I want to order one from Steve Hopf but the old one is hard to measure now. Never even got to look through it with a lens on :(

2) As Frank may have guessed, the very bottom teeth on the plastic gear rails for the front rise are stripped. I called Martin at Marflex and left a message and e-mailed, too. Do they fix these with plastic again or do they use brass? Does anyone make a brass part for this?

Beautiful camera. Sill playing with it, trying to figure everything out.

--Darin

[Frank Petronio]

Just pack it up and send to Martin and keep your credit card paid off ;-) then you know it is right.

[venchka]

I have a Beater with a capital "B" Technika V. No grip. No finder. No cams. No leaks. All the movements work. The rear hood is toast. I like it! A lot.
Good luck.