| Author |
Message |
    
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 43
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, January 23, 2010 - 07:00 pm: | 
|
I am just wondering if anyone has ever bought a camera on the merits of its design.OK it must take good pictures, but the look of something must play some part.I must admit that I have the Canon Ixus L1.
Just a thought,if anyone has other examples of a design classic it would be interesting reading. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 85
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, January 23, 2010 - 07:38 pm: |
|
I buy cameras for this very reason all the time--just because they look cool--and I'm not the least bit ashamed of it.
Sometimes the camera may take good pictures; sometimes it's incapable of taking any pictures, and sometimes it can only take crappy pictures.
But yes, to use your phrase, I'm definitely into "cameras as jewelry". |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 86
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, January 23, 2010 - 07:42 pm: |
|
To give some specific examples:
o Ansco Memo (wooden half-frame 35mm)
o Pax (cute li'l "Leica copies", but not really)
o Univex Mercury II (strange 35mm half-frame)
o Lots of old folding plate cameras (6x9 & 9x12)
o Bolsey B-2 rangefinder
Lots more; I'm sure others will add to the list. |
Chiccolini
Tinkerer
Username: Chiccolini
Post Number: 76
Registered: 06-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, January 23, 2010 - 08:59 pm: |
|
Try Regula IIID (35mm RF), Clarus 35, or Rocca Automatic (TLR). Would like to have the Rocca. |
M_currie
Tinkerer
Username: M_currie
Post Number: 209
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 08:06 am: |
|
Second the Mercury II. No other camera is like it. |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 44
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 08:55 am: |
|
What about the Gilbert box camera by R.F.Hunter,is this a case of style before function,it is very different to other box's of the time. Did they want to make a camera or a statement.I want one. |
Ismaelg
Tinkerer
Username: Ismaelg
Post Number: 37
Registered: 11-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 10:31 am: |
|
I do as well. To a certain degree, I consider all my cameras some sort of jewelry. In my case, my favorite jewelry is my Pentax SV.
It just so happens it can take pictures as well 
Thanks, |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 45
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 02:06 pm: |
|
So far it does look as though it is the look of the thing that makes us buy it,we realy are Magpies at heart attracted to the shine and the gloss.There are bad looking,bad designed cameras,I have seen them but I don't own them.Well I say I don't own one but what about the Argus C3,I dare say some people hate it but to me it is what I would call an honest camera,it does exactly what it says on the box,it takes pictures not bad ones.To me the C3 is the reverse of the above,function comes first.It does stand out which is ironic,but I wouldn't call it a jewel,maybe a rough diamond. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 88
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 03:52 pm: |
|
The Argus C3 is a good example to discuss for the very reasons you give. It's a camera a lot of people love to hate; after all, it's almost universally referred to as "the brick".
I think it's rather ugly and fairly badly designed, at least from a functional standpoint. (One example is the nonstandard shutter speed markings, which are arbitrary numbers rather than actual fractional spees.) But I do have one (which I'll probably never actually use), and when I look at it rationally, it actually has a lot of good qualities. First of all, the ugly C3 is capable of taking very good pictures. It was also one of the most popular cameras of all time, in terms of numbers sold. And it is actually a well-designed and well-built piece of machinery.
I just don't happen to like Argusii. There are, however, plenty of collectors out there who love them. More power to them, I say. |
Adrian
Tinkerer
Username: Adrian
Post Number: 278
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 04:33 pm: |
|
Surely we're missing the point of the C3? It's not to look good - it's to take out for a roll or two of film and to remind you that actually your (insert appropriate less-than-ergonomic camera here) isn't that awkward to use! Well, that's what mine is for, anyway...
I think the ultimate buy-it-'cos-it-looks-good camera is probably a Beau Brownie. Mind you, I have a flat-top Werra which I like in part because it is almost anti-styled, it's so clean. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 89
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 05:18 pm: |
|
Just looked at some Werras on eBay: my [insert name of deity here], that's a clean camera. It's so austere, it almost looks like a Bauhaus design. But how do you wind them? Doesn't seem to be a knob or lever anywhere, and they don't look electric.
Speaking of less-than-ergonomic cameras, I must nominate the Univex Mercury II as the most unergonomic design, at least among cameras I've actually seen and held in my hands. There are many things wrong with this camera: the wind lever is on the front of the camera; the focus ring is too narrow and up against the front of the camera, and the little knob on the ring becomes inaccessible when focusing at the closest distance; and the mark on the aperture scale is hidden behind the shutter-speed knob, necessitating the user craning their neck to see it.
But I loves it, precisely because it looks so "gadgety". The ultimate camera with lots of dials and knobs sticking out of it ... |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 46
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, January 24, 2010 - 07:42 pm: |
|
The Werra is a good example,wind on and cock the shutter with the ring around the lens barrel and the lens cap doubled as a lens hood,really just the shutter button on show,surely a case of less is more.A clean style imitated by Voigtlander in their Vito range with pop up rewind buttons etc.
As for the Mercury II which is another of my favorites,the best thing about it is that it has a "face" two eyes a nose and a large forhead.
Out of interest was this the only still camera with a rotary shutter? |
Msiegel
Tinkerer
Username: Msiegel
Post Number: 167
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 01:29 am: |
|
I would like to put my Rollei 35 in here. Small but not handy - unergonomic as can be, the dents prove it. Nevertheless it looks great and takes fine pictures (if not the problem is 1/2 inch behind the film plane). The design is very 1960ies.
I also love the design of the Olympus XA. It is kind of the beginning of a new era in camera design - and takes fine pics. |
Adrian
Tinkerer
Username: Adrian
Post Number: 279
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 03:05 am: |
|
Karl is right with the Werra - you wind on with the collar round the lens. If you fancy one, though, check that the shutter is working properly and does not let light through when you cock it. It has an unusual double-shutter arrangement necessited by symmetrical, rotating, blades, and they are a pain to work on. And the film counter is hopeless!
The Robot also used - may still use, the company are still in business and now make speed cameras - a rotary shutter and a 24x24mm format. I THINK the Robots and the Mercury were the two major rotary shutter models, there were a few other minor players, but the main drawback is that a rotary shutter for full-frame 35mm would be just be too big for the camera to be a sensible size.
And then there's the Argus C33...
http://cameraquest.com/argc33.htm |
Thomas_mann
Tinkerer
Username: Thomas_mann
Post Number: 8
Registered: 04-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 03:34 am: |
|
I'd second the choice of the Werramatic for its simplicity and the Voigtlander Vitomatic for its complexity; they both achieve similar results but in different ways!
The major advantage of the Werramatic is that it has interchangeable lenses.
Thomas Mann |
Tom_cheshire
Tinkerer
Username: Tom_cheshire
Post Number: 249
Registered: 04-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 12:06 pm: |
|
The Olympus Pen F 1/2 frame cameras had a rotary shutter I heard. Also heard the engineers took apart a good number of Mercurys to study before designing the Pen F. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 94
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Yes, the Pen F did use a rotary shutter, although it was not at all like the Mercury's. (I learned this from this page of Rick Oleson's.) |
Mndean
Tinkerer
Username: Mndean
Post Number: 182
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 03:52 pm: |
|
The camera that I was most asked about by women as pieces of jewelry (so to speak), were the half-frames from Olympus and Minolta. I made the mistake of giving one away to a friend, and have never been able to replace it at a reasonable price. I don't give cameras away anymore except for parts. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 95
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 04:03 pm: |
|
If they oohed and aahed over those cameras, imagine what they'd do if you showed them a Tessina. They'd probably swoon.
(Yes, this is one of the cameras I lust after ...) |
Finnegan
Tinkerer
Username: Finnegan
Post Number: 25
Registered: 09-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 05:28 pm: |
|
Surprised no one mentioned the Zeiss Ikon Contessa yet. Or the Steinheil Casca II. Or the Wirgin Edinex. |
Marty
Tinkerer
Username: Marty
Post Number: 54
Registered: 11-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 06:03 pm: |
|
If the discussion of the Argus C3 opens the thread to possibly UGLY cameras, I used to keep a Perfex Speed Candid under the seat of my car. It was distinctly ugly, violently unergonomic, and had a focal plane shutter that sounded like a gate slamming on a chain-link fence. Aside from that, it took pretty decent pictures.
But yes, I've been known to buy an old camera strictly because it looks cool... If a movie camera counts, I can't walk past my 16mm Filmo 75 done in "silver birch" without pausing to just look at it...
Marty |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 47
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 06:39 pm: |
|
Yes,the Tessina I'd forgotten about that,perhaps the ultimate gadget.Very handy for "plumbers" when working in the Watergate hotel,I understand it was one of their tools.I don't think they were real plumbers though! :-) |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 97
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 06:44 pm: |
|
Funny you should mention that Perfex, since their Forty Four and Fifty Five are on my list of cameras I must have; I think they look plenty kewl.
And let's not forget movie projectors while we're at it: I have a certain fondness for my Hell & Bowel Filmosound 179, even though it's a Signal Corps model in an ugly olive-drab case. But inside there are lots of chromed wheels and nicely-formed castings. |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 98
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, January 25, 2010 - 06:46 pm: |
|
Wow, I didn't know that the "plumbers" used a Tessina (from my Google search, it appears to have been a black one). I wouldn't have thought those idiots had enough class to use a camera like that. |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 48
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 26, 2010 - 02:14 am: |
|
If you like spy cameras there are some good ones here:
http://collectiblend.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5 |
David_nebenzahl
Tinkerer
Username: David_nebenzahl
Post Number: 99
Registered: 12-2009
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 26, 2010 - 02:59 am: |
|
Damnit! Now I want a Compass. Wish I had a time machine: I just read that they only cost 30 British pounds when they were first made ... |
Fred_the_oyster
Tinkerer
Username: Fred_the_oyster
Post Number: 29
Registered: 11-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, January 28, 2010 - 05:01 am: |
|
I'll chip in in support of the folding Zeiss Contessa, though I actually prefer the simpler lines of the 524/24 Contina. Have to mention the grey Baby Rolleiflex; mine's more an olive drab colour than actually grey, and always attracts attention when out and about. The GB-Bell & Howell Viceroy 8mm cine camera is a gem, too, unusually styled and beautifully finished. I like the look of the Mamiya Super 16, but I don't own one (yet)! |
Miss_emma_jade
Tinkerer
Username: Miss_emma_jade
Post Number: 2
Registered: 10-2011
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2011 - 03:11 am: |
|
yes totally. Argus C3.. I feel like Nancy Drew with that. speed graphic pacemaker.. its the best portrait camera ever made. because everyone asks about it and you can take their picture.. and a LTM leica, just because it goes everywhere with me of course.. |
Karl
Tinkerer
Username: Karl
Post Number: 87
Registered: 03-2008
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2011 - 06:48 pm: |
|
Seems the Argus has many fans including me. As for the Leica well they look good anywhere and everywhere.
I did look at your profile, Miss emma jade. Watchmaker, sounds like a dream job. |
Br1078lum
Tinkerer
Username: Br1078lum
Post Number: 169
Registered: 11-2010
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2011 - 05:49 pm: |
|
I'll put in a vote for the Gelto D III, since Dave already beat me to naming the Compass.
PF |
Jeffk
Tinkerer
Username: Jeffk
Post Number: 22
Registered: 10-2011
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2011 - 08:13 pm: |
|
I always look around in antique shops for interesting oddball cameras. I rarely find anything worth buying, but occasionally I do, like my Stereo Realist. A couple years ago I came across an art-deco Feinwork Mec-16 16 mm camera in Santa Barbara CA, and I wish I had bought it but at the time I reckoned I'd dig around and find out what it was worth first - when I went back it was sold. |
Fallisphoto
Tinkerer
Username: Fallisphoto
Post Number: 189
Registered: 09-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 05, 2011 - 11:52 am: |
|
If you like art deco, it is hard to beat an Agfa PB 20 Tripar perched atop a Davidson Star D. |
Jimmyh
Tinkerer
Username: Jimmyh
Post Number: 5
Registered: 04-2011
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 05, 2011 - 09:59 pm: |
|
"...I actually prefer the simpler lines of the 524/24 Contina."
Me too! |
