Wich cameras you think is necessary on a collection and why?

[stark_674]

I would go for price and functionality.
Nikon: F. F2. F2AS. F3 F4. FE, FM, F100, FM3A, F90X
Minolta: XD-11, SRT-101
Leica: IIIf, M3
Contax: IIa
Olympus: OM-1, OM-1n, OM-2, OM-2n, OM-4Ti, Epic
Hasselblad 500 CM
Mamiya RB6X7 Pro S
Mamiya 645
Bronica: EC, EC-TL, SQ-Ai
Canon: F-1, New F-1, A-1, EF
Yashica: Electro 35 CSN, MG-1, FX-3, Lynx 14e

This is a nice example of what I intended on this thread.... Everyone like some cameras, some other not, also a list with only one is well accepted.... Thanks....

[Les Sarile]

Check out this link -> Minolta-Canon-Nikon-Pentax SLRs

[jacksond]

I bought a Praktica IV in 1963 In San francisco. It was stamped "USSR Occupied Germany" on the top. They were freely available then. Very roughly made.

[jerry lebens]

No camera collection could ever be considered complete without a fully working example of all the possible Sinar permutations ever produced (including an individual set up for each lens from the ranges of Schneider, Rodenstock and Nikkor).

Then, once that's complete, you should do the same with Linhof...

[JMC1969]

And a Carbon Infinity.

That is a very cool camera. I could not read the text, however, I would like to ask if I can borrow it for...............let's say................infinity? Yes?

Thank you

[kitanikon]

Any collection should include the Olympus Pen FT half-frame SLR...

[DaveO]

Nikon made a camera, I think in the 70's, called a 35ti which supposedly had a lens that was spectacular, even better than the 28ti and cheaper. Don't know what kind of batteries it took though. For a starter on a collection, you might consider the Argus C 3 which was ahead of it's time.

DaveO

[fstop]

The 35Ti is a rangefinder. I almost bought one, they are a great camera.

[waynecrider]

If the idea is to collect and not shoot, or only shoot once in awhile, don't waste your money. I see huge collections being sold off every year for less then the expense in collecting the items when the person dies, or upon insolvency for whatever reason to pay bills and eat. If you want to shoot analog and buy into a lineup that may increase in value, or at least maintain value, then that would probably be mint condition mechanical Leica M's, and probably Nikon rangefinders, but rangefinders are a whole different beast then a SLR for a photographer and not everybody takes to them. Truthfully, in collecting in photography, great lenses maintain their values better then bodies most of the time.
Personally, instead of collecting cameras, collect memories of traveling to photograph. Get a camera that suits you and a couple of lenses and spend the rest of your money using it to photograph places you've always wanted to go to. It's not what you can put on a shelf and admire, it's the experiences of life that are more valuable.

[Jim Jones]

There are three cameras that really made a difference to the history of photography:

Graflex speed graphic
Nikon f
Hassleblad 6x6

Im not a fan of leicas or rollies, as they were mostly the toys of the rich, not artists.

Leica and Rollei made their formats acceptable so that Nikon and Hassleblad could succeed. The cost of my Leica M4 and five lenses comes to a very few dollars a month when spread out over 40+ years of service. That's no rich boy's toy, but a much better investment for a photographer than today's DSLR.