How does Linhof manage to stay in business?

[neil poulsen]

I know that Linhof makes, and has made, some great equipment. But I've also seen some strange designs from them.

For example, I have a large Linhof ball head where the 1/4" socket that receives the tripod screw has been threaded into a about a 1" round, 1/8" thick plug that fits into a similarly sized hole on the bottom of the head. There's nothing but friction that keeps this plug fitted inside the hole, no threads, nothing to ensure that it can't just POP OUT with the camera mounted on the head. And guess what, one day it just POPPED OUT, and both the camera and the head fell off the tripod. It was an 8x10 Burke and James.

When I saw the design of this Linhof head, I couldn't believe it. The head was designed for, and could securely hold large cameras. But, everything depended on this little plug remaining inside the hole on the underside of the head.

Here's another example. I have a large, heavy duty Linhof tripod that has about a 2" or larger diameter column with a geared crank. Heavy, but it's a terrific tripod for large cameras. There's a rod with a detachable screw arrangement that fits up through the column and out through the hole on the tripod plate on which the head rests. The opposite end of the rod has a handle on it that extends out of the bottom of the column. By turning the handle at the bottom of the column, one can tighten the head to the tripod plate at the top of the column. So, this is all just fine, until one needs to remove the head from the tripod. Sure enough, turning the handle in reverse direction, the detachable screw arrangement that secures the head to the plate detaches and the rod comes apart inside the column. At this point, it can't be reattached without further tightening the head to the plate. The only way to remove the head is by disassembling the tripod.

Again, this was all BY DESIGN! It was a real head scratcher. A $3 fix solved the problem. I bought a long, threaded rod, a washer, and a bolt at the hardware store.

Here's another one. Why is it that one needs to pay SO MUCH MORE for a Master Technika, just to get that little flap at the top of the camera that enables one to obtain rise with wide angle lenses? I guess it was by design.

And of course, there's the "M" Linhof medium format view camera whose front and rear standards had no rise or fall. Are you kidding? (They added it on a subsequent model.)

So, I don't mean to unnecessarily rap what can be some really excellent equipment made by Linhof. But given my experiences, I'd be very cautious about purchasing Linhof equipment, without careful examination of its design. (Nor, without a flexible return policy.)

[Bob Salomon]

I know that Linhof makes, and has made, some great equipment. But I've also seen some strange designs from them.

For example, I have a large Linhof ball head where the 1/4" socket that receives the tripod screw has been threaded into a about a 1" round, 1/8" thick plug that fits into a similarly sized hole on the bottom of the head. There's nothing but friction that keeps this plug fitted inside the hole, no threads, nothing to ensure that it can't just POP OUT with the camera mounted on the head. And guess what, one day it just POPPED OUT, and both the camera and the head fell off the tripod. It was an 8x10 Burke and James.

When I saw the design of this Linhof head, I couldn't believe it. The head was designed for, and could securely hold large cameras. But, everything depended on this little plug remaining inside the hole on the underside of the head.

Here's another example. I have a large, heavy duty Linhof tripod that has about a 2" or larger diameter column with a geared crank. Heavy, but it's a terrific tripod for large cameras. There's a rod with a detachable screw arrangement that fits up through the column and out through the hole on the tripod plate on which the head rests. The opposite end of the rod has a handle on it that extends out of the bottom of the column. By turning the handle at the bottom of the column, one can tighten the head to the tripod plate at the top of the column. So, this is all just fine, until one needs to remove the head from the tripod. Sure enough, turning the handle in reverse direction, the detachable screw arrangement that secures the head to the plate detaches and the rod comes apart inside the column. At this point, it can't be reattached without further tightening the head to the plate. The only way to remove the head is by disassembling the tripod.

Again, this was all BY DESIGN! It was a real head scratcher. A $3 fix solved the problem. I bought a long, threaded rod, a washer, and a bolt at the hardware store.

Here's another one. Why is it that one needs to pay SO MUCH MORE for a Master Technika, just to get that little flap at the top of the camera that enables one to obtain rise with wide angle lenses? I guess it was by design.

And of course, there's the first "M" Linhof medium format view camera whose front and rear standards had no rise or fall. Are you kidding? (They added it on a subsequent model.)

So, I don't mean to unnecessarily rap what can be some really excellent equipment made by Linhof. But given my experiences, I'd be very cautious about purchasing Linhof equipment, without careful examination of its design. (Nor, without a flexible return policy.)

Neil,

You are a bit unspecific.

The Linhof ball heads made for the past 40 odd years, at least and especially the ones made since the mid 80's - the current ones, use on the Universal Ball 1, Profi 2 and Profi 3 a reversible dual thread top plate in either 46 or 77mm diameter. These have a ⅜" threaded bolt that goes through and is anchored in the top plate with pins. One side is ⅜" and the oter side ¼-20". On the bottom they have a ⅜" threaded female hole and come with a ¼-20 reducing bushing. I can't figure out exactly what head you have from your description. Can you send me a picture of it?
Simalrly you seem to be describing the 003323 Heavy Duty Pro Tripod and the Large Geared Center Column. But this tripod and column have a 90mm flat disk with a ⅜" threaded bolt embedded in it that you screw the head onto. This 90mm diameter plate is held in place with a strong clamp that has a short handle that is adjustable for best angle. If you prefer, rather then using the flat top plate you could get a Linhof head with a 90mm base like the 003650 Profi 3 which would drop directly into the 90mm hole and be held tightly in place with the clamp. One of the older heads for this tripod was the Large Pan/Tilt Head from Linhof which had a pair of slotted rods that the top of the head rode in when it was tilted up to 90°. The top of this head also had a hole and clamp arrangement that Linhof Monorail camera clamps for the B, original Super Color and some other models fit directly into and clamped tightly. Again a picture would help to figure out exactly what you are describing.

The Master replaced the V in 1976 and the big improvement was the flap on the top of the body housing. Back when the V was replaced the difference in price between a V and a Master was not very much. But that was almost 40 years ago and the cost of something back then in today's dollars has changed quite a bit! While it is another 20 years but when I was 15 the Leica M came out and it retailed for $350.00 with a lens (so did the Exacta with a Biotar). Have you checked the price of the current Leica M body only? How about a gallon of gas? or a loaf of bread? or a really good rib eye steak?

The current Master, adjusted for inflation, isn't that much more when you factor in the increase in wages, insurance, utilities, salaries, health care, rent, etc in Germany vs back then.

All of the Linhof distributors questioned the lack of some movements on the original M679 (the current model, the M679cs does have them). The factory's explanation when the M679 was introduced to us was that the people it was aimed at were not primarily photographers and the factory wanted to make the operation as easy to learn as possible so they limited the number of movements preferring to let it operate by indirect displacements rather then by direct displacements or by a combination of direct and indirect displacements. When they introduced the M679cc a couple of years later some of the direct displacements were added and with the M679cs came all of them plus the geared leveling head. In other words, they listened to the feedback from users, prospective users, dealers and distributors and changed the camera as it evolved. In fact the original M679 could be pretty much upgraded into the M679cc. However the cs is so much different that the upgrade path ended with the cc.

As for careful examination of its design that would be also true for any other capital purchase. As well as questioning owners of what you are considering as to how the product holds up and performs over time. Do the controls become sloppier? Do the locks loosen up too much? How often is cleaning and re-lubrication necessary? Do you need to do it more often with outdoor use?, etc.

In short, nothing is perfect! Especially my 2013 MB with 20K miles that just had its B1 service and two days later would not start!

[StoneNYC]

The original Technika was introduced in 1936 and interchangeable bellows were not a consideration as the tapered bellows design allowed the use of extreme wide to long lenses, with lots of movements, with that bellows. So there was no need to interchange bellows. It is a function of the design that the bellows does not need to be interchanged even still today with the latest models, the Master Technika Classic and the Master Technika 3000. With the Master Technika 3000 the bellows accommodates lenses from 35mm to 400mm (on the proper boards, of course). On the Master Technika Classic the camera handles the same range of lenses but the 35 to 65mm lenses each has to be mounted on its own special board with its own focusing helical on each board that is specific to the lens' focal length. On the 2000 and the 3000 the extreme wide angle focusing system is built into the camera body.

I can not think of any other 45 view camera that is capable, with the regular bellows, to accommodate this range of focal lengths other then the Technika and still allow all movements!. And this range is not limited to the Master Technika Classic. The same lens boards with helical mounts for the 35 to 65mm lenses also fit and work, with movements, on the V and IV models as well!

For Noah,

The difference in the 2000 and the 3000 are mainly two things:

1: On the 3000 the focusing for the internal extreme wide angle focusing rails has been moved from the lever in front of the front standard to a knob on the bottom right front corner of the body so you don't have to worry about blocking part of the image with your hand while focusing the camera.

2: The front bed has an extra setting so it drops 90° straight down to eliminate any possibility of including part of the bed when shooting with the back in portrait orientation with a 75 or wider lens. This extra drop position can be added to some older models, like the 2000, by the Linhof Service Centers.

Thank you, VERY good movement, although not a technical camera per-se, the Chamonix 45n-2 has a universal bellows design that goes from 45mm-395mm which is also generous, I do believe the linhof has has more rear movements though? Different animals but you mentioned you couldn't think of another 4x5 system that could accommodate so much, so wanted to mention it.

I know you're a rep so you have to tout your product (and it's a good one) just wanted to share the details of perhaps a close second, as I believe longer bellows more valuable than shorter, the linhof "wins" by 5mm

Thanks for the history and details, this certainly is why linhof has stayed strong, great design.

[Bob Salomon]

Thank you, VERY good movement, although not a technical camera per-se, the Chamonix 45n-2 has a universal bellows design that goes from 45mm-395mm which is also generous, I do believe the linhof has has more rear movements though? Different animals but you mentioned you couldn't think of another 4x5 system that could accommodate so much, so wanted to mention it.

I know you're a rep so you have to tout your product (and it's a good one) just wanted to share the details of perhaps a close second, as I believe longer bellows more valuable than shorter, the linhof "wins" by 5mm

Thanks for the history and details, this certainly is why linhof has stayed strong, great design.

Stone,

Thanks, but one thing you need to remember. The Linhof Master Technika Classic, the current model, has been on the market and used under professional conditions since 1976. And it replaced the pretty similar Super Technika V which replaced the Super Technika IV which replaced the III that has been in use since 1946! That is a long time! Close to 70 years!

How long has the Chamonix been available at all? 10 years, maybe 15? Wait till it has the track record of just the Master and then compare them.

[StoneNYC]

Stone,

Thanks, but one thing you need to remember. The Linhof Master Technika Classic, the current model, has been on the market and used under professional conditions since 1976. And it replaced the pretty similar Super Technika V which replaced the Super Technika IV which replaced the III that has been in use since 1946! That is a long time! Close to 70 years!

How long has the Chamonix been available at all? 10 years, maybe 15? Wait till it has the track record of just the Master and then compare them.

Oh geeze, I wouldn't want to do that, the Chamonix might win... :whistling:

Seriously I'm kidding, they are all used for different things, the Chamonix is still an excellent camera, so is any Linhof.

Just because something is new doesn't mean it is of poor quality or of poor design, nor does something that is old mean that it is no longer any good compared to what is newer.

They are also apples and oranges.

Cheers.

[Jeff Dexheimer]

How long has the Chamonix been available at all? 10 years, maybe 15? Wait till it has the track record of just the Master and then compare them.

Linhof Master Technika Classic = $9411.99 (B&H)

Chamonix F1 = $1110 after shipping

Is the track record worth $8301.99. or an 848% higher price?

[Bill_1856]

Linhof Master Technika Classic = $9411.99 (B&H)

Chamonix F1 = $1110 after shipping

Is the track record worth $8301.99. or an 848% higher price?

Don't begrudge it. It helps support Bob's Mercedes-Benz Habit.

[StoneNYC]

Linhof Master Technika Classic = $9411.99 (B&H)

Chamonix F1 = $1110 after shipping

Is the track record worth $8301.99. or an 848% higher price?

Wow! I didn't know they were that expensive! Well I guess that answers the question of how they are still in business, they only need to sell one camera a year to cover operating costs...

[Bill_1856]

Somebody who knows how to do that sort of thing should check and see how many employees they have.

[Bill McMannis]

Regarding Linhof - and they do make some tremendous photographic equipment - nearly every Technikardan 45S that I've seen for sale has said the bellows has pinholes, or that the bellows needs to be replaced or has been replaced. The odd thing is that the cameras themselves do not seem to be that old, so it makes me wonder if selling $800 replacement bellows is a cost recovery strategy for Linhof, especially since I've seen much older cameras with perfectly fine bellows.

My TK 45S is over a decade old and the original bellows remains intact.