Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,518   Posts: 1,543,747   Online: 842
      
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 107
  1. #21
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,646
    Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post
    I used to stip wire with my teeth also
    Oh man, I did that when I was a kid. I still remember what it felt like when a strand got caught between my teeth as I was pulling outward on the wire.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,431
    [QUOTE=David Lyga;1407132]OK: I have been buying SLRs and RFs (the cheap ones) for literally decades and do minor repairs. MY EXPERIENCE has been that (E von Hoegh) Mirandas are MOSTLY good but I admit that there are some dogs, and for no apparent reason. I have always thought that their really silly advertising (essentially 'sex' ads glorifying the man/woman sexual attraction that segues into their product(?!) is what they were trying to use to sell their cameras. Compare those 1960s ads with the cool, quite, intellectual ads placed by Nikon. Advertising, more than any other factor destroyed Miranda. Who was their Madison Avenue agengy? But, no, Mirandas were generally not faulty products.

    (Dali): Nikkormat was never quite the 'god' it was cracked up to be. I have had Nikkormats, Spotmatics, and SRTs get truly soaked and only the Nikkormat did not respond to drying and TLC.[QUOTE]

    Thanks, I found a Miranda Fv with a 350mm Soligor tele on it, in a dumpster. Someone had done a camo paint job with acrylics on the body. The camera functions, and the shutter is accurate enough to be useable. I guess I'll get a normal lens for it and try it out.

    As for the Nikkormat, it's the only one of the three you mentioned with a metal Copal square shutter. Yours behaved about as I'd expect. Mine has been as reliable as a post for the past four years I've had it, it was made about 1970.

  3. #23
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,595
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Yashinoff View Post
    That being said the camera I have run the most film through this year was an Edixa Prismaflex. I just can't recommend one of these to anybody who is not mechanically inclined. Because they're all broken.
    I have three which all work perfectly! One of them was my first SLR back in 1979.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Lyga View Post
    I used to stip wire with my teeth also
    Me too (still do sometimes). I also used to use my mum's hairdressing scissors!


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  4. #24
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    I also used to use my mum's hairdressing scissors!
    In my house, using those or her sewing scissors for that (or for any reason without asking) was an effective way to learn the true meaning of wrathful!
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  5. #25
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by E. von Hoegh View Post
    What about Mirandas? I have one I've never used, and everyone says it's crap.
    I collected Mirandas, the lens are very good and test well, the bodies were mid range, not up to pro Nikon or Cannon, but good for the day. Many Mirandas were lightly used and can be found in good condition, interchangable viewfinders, the EE had spot and average metering with shutter speed priortiy, but a limited range of lens and no winders or motors. The only Miranda I would call a dog is the Dx, the last version sold, I have yet to find a Dx in working order, used 4 or 5 button batteries, really very odd for the time. Early Mirandas are very collectable.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    280
    The thing to remember is that there were a lot of cheaper or more basic SLRs aimed at the same market as digital bridge cameras - people who wanted better quality than the average compact but didn't want to pay for a fully fledged bells and whistles pro-spec SLR. This is presumably where all the Miranda/Cosina/Chinon stuff came in, as well as the Pentax MV/MV1 (which are so simplified that they don't even tell you what shutter speed they intend to use!)
    Matt

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,544
    I remember my Father being unhappy with the Exaktas he had in the 60's and 70's....querky solid cameras, very versatile and with a huge range of accessories, but, from day one, spending more time at the repairers than in use! Probably the same issues of indifferent factory QC as Prakticas, also from East Germany. He eventuallty switched to Rollei SL35's with West German Zeiss lenses, and never had any trouble, although they seemed lighter and more delicate than the East German products. I inherited the Rolleis and used them for several years before selling them on, still working as good as new.

  8. #28
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera View Post
    The "Brand" 4x5 "field" camera. The thing makes an RB67 feel like a Ricoh GR1 in your hand. The handle on the rear standard gives the illusion that you could somehow hand-hold this beast. The dual-rail chassis design is also something that could get mis-aligned, and due to the fact that all the standards and the tripod mounting block are cast metal bits, if they got bent (say, you dropped it on a concrete floor while trying to mount it on your tripod) there'd be no way to accurately re-align them or to repair the camera to any degree of precision.
    I have a Brand, very odd camera, bought mine at a swap meet in the 80s's I think I paid $25 for it will an old Kodak uncoated lens, held togeather by duct tape and epoxy. All alumumimum so it cannot be welded. Someone told that Brand and New View were made of alumumimu because after WWII 1000s of plans were scraped. Still in alinement and bellow are light tight. I dont need a view camera very often so I use it only when I need more movement than I have a Crown and Speed. I get good negatives, use a 152mm Kodak commerical and old BL 210.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    193
    That's odd because Exaktas tend to be very robust. With the exception of the clockwork for the slow speeds and self timer, they're very simple cameras. On the other hand the last ones, the VX1000 - the quality was really bad. The 1950s Exaktas are made about as well as anything, but by the 1960s Exakta apparently was competing on price instead of features. I think the VX1000 I had may have been the shoddiest SLR I've ever laid hands on. At that point I think there may have been a lack of pride or interest in the product as Exakta was enduring a lot of legal troubles with the copyright holders in West Germany.

    I don't know if I would put Miranda in the budget group. The Sensorex cameras were very advanced and very expensive when they came out. Miranda also had one of the largest lens line ups, from I believe, 17mm to 500mm. Prior the introduction of the Nikon F, the Miranda was Japan's "pro" SLR, and even for a couple years after Miranda competed with Nikon. When Nikon came out with the 21mm lens (which needed MLU to work) Miranda came out with the 17mm lens the next year - and it worked with reflex focussing!

    However Miranda was a small company, never made their own lenses, etc. etc. - IIRC Soligor bought them up in 1968 or 69, and managed to kill the whole operation in less than a decade (apparently through gross mismanagement).

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,829
    Never liked the Contax II. The design of the camera ignores how the human hand operates. The choice of lenses is limited by the design decision to include the focusing helix in the camera body rather than in the lens. A well made but very poorly designed camera.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin