Which Linhof for 6x9

[Renato Tonelli]

I am thinking of a Linhof for 6x9 and all the auctions for the non-4x5 Linhofs are listed as Linhof 2x3. My question is: is it adaptable to 6x9 with a roll film holder? Thanks for the advice.

[David A. Goldfarb]

The Linhof "2x3" cameras can shoot 2.25x3.25" sheet film and 56x72mm rollfilm typically, and if you can find a 6x6 or 6x4.5 back, you can shoot those formats as well. I have a Tech V 23b, and I don't know that there is a 6x9cm rollfilm back for it, but I do have a 6x9cm Super-Rollex back that works on the 4x5" cameras.

Linhof 4x5" cameras can use any Graflok-type rollfilm back as well as backs that fit under the groundglass.

Linhof 2x3" cameras can only use Linhof backs designed for the camera.

[JG Motamedi]

There were 6x9 Rollex backs made for the 2x3 linhof, I had one many years ago. I think that a Super-Rollex back was made. In any case, I can't recommend using a plain "Rollex" back, they have too many irreparable problems with overlapping frames. The Super-Rollex has a much better mechanism.

[bdial]

Like JG, I had a Linhof 2x3 years ago with a 6x9 rollfilm back. I have no idea now if it was a plain Rollex or Super-Rollex, but never had problems. Though it was 20+ years newer that it would be now.
So, the answer is "yes", it can accept a 6x9 roll back. I'd aim for one that includes the back though, since getting stuff like that ala carte can get expensive. The little Technikas are nice cameras, and I fairly often regret that I don't have it still.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Rollex backs have a film advance knob and the Super-Rollex backs have a lever advance.

The problem with the Rollex back is that the film advance is geared to turn the takeup spool by a fixed amount each frame, while the Super-Rollex back actually measures the length of film that passes over the roller. When the Rollex back was made, the film or the paper backing was often thicker than modern films and backings, so some modern films don't advance far enough and frames will overlap. Super-Rollex backs don't have this problem. If you get stuck with a Rollex back, you can try things like starting the film past the normal start point to see if you can manage, but better to avoid them if possible.

By the way, if you get one of these and want new lenses cammed, it can only be done for the later models like the Tech 70, Super-Tech V 23 and Super-Tech V 23b, and plan for a long wait. Maybe it was just bad timing, but my Super-Tech V 23b has been at Marflex since April awaiting a blank cam from Germany so that Martin can cam my lenses for it.

If you get one of the older models, try to find a package with three cammed lenses that you like.

[Roger Hicks]

Many formats are nominal: '6x9 cm' is typically 56x84mm at most, and '2x3' is in the same camp as '3x4' and '6x8', a cavalier disregard for the quarter-inch and half-inch fractions that tell the rest of the story.

External dimensions of the cut-film holders for 2-1/4 x 3-1/4 inch, 2-1/2 x 3-1/2 inch and 6.5x9cm are identical: only the internal dimensions vary. Personally, having tried it, I see little attraction in piddling about with small bits of cut film: I'd go for roll-film every time.

Tech IV and later 'baby' Linhofs have an 'easy-on, easy-off' back with a single movement: earlier models have four wildly inconvenient fingernail-breaking slides. Both accept the same Linhof-unique rotating fitting.

As already noted, the most common roll film back is 10-on-120, 56x72mm, which enlarged 3x is whole-plate (and can pass for a contact print). Yes, 6x9cm backs (8-on, 56x84mm) are available -- indeed, they are still available new, I believe -- but they are rarer and more expensive on the used market. My old (60s/70s) Super Rollex 6x7s wind on with a single movement: my wife's late 90s version, new, Alpa-modified, requires multiple strokes of the lever. Like everyone else, I'd recommend Super Rollexes over plain knob-wind Rollexes.

You can often (though not always) have old cams peened and re-cut: Bill Orford (www.photographicrepairs.co.uk) has done this for me more than once.