PDA

View Full Version : What to do about a really ugly Linhof Technika...



Noah A
28-Sep-2011, 06:06
So I found a ridiculously low price on a beater Linhof Technika IV. The camera works perfectly, all of the movements are smooth and lock down, the thing is as rigid as my newer MT2000, even the bubble level still has fluid and seems accurate.

It included a grip, and frankly what I paid for it is less than what used grips go for on Ebay.

The leather was shot, so I removed it and am working to remove the glue so I can get new leather from cameraleather.

The main problem with the camera is that the chrome on the body is peeling. In some cases the metal below is exposed and has started to corrode slightly (or something, there are dark spots showing through the chrome). Any ideas on how to deal with this?

I've considered the following options.

1. Leave it alone. According to Bob S. it's from around 1958. I'm sure it has more life left in it, and it will scare away thieves.

2. Try to polish up what chrome is left and (somehow) remove the dark spots, maybe give it a clear coat or something to preserve the metal.

3. Take it to a shop and have it either re-chromed or powder-coated. It would cost a bit, but in that case it could be a really beautiful camera and it would still have cost me far less than a mint Tech IV would have.

I got it to use as a backup and/or a camera to use in rough conditions when I don't want to worry about my MT2000. For travel I can throw it and a lens in my checked bags and use it as a backup in case my main kit gets ripped off. For home I can leave it in the trunk of my car and not worry. However, in my brief time playing around with it, I think I prefer the rise knob to the newer ratchet system. and I could actually see using this one as my main camera, at least for everyday stuff.

Any thoughts/ideas/suggestions?

Richard Wasserman
28-Sep-2011, 06:26
I don't know what kind of metal was used, are they cast (molded) or solid? If they are cast from your description it sounds as if they are white metal which I think will be problematic to re-plate in chrome. Powder coating could work well, if the chrome is removed first, but are you up to disassembling the camera and then putting it back together without any leftover bits? If you leave it alone, and ugly, nobody will want to steal it, but will it's looks bother you?

Bob Salomon
28-Sep-2011, 06:27
Get it painted at a shop. You can't replace that missing chrome without removing all of it and recoating it. And that would require a complete disassembly and re-assembly.

Ivan J. Eberle
28-Sep-2011, 06:41
It sounds like the perfect beater camera for bad weather and bad neighborhoods just like it is, provided it's light tight and everything works.

A humble camera can be a good check-and-balance that it's the photographer and not the camera doing the photographing-- an antidote to gear acquisition syndrome.

Should you try to restore/rechrome it you may have regrets taking it apart if a part breaks or a thread strips in the process (you say it's already corroding?) and there's no ready replacement for a Tech IV... or the part costs more than you've got into it or more than you could get back out of it repaired.

Frank Petronio
28-Sep-2011, 06:42
Carefully dip the side panels, one at a time, in PlastiDip - the stuff you use to fix bellows and create handles for metal pliers, etc. You could have a rubber coated Technika - the ultimate off-road machine!

Bill_1856
28-Sep-2011, 06:42
Leave it alone or sell it on ebay. Technikas don't need a backup body.

E. von Hoegh
28-Sep-2011, 06:51
They were cast of some sort of alloy, I think it has a fair amount of zinc in it. Peeling chrome is fairly common, my otherwise near-mint IV has it in 2 or 3 spots. I painted over the spots with a couple coats Humbrol silver model paint about 1987; it stopped the peeling and the paint is still there.

Peter De Smidt
28-Sep-2011, 07:00
I'd shoot with it as-is. Why does it matter what it looks like?

E. von Hoegh
28-Sep-2011, 07:05
I'd shoot with it as-is. Why does it matter what it looks like?

There's that, as well.:)

You could have a t-shirt made that says "My other camera is a Linhof, too".

Frank Petronio
28-Sep-2011, 07:27
Sand it down, spray a matte clear lacquer or nail polish in spots.

Noah A
28-Sep-2011, 08:00
As much as I like the Plasti-Dip idea, I'll probably leave it mostly as-is.

Wilhelm: I don't need a backup because I expect mechanical problems, I need one in case of theft when I'm on the road. And a beater camera to leave in the trunk and/or take out in the rain, in a sandstorm or in a rough neighborhood (though most of my work happens in what many people would call rough neighborhoods).

Honestly the appearance mattered a bit or I wouldn't have posted, but I can and should get over it. I was also concerned about the situation getting worse and leading to more corrosion. I think E. von Hoegh and Frank's suggestions--to spot-paint with model paint or lacquer should prevent additional corrosion and that's probably my best bet.

Jim Jones
28-Sep-2011, 08:16
Noah, you're not supposed to look at any Technika, you're supposed to look through it, and with a supply of film at hand.

Halford
28-Sep-2011, 08:25
Take photographs with it :)

Mark Woods
28-Sep-2011, 10:45
Frank, I like your rubber dip post. Sweet.

mortensen
28-Sep-2011, 15:34
Frank, your suggestions are spot on the german weapon feel of Linhof, haha. GREAT! I'm still jealous on your stripped down Tech IV. To me, it's the best looking Tech I've seen, hands down.

Noah, it fun following your camera 'route'... from Wista to Technikardan, falling in love with the MT2000 and now realizing, that the cheapest Tech IV beater is the best.

Noah A
28-Sep-2011, 18:25
Lars, my MT2000 is still my favorite ;).

It has been a process though. The Wista was just a tiny bit limiting, the TK is great but a bit slower to set up, and when I shoot with it I'm always swapping bellows, and it's bigger. And the MT2000 is a great compromise since I've realized that having a small kit that doesn't slow me down after walking around the city for ten hours is important.

I picked up the IV for a really good price, but I'm afraid it has to go back. I bought it from a friend who had seller's remorse. Of course I have every right to keep it, but since it was a friend of a friend I don't want to be a jerk. Frankly I don't have time right now for a project camera anyway.

So back it goes. For now I'm sticking to my MT/TK combo and hopefully I won't need that backup...

cyrus
28-Sep-2011, 18:42
Dude, a Linhof is a Linhof - who cares what it looks like?

TheDeardorffGuy
28-Sep-2011, 19:11
If the metal body is diecast out of Zamac (google it) you can't remove the chrome any way. Acid dip will eat the casting and reverse electo plating will remove the casting too. Scrape the chrome away where the coorosion is and bead blast it clean. An auto parts business with a machineshop can do this. Use a special blast tape to mask the good chrome. This is assuming you have completely disassembled it. I think I'd powdercoat it silver. I'm doing a 1946 Chrysler and have powdercoated everythinf below the body. Frame brakes oilpan tranny housing etc. Silver or black. The silver is nice. But prep is 100percent of the final product. skimp and it shows. You can fill the pitting with body glazing prior to powdercoating. I did a Tech a few years ago. I covered it with burled mahogany veneer. I used Camera Leather as templates and 3M peel and stick as the adhesive. Looked really neat.

Ari
28-Sep-2011, 19:36
I had a III that I went to some trouble putting back together.

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=74702&highlight=linhof

All in all it took a few hours and one overnighter to let the Pliobond set, but if your bellows are fine, you might have only 3-4 hours' work to do on it.

stillphotog
29-Sep-2011, 12:50
Maybe take a little CLR on a q-tip and clean the corroded areas as best you can, then use some Renaissance wax over those spots (and the rest of the chrome for that matter) to seal it up against further corrosion. Then use the heck out of it.

Or go crazy and strip it down / powdercoat the whole thing and hope it all goes back together correctly and to the same tolerances.

Noah A
29-Sep-2011, 16:41
Thanks for all of the tips. As I stated above, I returned the camera (not because of its condition, the seller wanted it back and it seemed like the right thing to do).

I do plan to find another beater Tech IV though...

mortensen
29-Sep-2011, 23:03
... if you happen to stumble upon two at a really good price, give me a call :)

Kuzano
29-Sep-2011, 23:33
Over the years, I've shot with some near "mint" LF cameras, and also some real crappers. I shot for a while with a Busch D that I stripped the covering from and drilled hundreds of holes in the body and the front standard to take 2 pounds off the weight. Talk about UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGLY!!!.

I learned one thing. The appearance of the camera never changed the images I created. They came out as I composed and exposed them. When you shoot with a "crapper" you are freed from one more of the downsides of photography.... Caring what happens to the camera.

Please, somebody steal my current POS... A pared down and modified Graflex Super Graphic that weighs in at half it's original weight. Oh yes, and don't let me get near an Ebony or a Gandolfi. .... Please. Watching me drill those lightening holes won't be a pretty sight.

Ari
30-Sep-2011, 18:30
Over the years, I've shot with some near "mint" LF cameras, and also some real crappers. I shot for a while with a Busch D that I stripped the covering from and drilled hundreds of holes in the body and the front standard to take 2 pounds off the weight. Talk about UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGLY!!!.

I learned one thing. The appearance of the camera never changed the images I created. They came out as I composed and exposed them. When you shoot with a "crapper" you are freed from one more of the downsides of photography.... Caring what happens to the camera.

Please, somebody steal my current POS... A pared down and modified Graflex Super Graphic that weighs in at half it's original weight. Oh yes, and don't let me get near an Ebony or a Gandolfi. .... Please. Watching me drill those lightening holes won't be a pretty sight.

Lightening holes?
I was told by a very slick camera salesman that they are speed holes; they make the camera shoot faster :)

Darin Boville
30-Sep-2011, 18:45
You know, if someone out there had a business to drill holes in Linhofs (like the Canham metal field, etc) to lighten them without weakening them, I would be the first customer in line....

--Darin

Frank Petronio
30-Sep-2011, 19:54
And then I could sell you a $199.95 hi-tech dust barrier to line your new ultra-light camera with.

(Don't tell him it was made from a Hefty bag and Scotch tape.)

Darin Boville
30-Sep-2011, 23:02
And then I could sell you a $199.95 hi-tech dust barrier to line your new ultra-light camera with.

(Don't tell him it was made from a Hefty bag and Scotch tape.)

Some sort of membrane would be o.k.!

--Darin

Paul Fitzgerald
1-Oct-2011, 08:42
You could also find a paint and body shop that handles 'SpectraChrome' . If they do bike parts they could also do camera parts. The 'chrome' is silver nitrate covered with clear or tinted urethane, tough enough for wheels, should work for camera parts. The prep work is 99% of the job, ANY defect will show through. :eek:
Will not be cheap :D

SpectraChrome (http://www.sprayonchrome.com/index2.html)

Kuzano
1-Oct-2011, 20:06
You know, if someone out there had a business to drill holes in Linhofs (like the Canham metal field, etc) to lighten them without weakening them, I would be the first customer in line....

--Darin

Not a problem. The way to accomplish the task is to give the camera to either an aeronautical engineer, or a good A&P mechanic (Airframe and Powerplant mechanic in the aviation field). I can assure you that a large portion of the metal that is part of a Canham Metal Field has nothing to do with ruggedness or rigidity, but rather because taking the time to build the same camera two pounds lighter is simple lack of creativity and craftsmanship. The cameras would truly be worth the prices asked for them, IF they were actually built to meet the challenges of rigidity AND light weight.

The Busch that I lightened, along with subsequent Graflex Supers suffered no less rigidity than when I started. Now, if you want to send me your Canham, or one of the other camera's I mentioned, I will show you how it's done.

Ivan J. Eberle
2-Oct-2011, 13:04
Less mass=less inertia=more shutter induced vibration.

Darin Boville
2-Oct-2011, 13:10
less mass=less weight=happier photographer.

It would still be far heavier than any of the wooden cameras. :)

--Darin