Bite your tongue, gleaf. We're vintage, not old!!
Originally Posted by gleaf
I disagree here: I have several twin reflexes for two reasons: I like the different models for their design and beauty, BUT more importantly because they are SO different!!
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
The forrest? = Super Ricohflex any day
Portrait? = Rolleiflex F
both? = Voigtländer Superb..
I might be a snob... I'll buy a Gandolfi if I don't allready have that model already... (maybe that just makes me a collector)
I don't look down on others - I look up to them with jealousy if they have something I want...
Not really. My best camera is the one that I have with me.
"Photography, like surfing, is an infinite process, a constantly evolving exploration of life."
Anti-snob. All my cameras and lenses except one I bought cheap on the 'Bay. All my lenses except one are off brands. The one snob lens I have is a 12" Dagor, but it's a beater. The one snob camera I have is a Voigtlander Bessa II that my late Dad gave me when I was a teenager.
Happiness is a load of bulk chemicals, a handful of recipes, a brick of film and a box of paper. - desertrat
If the lenses aren't interchangeable, and you need to change whole bodies in order to get a different focal length, yes that in this case you have multiple bodies, however to me that silly, which is why I would buy into the camera system that has interchangeable lenses over a pretty body or pretty name. But that's just me.
Originally Posted by gandolfi
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Not a snob-I've taken some of my best pics with an old Olympus Trip and a pinhole camera made from a coffee tin. Any camera's only as good as the person using it!
"He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves: and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said 'Poor old Baggins!' and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy till the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long "- JRR Tolkien, ' The Hobbit '.
I'm not choosy, it's Penzoil or nothing.
I'm not a snob. However, I prefer a couple of my cameras because they have sentimental value, and thus use them most of the time.
No, not really. Although I do own a few pricey bodies, cost and "status" did not figure into either my purchasing decisions or my attitude toward my equipment. To wit:
1). I bought my first Nikon, an F2AS, new in 1979, on the advice of a colleague who stressed the extensiveness and ruggedness of the system. Given that (a) as a neophyte who had no earthly idea where photography would take him, the availability of a multitude of lenses and accessories was a major selling point; and (b) being totally bereft of any sort of mechanical aptitude (see my post re attempted - i.e failed equipment repairs) Nikon's reputation for dependability and longevity was the clincher. Although I have added new bodies as they were introduced, most were purchased for reasons of "improvements" in technology (i.e. F3HP: in camera metering, F5: multi-step shutter speed (nice for chromes), F6 (as F5: ergonomics...plus, for sentimental reasons, the "last Nikon?"). Further to owning a lot of Nikon bodies: I have been extremely lucky on eBay, paying sub $100 for the majority of my inventory (F5 bodies excepted).
2). The Leicas? I have always enjoyed the human circus (is there anything more entertaining than watching humans be humans?); that said, I prefer standing back - unnoticed, I hope - and watching the spectacle unfold before me. Leica was the first name that came to mind ( I confess to not doing any research beforehand re other options); most of what I have learned about the system, I have picked up here on APUG!
3). All my Hasselblad equipemnt was purchased used. Again, my initial foray into the system was on the advice of a colleague who stressed the simplicity, quality and ruggedness of the system as well as the quality of the glass. Over time, the system has proven to be a good compromise to lugging a view camera on hikes.
So...do I "look down" on other systems? No. I have what I have because each works for me. I invested in each system for reasons far removed from "status" concerns. When I say I am mechanically inept, I mean that to the fullest extent (also why I own a Civic and a BMW - things I don't have to fix!). I know many other photographers who will sing the praises of their Olympus, Canon, Pentax and Minolta systems; use what works for you (even a coffee can or shoebox). In the final analysis, it is about the image, not how you obtained it. Shoot on!
An assortment of F-series Nikons (F to F6, excluding the F4) with quite a few Nikkors, a pair of M6s with some Leitz glass, a pair of 500c/ms with a wide range of Zeiss optics and, just to help keep Duracell solvent, a D800.
Favourite films: (1). KE ("Kodachrome Era"): 35mm: PKM25 and PKR64, HP5/Tri-X; 120: PKR64, PanF, FP4. (2). PKE ("Post-Kodachrome Era"): (a) 35mm: E100G, HP5 Plus/Tri-X and Delta 3200; (b) 120: E100G, PanF Plus, FP4 Plus, TMax 100.
Speak for yourself, John.
Originally Posted by jovo
I've measured, and I'm old. So is most of my photographic equipment. Getting here took all of my life and so did accumulating the gear.
Let's not talk about superiority, real or imagined. Neither kind gets me a discount when I go shopping, not even for the proverbial cup of coffee. I pay full price, like everyone else.
I think you misunderstood my post...
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
All or most of my twinreflex cameras has the same FL.. so it is NOT to have different focal lengths - it is because of the obvious difference in how the different lenses perform!
I also have interchangeable systems and they are fine too - I get that point,but....
And the snob in me do think a beautiful body matters! ( )