Gotta *NEW* Camera (Pt. 2)
04th May 2009
Gotta New Camera. A Rangefinder. A Voigtländer. About 45 years old. No sensor dust issues. No battery, w'dyabelieve!
Well- here it is:
A '60's Classic. The sort of camera I used to lust after in the camera shop window back in my schooldays. And a Rangefinder. Never had a Rangefinder before.
But "Wait a minute!" I hear you say. "That's a FILM camera!?!"
That's right. I bought a new camera; but it's an old camera; and it's a film camera!!
Have another look...
c. 1965, and they most certainly do not make them like this any more! Also, notice how this crops down using the "original" (i.e. fixed at 24 x 36) aspect ratio in Lightroom. Any 35 mm camera worth its spats needs to be 36 x 24 ratio!
Even nearly makes it on its back, too...
So where's this going?
Well, I'm not sure. But I can tell you where it's come from. Maybe that'll make things a bit clearer.
A week or so back I won one on Guess Where UK - a Flickr quiz group I like to play in from time to time. I've got 17 points so far this year, but I digress. I posted an old scan as part of my answer. This one:
To my surprise, it looked quite good. Got a plaudit from the question setter on the group too - a photographer whose work I regard with great respect. His Flickr page is here.
Made me think: this is tecnically deeply flawed. My scanner was not a particularly good one. It was a cheap Canon that wouldn't run with SilverFast. Noisy as hell. And I was just learning Photoshop at the time. This is PS juvenilia.
The image, as you can see, is grainy.
And the saturation is a bit extreme.
And it is, as you might say, tack-blunt.
But for all that, it has, I think, some character.
And it's something of the character of the Lomotographer.
And I kind of like that.
But I sold my film SLR a few years back, not long after I got my first DSLR. Never really thought I'd go back to film, but now I'm finding it has some appeal.
And I start to think that maybe Mr. Kobayashi, CEO of Cosina and current owner of the Voigtländer marque, has something right when he says "Look at the short life of digital SLRs and their continuously falling prices, why should I get into that mess?" (Source: Speaking Frankly, by Herbert Keppler)
Cat don't care
But I think there may be some mileage in this. I won't be throwing away the DSLR, but my update strategy might take a turn - for Bessa or for worse.
After all, Cosina made cameras and lenses that sold as Canon, Nikon and Olympus. And Mr. Kobayashi's approach is a good one, I think:" "Usually we first design the very best possible lens, regardless of glass price," explains Kobayashi. "Then we try to substitute less expensive elements wherever possible without noticeably affecting quality. We stop when we have lowered production costs sufficiently, but have retained quality, and where the difference from our original lens will be negligible to the user."" (Keppler))
So it's: Onward! into thepast future!
Well- here it is:
A '60's Classic. The sort of camera I used to lust after in the camera shop window back in my schooldays. And a Rangefinder. Never had a Rangefinder before.
But "Wait a minute!" I hear you say. "That's a FILM camera!?!"
That's right. I bought a new camera; but it's an old camera; and it's a film camera!!
Have another look...
c. 1965, and they most certainly do not make them like this any more! Also, notice how this crops down using the "original" (i.e. fixed at 24 x 36) aspect ratio in Lightroom. Any 35 mm camera worth its spats needs to be 36 x 24 ratio!
Even nearly makes it on its back, too...
So where's this going?
Well, I'm not sure. But I can tell you where it's come from. Maybe that'll make things a bit clearer.
A week or so back I won one on Guess Where UK - a Flickr quiz group I like to play in from time to time. I've got 17 points so far this year, but I digress. I posted an old scan as part of my answer. This one:
To my surprise, it looked quite good. Got a plaudit from the question setter on the group too - a photographer whose work I regard with great respect. His Flickr page is here.
Made me think: this is tecnically deeply flawed. My scanner was not a particularly good one. It was a cheap Canon that wouldn't run with SilverFast. Noisy as hell. And I was just learning Photoshop at the time. This is PS juvenilia.
The image, as you can see, is grainy.
And the saturation is a bit extreme.
And it is, as you might say, tack-blunt.
But for all that, it has, I think, some character.
And it's something of the character of the Lomotographer.
And I kind of like that.
But I sold my film SLR a few years back, not long after I got my first DSLR. Never really thought I'd go back to film, but now I'm finding it has some appeal.
And I start to think that maybe Mr. Kobayashi, CEO of Cosina and current owner of the Voigtländer marque, has something right when he says "Look at the short life of digital SLRs and their continuously falling prices, why should I get into that mess?" (Source: Speaking Frankly, by Herbert Keppler)
Cat don't care
But I think there may be some mileage in this. I won't be throwing away the DSLR, but my update strategy might take a turn - for Bessa or for worse.
After all, Cosina made cameras and lenses that sold as Canon, Nikon and Olympus. And Mr. Kobayashi's approach is a good one, I think:" "Usually we first design the very best possible lens, regardless of glass price," explains Kobayashi. "Then we try to substitute less expensive elements wherever possible without noticeably affecting quality. We stop when we have lowered production costs sufficiently, but have retained quality, and where the difference from our original lens will be negligible to the user."" (Keppler))
So it's: Onward! into the
