Looking for user feedback on Linhof M679

[Hassasin]

This is either an LF or MF forum. Stuck it on LF as it is after all a full movement view camera.

In the past I was hardly looking at LF gear below 4x5. Now times have changed. There are a few choices in 6x9 format, most as field cameras, more compact and lighter for sure. But not offering full set of movements.

How is LInhof M679 in real life use? M679cs version? Surely could use some comparison, even if for the moment not interested in that kind of spending. There is custom hard case too. Is it worth having for field use, or more like storage at home?

More specifically asking for in the field use, bulk, weight, ease of operation (surely this is not a field camera with relative simplicity). And in all that, film not digital, with film holders and roll film backs. Is Super Rolex roll film back directly compatible, or does M679 have own mounting standard?

I have noticed a slider fo Hasselblad film magazine available, so the is a plus to me.

 

[Hassasin]

Just to make this thread visual friendly

 

[abruzzi]

I've never used the 679. I was looking for 6x9 monorails recently and the M679 was actually fairly heavy--about 10 lbs. The Super Rollex has different variants--the 4x5 variant is the most common and fits any graflok back 4x5 camera. The 6x9 variant is specific to the 6x9 technikas and the 6x9 Technikardan. There is a Super Rollex back specifically for this camera and the Techno, but its not very common, so you're likely to have to buy new. For the 679, the film back I'd want is this:

Multi Adapter | Linhof

(001695) The Multi Adapter accepts all digital backs adapted to Mamiya RB with M 679 and Techno.

linhof.com

It allows you to mount standard 6x9 graflox roll film backs like Horseman or or Mamiya backs which are cheap and plenitiiful on the used market.

If you want something more field ready Linhof has the Technikardan 23S--closer to 6lbs, but the movements aren't geared--they're friction locked. The biggest drawback for me is it doesn't have an accessory like the link above so you either have to use sheet film or a Rollex back, I have a project underway to make a custom graflok back for mine. Another lightweight option is the Arca Swiss F-Classic or F-Metric 6x9. I have the F-classic, and its very nice too. I use it more than my TK23 because its compatible with Horseman backs.

 

[xkaes]

I'm not a 120 view camera user, but I am constantly amazed at the number of cameras in that format(s) -- largely 6x7 -- that have been made over the years. Many are only available USED, today. Linhof has a long history with them, and Horseman is also highly praised. Since I'm a 4x5 wooden, field user, I've always been tempted by the various Wista/Tachihara/etc. 6x7 models -- but that might not be on your radar. There are several that are compact and light -- perfect for field use.

https://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?172584-info-on-Horseman-6x9-view-camera&highlight=horseman+6x7

 

[Hassasin]

Only one thing drew me to consider M679, the full precise movements. This is a high quality view camera that is not light at all, but still not as bulky as 4x5. General price is not what I would pay for, after all, a limited use In my case. But I saw one going for a lot bellow market, so I need to be ready if it comes up again.

Otherwise I am covered, I have Linhof Technika 70 for a 6x9, that does almost everything I want it to do.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

If you have a Hasselblad and a few lenses, then you might consider a Flexbody, as it is a cheaper way to an adjustable roll film camera.
And if you fear vignetting when moving to far with these lenses, then the 4x5 cm mask could be the answer, close to the sheet film format, and doable wit slow film like the PanF or RPX 25...
A Flexbody can always be found used (e.g. Kamerastore from Finland has one).

 

[Hassasin]

If you have a Hasselblad and a few lenses, then you might consider a Flexbody, as it is a cheaper way to an adjustable roll film camera.
And if you fear vignetting when moving to far with these lenses, then the 4x5 cm mask could be the answer, close to the sheet film format, and doable wit slow film like the PanF or RPX 25...
A Flexbody can always be found used (e.g. Kamerastore from Finland has one).

I use Flexbody, SWC and 503CW. The is different from the ground up though. Just learning about the camera before I pull the trigger, if ever.

 

[abruzzi]

It seems in the Hasselblad universe, the Arc Body is closer in that it uses different lenses that have greater range for movements. In the world of 6x9 roll film view cameras, with the caveaer that you want a "precise movements" which I take to mean geared movements on all movements, and of a fine enough control to make exact adjustments, there are still a few--some cheaper and some more expensive. Ones I've come across in my search for 6x9 view cameras:

Cambo Ultima (Cambo may have another one I cant remember as well.)
Arca-Swiss M-Monolith (you can get close with a lighter setup from Arca with a F-Metric 6x9 with orbix front tilt)
Sinar P-3
In addition to the 679 series, Linhof also made the Techo. I believe that one only has movements on the front, except rise/fall which the rear has as well.

EDIT: Here is a Cambo Ultima:

Cambo Ultima D 4x5 Monorail Large Format View Camera #648 | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Cambo Ultima D 4x5 Monorail Large Format View Camera #648 at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

And a Sinar P3:

Sinar p3 PRO digital VIEW camera. For Sinar, Leaf, or Phase One Digital Backs. | eBay

Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Sinar p3 PRO digital VIEW camera. For Sinar, Leaf, or Phase One Digital Backs. at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!

www.ebay.com

 

[Hassasin]

@abruzzi great, thanks. and yes, Flexbody is nice for what it is, but Arcbody is the one to get more movements, but that is all special along with dedicated lenses, which drives the price up quick. As I have enough LF lenses already I don't need that.

 

[abruzzi]

Yeah, I suspect that Hasselblad user are used to higher costs (), but it can add up quick. I've stumbled across a lot of Chinese made adapters for MF digital backs or Hasselblad System V backs, so many of these systems can be made to take Hasselblad 6x6 backs, but my goal had been to get 6x9 specifically, so I ended up with a Arca Swiss system. (and the Linhof TK23, but I'm still working on getting a standard 6x9 back sincce the Super Rollex's are out of my budget.)

BTW, the fun thing with the Sinar P3 is its still part of the whole Sinar system, which can be adapted to do just about anything. While their cameras aren't perfect, it amazing how much compatibility remains between a 1949 Norma and a 2010 P3 or F2.

 

[MTGseattle]

I checked the Linhof website. Here is "bulk" for the M679cs

These are measurements with all movements zeroed (camera in storage mode)

Length 170mm = 6.6 inches
Width 153mm = 6.02 inches
height 294mm = 11.57 inches
weight 4500 grams = 9.92 pounds.

It's certainly an interesting little piece of metal.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

I checked the Linhof website. Here is "bulk" for the M679cs

These are measurements with all movements zeroed (camera in storage mode)

Length 170mm = 6.6 inches
Width 153mm = 6.02 inches
height 294mm = 11.57 inches
weight 4500 grams = 9.92 pounds.

It's certainly an interesting little piece of metal.

When you began building all metal camera's in 1889, and still do it today, then you lug a "bulk" of knowledge and tradition along...
On the other hand their Techno is much lighter, allows as much high precision movements and is partially made of carbon fiber, which shows that after more the a century they are open to alternative materials.

BTW, yesterday I adjusted the revolving gear of the back standard of my Flexbody, there was a little play on it.
This was the second time in about 30 years I had to do it. It's easier to do than you might think, the only 'delicate' part is removing the bellows, then it's tuning by the feeling.
I cleaned the gears with cleaning spirit and lubed it with a few tiny drops of Ballistol.

PS: I am not affiliated to Linhof what so ever, just a little fan of Europe made gear...

 

[GG12]

Tricky ground. I've sort of gotten fond of 6x9 format, for reasons of portability, roll film, and adaptability to digital backs. Had a Techno for years, a super camera but awkward for travel. Just not quite configured to come in and out of a pack. Now trying a TK23, which has lots of flexibility, but is not as precise as the Techno. Seems like a real good answer - like the fast more analog flexibility. The M679 is quite heavy, and precise, similar to the Rollei version. These were early solutions to the digital need for precision, which they deliver, but more for studio work. A bit too slow and for me, too heavy for field.

 

[Lachlan Young]

M679 and Techno both take a specific Super Rollex that's only available in 6x9.

 

[Hassasin]

M679 and Techno both take a specific Super Rollex that's only available in 6x9.

Sadly so. I was actually quite surprised LInhof did not go with a standard back mount. I supposed it was leaning digital from the get go anyways.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Sadly so. I was actually quite surprised LInhof did not go with a standard back mount. I supposed it was leaning digital from the get go anyways.

Weight, bulk and (possibly) the relative precision of the old Technika 23 back design all probably told against such a decision.

 

[Hassasin]

Weight, bulk and (possibly) the relative precision of the old Technika 23 back design all probably told against such a decision.

I have not looked into what they made for M679, but it seems to me they just did not see a connection to make camera universally backward compatible.

Super Rollex backs are high precision machines, I use them on 4x5 and Technika 70, and with 4.5 kg of camera alone I don’t see how they would have put a dent into final set up.