DAYI 6x17 120 film holder vs shen hao 617 film holder , for 4x5 camera

[Man from moon]

dears

i am planning to get one of this two film holder for my toyo 45a LF camera

i tried to find something to help me choosing of this two holders , but i cant

the DAYI can take 6x14 but Shen hao just 6x17 or 6x12

also the ground glass hood is different , Shen hao has bellows and DAYI has just regular folded hood

but , there is huge price different , Shen hao = 810$ , DAYI =650$

any advice please ?

thanks in advance guys

 

[wy2l]

I'm interested in an answer to this question... can anyone help (please)?

 

[xya]

I have had the shen hao, it worked nicely and I can't say anything about the dayi, haven't seen it yet. nevertheless I'm back to 9x12. prints from 6x17 haven't convinced me, on the wall 6x12 seems to me a natural panoramic format, wheras a 6x17 is a strip. that's taste for sure. I sold the 6x17 and got myself a nice linhof vario, which also does 6x12. what a differene in handling! no red windows, just set your format and advance via lever. I'm very happy with that one.

 

[Bob S]

Linhof

I have had the shen hao, it worked nicely and I can't say anything about the dayi, haven't seen it yet. nevertheless I'm back to 9x12. prints from 6x17 haven't convinced me, on the wall 6x12 seems to me a natural panoramic format, wheras a 6x17 is a strip. that's taste for sure. I sold the 6x17 and got myself a nice linhof vario, which also does 6x12. what a differene in handling! no red windows, just set your format and advance via lever. I'm very happy with that one.

Linhof didn’t make a vario roll back.

 

[darekdp]

That is Sinar roll back. Sinar Vario and Sinar Zoom. From 6x4,5 to 6x12.

 

[xya]

That is Sinar roll back. Sinar Vario and Sinar Zoom. From 6x4,5 to 6x12.

that's true, my fault. it's the zoom model I have. I used it on my linhof 4x5 and I now use it on a cambo wide.

 

[Man from moon]

Thanks guys for the information

We need some one who used DAYI please

 

[Jesper]

I have a Dayi back. It seemed like a good idea when I got it since I already had a 4x5 that it would fit and a bunch of lenses. I have taken some great pictures with it but it is a bit cumbersome to work with. First of all you need to carry not only the 4x5 but also one viewing back and one film back (this is not just the Dayi), secondly you have to swap backs when you are ready to take the picture and not only slide in a cassette. You are also restricted by the fact that you are trying to get a 17cm wide image through a 12,5cm hole which means that the film will have to be moved back a little which means that you cannot use short focal lengths (on the Dayi 90mm works but not 75mm at infinity) and at the other end 150mm works but with 165mm you start losing the edges (tele lenses can be used).

The build quality can best be described as sturdy and it is fairly easy to work with. It is not a wonder of precision but it does the job without errors. The ground glass is ok. There is a kind of bellows extension with the viewing screen that doesn't really do a lot but it is a good place to fasten a dark cloth. To sum it up, the Dayi is a bit heavy, cumbersome to work with, can only use 90-150mm lenses (at infinity) but reliable. I use it from time to time but I got myself a 6x12 Tomiyama instead and really enjoys how easy it is to work with and when I need a wider negative I use an 8x10 camera and crop.

 

[Man from moon]

I have a Dayi back. It seemed like a good idea when I got it since I already had a 4x5 that it would fit and a bunch of lenses. I have taken some great pictures with it but it is a bit cumbersome to work with. First of all you need to carry not only the 4x5 but also one viewing back and one film back (this is not just the Dayi), secondly you have to swap backs when you are ready to take the picture and not only slide in a cassette. You are also restricted by the fact that you are trying to get a 17cm wide image through a 12,5cm hole which means that the film will have to be moved back a little which means that you cannot use short focal lengths (on the Dayi 90mm works but not 75mm at infinity) and at the other end 150mm works but with 165mm you start losing the edges (tele lenses can be used).

The build quality can best be described as sturdy and it is fairly easy to work with. It is not a wonder of precision but it does the job without errors. The ground glass is ok. There is a kind of bellows extension with the viewing screen that doesn't really do a lot but it is a good place to fasten a dark cloth. To sum it up, the Dayi is a bit heavy, cumbersome to work with, can only use 90-150mm lenses (at infinity) but reliable. I use it from time to time but I got myself a 6x12 Tomiyama instead and really enjoys how easy it is to work with and when I need a wider negative I use an 8x10 camera and crop.

Thanks a lot for sharing this informations

Ok, i can understand from you that there is no design problems or somthing , like light leake for example....

Just that the 617 film back holder not the best choice for panorama

Am i right ?

Thanks again

 

[Jesper]

No light leaks in my 6x17 back, but that is just one example. The drawback is the time it takes from seeing a picture to capturing it. In my experience it takes 5-10 minutes from decision to take a picture till you press the shutter. Set up the camera, put the viewing back in place, choose lens, compose picture, decide on exposure and filter, change from viewing back to film back, remove darkslide and take the picture. After exposure you wind the film (window on the back) and change back again, pack up and move on. If you have the time this is not a problem but I've tried to take landscapes with shifting clouds only to find the image gone by the time I had everything in place.

Nothing wrong with the Dayi back but it is slow work.

 

[xya]

...Just that the 617 film back holder not the best choice for panorama

Am i right ?

I think, you are right. as I said, to my taste 6x12 is better. just download a 6x17 picture and a 6x12 picture from the web and print them as large as you can. put them on a wall. put yourself in front of the pictures and look. the 6x12 wil be just a panoramic picture, if you are near enough, it's all picture that you see. in front of a 6x17 you tend to see a strip of a picture. if you still go closer, you won't see the left and the right end of it. it's a question of taste and habits of course.

and, as just mentioned, 6x17 is slow. there are 6x12 backs that slide under the ground glass and have automatic advance. it saves you minutes...

 

[StepheKoontz]

For me 6X12 is as wide as I would go with roll film, as others have said, it ends up looking like a strip instead of an image imho. I have a horseman 6X12 and it's great on my super graphic.

 

[Bob S]

As the former Linhof distributor, 1970s till 2015, we sold lots of panoramic Linhof cameras and 617 was by far the best seller.
Maybe because the first two we sold to Kodak to take images for their famous Colorama display at Grand Central Station in NY city.

Even customers that bought 612 cameras would frequently crop down to get the 3:1 image ratio of the 617 format when printing.
The advantage was more shots per roll and being able to use a 45 enlarger instead of a 57 enlarger that 617 requires.

 

[Jesper]

I can't say that I've found one singular aspect ratio of panoramic pictures superior to all others. It all depends on the image. I like 6x12 for some and 6x17 for others. The widest picture I've done was printed in 6,4meters x 1,2meters which would be 6x32 had it been taken with 120-film (which it wasn't).
That is of course just my point of view.