Justify the acquiring of a new Linhof Technika?

[Michael_4514]

One can spend more on a diamond than on a complete Technika outfit, and what can they create with a diamond? When someone can afford luxury, it might as well be a decent camera. 66 years ago my first new Leica cost over a month's salary, but it was worth it to me then. Now I do much better with well-used cheaper equipment.

I did spend more on a diamond, but a woman came with it.

[DG 3313]

I don't have a boat, motor cycle or girl friend....my wife said, "you can have any camera you want".........

[Bertha DeCool]

I owned a Toyota Land Cruiser FJ40 in the mid-'70s. Poor grade steel meant most have returned to the elements from whence they came but there are survivors and restorations out there for $25K+.
I could never justify buying one but, if I could afford that for a part-time vehicle, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
You want it, you can afford it? No need to justify to anyone.
Except maybe your spouse...

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

A life without a Technika is possible, but meaningless. (Loriot)

[giganova]

You see the exact same discussions on the rangefinder forum whether it makes sense to buy a new Leica M-A for $5,200 when Ebay is full of used film M bodies for a fraction of the price. For some it makes sense, for others it doesn't. There is no right or wrong answer.

$10k buys you a lot of sheet film. I'd rather invest $10k in travel to exotic places to take pictures.

[Andy F]

The cost of the Linhof is absurd and I really think they should be ashamed of themselves for charging so much. Still, it is an amazing piece of equipment and life is short. Also, if you think about it how much money does a person spend over the years on crappy technology that will not last. If over ten years you have to buy 4 cell phones and 2 computers and maybe 2 ipads then your also spending a ton of money. Still they do cost a lot.

[Daniel Casper Lohenstein]

The cost of the Linhof is absurd and I really think they should be ashamed of themselves for charging so much. Still, it is an amazing piece of equipment and life is short. Also, if you think about it how much money does a person spend over the years on crappy technology that will not last. If over ten years you have to buy 4 cell phones and 2 computers and maybe 2 ipads then your also spending a ton of money. Still they do cost a lot.

Hello,

many thanks to the OP also from my side. I think it's quite useful that a decision process can be followed in this thread. There are a few more things that the interested reader might consider.

1. A Technika from Germany will perhaps be inherited in the third or fourth generation. A new Linhof is a statement, too. They don't produce in Shenzen, but in Munich where people don't stay without complete health insurance or starve to death - even if they become unemployed. They work 51% of the year for taxes, social and health insurance etc., 37,5 hours a week. That's "Gemeinsinn", community spirit, not Chinese-style "socialism" aka "Manchester capitalism". Leitz outsourced to Portugal or Canada, Rollei to Singapore, others to China .... They should not be "ashamed", not Linhof in Munich. IMHO the current new price of a technical camera is the normal price for a product of this quality and functional range in the given production conditions. Everything else is dumping, wage dumping, material dumping, social dumping and so on.

2. We're not real puritans: we try out some things and in the end we stick to one thing and the rest has to go. Truth is not something that is immovably fixed from the beginning. It arises only little by little in reflection and action, in exchange with others and in comparison. The OP has tried out a Technika. Mee too. I like to take the Linhof for hiking in Swiss Alps, in the south of France, in Italy. I never have to have the feeling that something goes wrong with the camera. It just fits, nothing wobbles, and you can trust it. From 75 to 360. The one kilogram more I accept for it.

3. Many wooden field cameras do not allow to transport the lens inside the camera. You have to remove the lens, and that means: it becomes bulky. I can store a Apo-Ronar 300 w. Copal 1 shutter inside the camera, as well as a Super-Angulon 8/75. And dust gets in the interior of the wooden field camera. In addition, the Technika remains quite compact on the outside, whereas a wooden field camera can have numerous wheels and levers that stick out. There is also the danger that sharp objects in a backpack, e.g. the lens board of the externally mounted lens, could prick the bellows. I think a Technika with a normal lens can be more compact and perhaps lighter than a wooden field camera with a dark cloth, a wrapping cloth and two separate casings for the camera and the lens.

Kind regards

[Tin Can]

My all metal VGC Prewar Linhof Standard 5X7 is far lighter than postwar

I also have VGC Linhof Kardan Color 8x10"

Both will never be sold by me

I doubt I buy any new camera again

[Kiwi7475]

Arguing in favor or against is futile.

It is definitely a luxury item, made for the elite bourgeoisie or the high end professional, as many other consumption items (luxury cars, etc.). Whether it can be a heirloom piece or not is just one more bourgeoisie consideration, most people will be glad if they leave this world not passing on debt to their descendants.

I don't know that it costs $10k to design and manufacture this thing (including all the health insurance and good working conditions/benefits), and definitely I don't know that it is worth $10k. Both of which are different things.

We all go through a personal evaluation process in considering an expensive purchase for something that will not bring us money back (ie. not a tool that generates income). Can I afford it? Will it give me that something more that a lesser expensive equivalent will not? What am I giving up in purchasing it? etc. etc.

This is a most personal decision, no one can take OP's spot on this. It will be worthwhile for some, outrageous to even consider for others, and so on.

For me, I can buy something that will do what I need for a heck of a lot less, and use the reminder of my hard earned dollars for many other things, photography related and not. So the decision is trivial.

[Bob Salomon]

Arguing in favor or against is futile.

It is definitely a luxury item, made for the elite bourgeoisie or the high end professional, as many other consumption items (luxury cars, etc.). Whether it can be a heirloom piece or not is just one more bourgeoisie consideration, most people will be glad if they leave this world not passing on debt to their descendants.

I don't know that it costs $10k to design and manufacture this thing (including all the health insurance and good working conditions/benefits), and definitely I don't know that it is worth $10k. Both of which are different things.

We all go through a personal evaluation process in considering an expensive purchase for something that will not bring us money back (ie. not a tool that generates income). Can I afford it? Will it give me that something more that a lesser expensive equivalent will not? What am I giving up in purchasing it? etc. etc.

This is a most personal decision, no one can take OP's spot on this. It will be worthwhile for some, outrageous to even consider for others, and so on.

For me, I can buy something that will do what I need for a heck of a lot less, and use the reminder of my hard earned dollars for many other things, photography related and not. So the decision is trivial.

But you probably not buy something for a heck of a lot less then a good, used Super Technika IV. Maybe for not much less then a 50 year old Master Technika. And both would outlast that heck of a lot cheaper camera or have the capability of the used camera.
The Master Technika was introduced in Sept. of 73. That’s a long run for one camera!