Just how good are some old cameras?

Gary Kinghorn

Gary Kinghorn

Messages
1,517
Edit My Images
No
I have some pretty up to date kit, with a 5d3 and 7d2, but at the back of the cupboard is a 1d3 I bought a few years ago. It is a rare occasion when I bring it out to play. However, when I do it never ceases to amaze me just how crisp, clear and vibrant the shots are I manage to take with it. Yes I can't crop to the same extent I can with the newer kit, but when I get it right, it feels just so good.

So what have you got, that makes you smile when you dust it off and give it a test drive?
 
I haven't used my old cameras for a long time.

From the more recent digital age I have a very cheap fixed focus Medion compact which takes frankly awful pictures but it has its charms. I also have a Panasonic G1 which I use with both modern AF and old manual lenses and despite its shortcomings it's perhaps my favourite camera.
 
From the digital age it would be my Canon 5D and film its an Olympus AF-1 bought for me by my wife in 1987
 
I've got old Voigtlander Baby Bessa. 1938. Uses 120 roll film. 6x4.5 images. Amazing how good they are.
 
I have an 8 year old leica m8 which was introduced about the same time as the canon 1diii and it is very "low tech" compared with modern cameras - it has a native iso of 160 but it's probably the only iso setting really worth using as upping it soon gets noisy! It's not "full frame" like many newer cameras (1.33 crop) and has a very low res screen and practically no automation apart from very basic centre weighted aperture priority and only has 10mp sensor. It does have all the features I actually need like a shutter button and shutter speed dial and I cant remember the last time I cropped a picture so the low res does not bother me. I think some older cameras can be bargains depending on the features you actually need in a camera.
 
I know lots of people who would love to upgrade to a 1d3 . What a snobby post!

said kipax with a big mischevious smile on his face and this line in a rare attempt to stop people crying over my every post........hic :)
 
KIPAX said:
I know lots of people who would love to upgrade to a 1d3 . What a snobby post!

said kipax with a big mischevious smile on his face and this line in a rare attempt to stop people crying over my every post........hic :)
Click to expand...

As a happy owner of a 1D II I can sympathise with this view :crying:

On a serious note, I have always gone with 2nd hand bodies and glass and due to my very limited abilities, never found my pics to be limited by the equipment...

In fact, only recently sold my CANON D30 and D60...

A
 
My oldest kit is a mid-50's TLR and to be fair, shooting with it it more enjoyable than my digital kit!
 
Last edited:
The Nikon F2 is still my favourite, but I admit that's got more to do with the camera and the way it handles than shooting film. My oldest digital camera is a Minolta Dimage 7i, which was very good in it's day but I can't remember the last time I used it. I bought it because I couldn't afford a DSLR, and was slightly annoyed when Canon released the 300D shortly afterwards, for about the same price! I'm still very fond of my Canon A640 though. It doesn't really compete with more modern compacts on features, but I do like the image quality.
 
Still have an Olympus C5050Z, an early enthusiast compact/bridge which can still take a great shot if you have the patience to use the thing!

But yeh, my oldest camera is a Pentax ME which is a few years older than me. Until recently I had lenses much older than me!
 
My 2008 Canon 50d still produces stunning images, but it always has done :)

My 4mp Fuji S3500 from 2004 still outclasses some new compacts, such as the Canon D20 I have at work!
 
Last edited:
In 7 years time, something like a 5D3 or a D810 will probably be scoffed at as being out of date, poor at high ISO, mediocre resolution and lacking the features that in 2015 we haven't even thought about. But as of now they're state of the art.

Likewise the equivalents from 7 years ago, lauded at the time, are now several generations old and not worthy of consideration to many people. But they're as capable now as they were then, just lacking the feature set of the cameras you can buy today. I guess that the speed at which the technological envelope is being pushed every 2-3 years, and our subseqeunt expectations, it's easy to overlook how capable older cameras can be if you are not pushing them to the absolute limits of things like sensitivity, etc.
 
Anything (dslr wise) produced in the last ten years will still produce stunning IQ with a good lens attached in normal circumstances.

Looking back at some photos I've taken with my old 400d with just the 50mm f/1.8 still impress me, even by todays standards and are more than acceptable.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Jims post.
Also, agree that the M8 takes a fantastic photo, the output of the sensor matched to the right lenses really does well. B&W shots are fantastic.
 
odd jim said:
Anything (dslr wise) produced in the last ten years will still produce stunning IQ with a good lens attached in normal circumstances.

Looking back at some photos I've taken with my old 400d with just the 50mm f/1.8 still impress me, even by todays standards and are more than acceptable.
Click to expand...

Agreed. My DSLR is a 30D and I've never felt any need, or desire, to 'upgrade'. It obviously falls short of more modern cameras in some ways, but it does everything I expect it to do very well.
 
My oldest in use camera is a Leica Digilux 2. I keep telling myself to get rid but I like it too much.
 
jamiewednesday said:
My oldest in use camera is a Leica Digilux 2. I keep telling myself to get rid but I like it too much.
Click to expand...

Which is probably the best reason to hang onto something that I can think of! Why get rid of something you like so much, unless you need to raise some cash and there's no alternative?
 
viewfromthenorth said:
In 7 years time, something like a 5D3 or a D810 will probably be scoffed at as being out of date, poor at high ISO, mediocre resolution and lacking the features that in 2015 we haven't even thought about. But as of now they're state of the art.
Click to expand...

Both print very reasonable A1 and nothing will ever take that away. The 1D mark III can't do this so well, whereas mkIV is way past that threshold. Early-ish digitals are almost all bin bound, and the later ones should stick around for a bit longer.
 
A good camera will always be a good camera.
 
I dusted off my Canon G2 the other day, and took some photos with it. Images are pretty good, just a clumsy old camera like holding a brick.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
In 7 years time, something like a 5D3 or a D810 will probably be scoffed at as being out of date, poor at high ISO, mediocre resolution and lacking the features that in 2015 we haven't even thought about. But as of now they're state of the art.

Likewise the equivalents from 7 years ago, lauded at the time, are now several generations old and not worthy of consideration to many people. But they're as capable now as they were then, just lacking the feature set of the cameras you can buy today. I guess that the speed at which the technological envelope is being pushed every 2-3 years, and our subseqeunt expectations, it's easy to overlook how capable older cameras can be if you are not pushing them to the absolute limits of things like sensitivity, etc.
Click to expand...

Nail - head
 
viewfromthenorth said:
In 7 years time, something like a 5D3 or a D810 will probably be scoffed at as being out of date, poor at high ISO, mediocre resolution and lacking the features that in 2015 we haven't even thought about. But as of now they're state of the art, so I wouldn't say people are calling them 'unworthy' as such.

Likewise the equivalents from 7 years ago, lauded at the time, are now several generations old and not worthy of consideration to many people. But they're as capable now as they were then, just lacking the feature set of the cameras you can buy today. I guess that the speed at which the technological envelope is being pushed every 2-3 years, and our subseqeunt expectations, it's easy to overlook how capable older cameras can be if you are not pushing them to the absolute limits of things like sensitivity, etc.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I entirely agree, only in that cameras from 7 years ago, are actually very well still thought of.

Even now people are still recommending to people that the Canon 40d is a good buy, and I still get great stuff from my 7 year old 50d. In fact I looked at some wedding shots on my Flickr yesterday and looked at a baby and father portrait I shot indoors and assumed it was shot with my 6d as it was so clean and crisp, with lovely detail and colours. To my surprise I looked at the exif and it was shot with the 50d.

As I said, a good camera will will always be a good camera, and will always churn out good results (in the right hands!).
 
Last edited:
I've some polaroids, they are always fun to shoot with, especially the black and white. The colour is a little unstable at times, unless you like that 70's retro look. Instagram filters, who needs them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top