- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
and help to keep the site free for all
The 10 Greatest/Best Selling/Most Influential Film Cameras
- Thread starter Andysnap
- Start date
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
How the hell you drove to my house Raggy, I will never know, you must have used the force or something cos you clearly didn't do it by sight...
Although my campervan practically drives itself I did drive round in circles for quite some time and ended up on a building site.
Funniest thing I've read in weeks....
Who asked you :razz:
Never thought of the F3 as ugly. F4 definitely beaten by the ugly stick IMO though. Do think that the F3 looks better with a DE2 compared to a DE3 viewfinder mind.
The F4 is Gisele Bündchen compared to the Susan Boyle inspired F3.
excalibur2
My F4's Broken...
- Messages
- 11,781
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Now there's a man that knows what he's talking about
Well he must do as he didn't say anything against my Nikon N2000
But he also wrote about Konica if anyone is interested:-
http://www.archiphoto.com/personal pages/Konica.html
- Messages
- 1,690
- Name
- Lloyd
- Edit My Images
- Yes
There's a difference between greatest (very subjective) and most influential (which can be argued for with sales/impact on the market), but this list is a mix of both really:
IMO it's better to go by series for these as they're all largely the same:
- Leica M: unbeatable in the 28-50mm range, along with the Nikon F series they're the reportage camera of the 20th century (users included HCB, Klein, Davidson, Webb, Frank, Koudelka, Erwitt)
- Hasselblad V: iconic studio camera, comprehensive modular system. Can't remember any names closely associated with them though...
- Rolleiflex: again, iconic studio camera, used by some influential fashion and portrait photographers, could also be used in reportage situations like a Leica due to their quietness and lack of mirror slap (which definitely separates it from the Hasselblads). Used by Capa, Bailey, Avedon, Eisenstadt, McCullin.
And for these, separate cameras, since the series they belong to evolved dramatically (or don't belong to one at all):
- Nikon F2: Same thing as the Leica M series really
- Canon EOS 650: Clean break for Canon (a new mount) that paid off immensely in the 90's/00's. Could be likened to Leica switching from screw to M-mount.
- Kodak Box Brownie: brought photography to the masses
- Polaroid SX70: a design classic and the symbol for instant photography
- Konica Hexar AF: Greatest 35mm point and shoot ever (I'm biased though). Fantastic lens, super accurate AF, infallible metering. A real photographer's camera, I'd say it's better than a Leica for street shooting.
- Canon AE-1
and
- Pentax K1000: these SLRs are damn near ubiquitous
IMO it's better to go by series for these as they're all largely the same:
- Leica M: unbeatable in the 28-50mm range, along with the Nikon F series they're the reportage camera of the 20th century (users included HCB, Klein, Davidson, Webb, Frank, Koudelka, Erwitt)
- Hasselblad V: iconic studio camera, comprehensive modular system. Can't remember any names closely associated with them though...
- Rolleiflex: again, iconic studio camera, used by some influential fashion and portrait photographers, could also be used in reportage situations like a Leica due to their quietness and lack of mirror slap (which definitely separates it from the Hasselblads). Used by Capa, Bailey, Avedon, Eisenstadt, McCullin.
And for these, separate cameras, since the series they belong to evolved dramatically (or don't belong to one at all):
- Nikon F2: Same thing as the Leica M series really
- Canon EOS 650: Clean break for Canon (a new mount) that paid off immensely in the 90's/00's. Could be likened to Leica switching from screw to M-mount.
- Kodak Box Brownie: brought photography to the masses
- Polaroid SX70: a design classic and the symbol for instant photography
- Konica Hexar AF: Greatest 35mm point and shoot ever (I'm biased though). Fantastic lens, super accurate AF, infallible metering. A real photographer's camera, I'd say it's better than a Leica for street shooting.
- Canon AE-1
and
- Pentax K1000: these SLRs are damn near ubiquitous
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,758
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think keeping film alive is innovative, the Bel-Air is best they've done so far, i hope they continue down that road and i wish them the best of luck. Saying there wouldn't be a film market without them is going into pure speculation, i don't know that and no one ever could. Since we are talking about cameras and whether any of them are great is surely the point of this thread?
George Eastman made it his mission to get photography to the masses and out of the studio and the advanced amateur, the Brownie was the first real point and shoot camera and achieved his goal, it pretty much created an entire industry for consumer cameras. The only person after him that did this was Edwin Land with the Polaroid camera. Someone may have made a consumer camera at one point but who knows how long it might have taken, an extra 10 years, 20? I have no idea, i can't predict alternate realities.
I won't fault Lomo's business acumen and drive but they haven't really created any cameras, let alone great ones, they've resold or copied them, as i said before the Bel-Air is a nice change and i hope they continue in that direction.
In your opinion
You are contradicting yourself though lol.
You say a camera must innovate in the market to be considered great, but then when presented with something that has innovated the market - you disregard it.
I'm happy that there's a good debate, and you clearly know more than myself about cameras, but at the same time your opinions are clearly clouded by your own views of what you like, and are happy to contradict your own definitions of great to avoid cameras that you don't like.
Last edited:
I'd say the ricoh GR1 is better than the konika
but again, I'm biased to say the least haha. Never even seen a konika come up for sale, it is a camera that intrigues me though
- Messages
- 1,833
- Name
- Nick (yes there is more than one of us)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not sure if I could make 10 cameras but a couple that seems to have been missed if the:
Minolta 7000 this was the camera that in 1985 launched AF into that shape of cameras we know today.
Also I am going to say the Nikon FA multi mode like the T90 but this one came with Matrix Metering and so pushed metering in cameras to a far easy to use and, at the time, very accurate system.
I am also going to say the Nikon F4 should be included, pro AF system with backward compatability, 7 CPU's in the machine, egonmically the best designed camera of the era. Yes some will argue that its is "ugly and plastic" but if you look beyond that it is a work of design genius.
Minolta 7000 this was the camera that in 1985 launched AF into that shape of cameras we know today.
Also I am going to say the Nikon FA multi mode like the T90 but this one came with Matrix Metering and so pushed metering in cameras to a far easy to use and, at the time, very accurate system.
I am also going to say the Nikon F4 should be included, pro AF system with backward compatability, 7 CPU's in the machine, egonmically the best designed camera of the era. Yes some will argue that its is "ugly and plastic" but if you look beyond that it is a work of design genius.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Knikki said:
^^^WHS^^^
It is indeed a piece of design genius
Show me the innovation Lomo has done to the camera design market, i can't see any boundary pushing or technical innovation in their cameras, all i can see (other than the new bel-air as i have conceded, but i think it's a bit too recent to discuss) in their range is over-priced cameras they've copied from elsewhere. They've been good at getting their brand and aesthetic out there and more people using film but that's not the discussion.
Lomo cameras don't appeal to me (and yes, i have used them), i don't hate them or dislike them, i'm just ambivalent about them. Give me some examples of true innovation from them and i'll talk about it.
- Messages
- 573
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Talking of pushing boundaries and technical innovations doesn't Minolta deserve a mention?
SRT101 was the first slr with TTL, XD7 the first slr with A and S modes and also P (although they didn't really realise the importance of what they had released and it was accompanied by the fanfare that it deserved at the time!). And the 7000 was the first autofocus slr in 1985.
I think the XD7 deserves a place at least.
Mark
SRT101 was the first slr with TTL, XD7 the first slr with A and S modes and also P (although they didn't really realise the importance of what they had released and it was accompanied by the fanfare that it deserved at the time!). And the 7000 was the first autofocus slr in 1985.
I think the XD7 deserves a place at least.
Mark
- Messages
- 2,104
- Name
- Samuel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not quite, it was the first SLR to have primitive multi metering TTL or Contrast Light Compensation as Minolta called it, basically a predecessor to modern mutli/matrix metering where the light was measured from two light sensors at the top and bottom of the frame and exposed for the one that read the darkest (to put it simply), giving much better metering in a lot of cases such as landscapes with the ground and the sky (but not if you turned it portrait!).
As I said above, the first camera with TTL metering was the prototype Pentax Spotmatic, but it was beaten very narrowly to market by the Topcon RE Super.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,643
- Name
- Ed
- Edit My Images
- No
^^^WHS^^^
It is indeed a piece of design genius
AF was rubbish, very slow and noisy, none of us ever used the AF, far too unreliable, until silent wave lenses came out, and by then Nikon had lost it's pro market crown.
Only nice thing I can say about the F4 was that you could take off the prism and do some nice worm eye view pics with a 20mm...Remember taking some nice cricket pics in the middle of a housing estate with it once and you could do manual film rewind, handy in the middle of a press conference...
Last edited:
- Messages
- 839
- Name
- Francesco
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I know there has already been a lot (some would say too much ;-) ) Nikon love here already, but one thing that has just occurred to me which really sets the Nikon single digit F cameras apart is the 'system':
1. firstly the lenses, which have great forward/back compatibility through camera series, and were unsurpassed by any other manufacturer in terms of the scope and variety and sheer number of different lenses available. And the quality was and remains largely outstanding, both optically and mechanically.
2. everything else: the number of different finders available, the staggering number of focusing screen choices, the motordrives, the accessories (close up equipment, intervalometers, 250 backs, you name it).
The F3 was probably the king of this stuff, and made it a serious working tool for anything from war journalism to a scientific laboratory or the military.
I think what I am doing here as well is perhaps taking the focus away from "the camera" which we are trying to judge on, but in truth a Nikon F3 is nothing without the system, so it is worth mentioning as part of the decision making, I think.
1. firstly the lenses, which have great forward/back compatibility through camera series, and were unsurpassed by any other manufacturer in terms of the scope and variety and sheer number of different lenses available. And the quality was and remains largely outstanding, both optically and mechanically.
2. everything else: the number of different finders available, the staggering number of focusing screen choices, the motordrives, the accessories (close up equipment, intervalometers, 250 backs, you name it).
The F3 was probably the king of this stuff, and made it a serious working tool for anything from war journalism to a scientific laboratory or the military.
I think what I am doing here as well is perhaps taking the focus away from "the camera" which we are trying to judge on, but in truth a Nikon F3 is nothing without the system, so it is worth mentioning as part of the decision making, I think.
- Messages
- 18
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
10 "greatest" film cameras.....
Would be better as "10 most influential film cameras" or "10 film cameras that pushed the medium forward" or "10 best film cameras"
The problem with "greatest" is what does that actually mean? IF it is the best ones then we start with the F6 and pick the nine nearest to it! Even Canon agreed that the F6 was the best 35mm film camera that will ever be made.
If we are looking at the most influential cameras then the likes of the box brownie need to come into it plus cameras that have changed they way other cameras are made forever. It would be an interesting discussion but having read what some people have posted it appears that people are looking at it from different positions.
Would be better as "10 most influential film cameras" or "10 film cameras that pushed the medium forward" or "10 best film cameras"
The problem with "greatest" is what does that actually mean? IF it is the best ones then we start with the F6 and pick the nine nearest to it! Even Canon agreed that the F6 was the best 35mm film camera that will ever be made.
If we are looking at the most influential cameras then the likes of the box brownie need to come into it plus cameras that have changed they way other cameras are made forever. It would be an interesting discussion but having read what some people have posted it appears that people are looking at it from different positions.
OP
- Messages
- 16,290
- Name
- Andy Grant
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Brian, you are correct on some levels however I did not want to make it a pedantic list of only those cameras that have 'changed photography' in a massive way. There is room for the greatest, the most influential and even the best selling.
It was just a passing fancy, an idle moments reflection which I thought would be of interest and stimulate some debate, which it has.
For the sake of clarity I have changed the title....
It was just a passing fancy, an idle moments reflection which I thought would be of interest and stimulate some debate, which it has.
For the sake of clarity I have changed the title....
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Heaven forbid, a pedantic northerner
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The name "Midlands" does not correspond to any current administrative area, and there is therefore no strict definition. However, it is generally considered to include the counties of Derbyshire, Gloucestershire, Herefordshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Rutland, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, the West Midlands and Worcestershire. The 2001 census included Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire in the Midlands, though East Anglia (the collective name for these counties) is not usually considered part of the Midlands. The population of the midlands is 13,884,100.
Crewe is in Cheshire isn't it? That's north in my book
TheBigYin
Moderator
- Messages
- 16,671
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
well - I always think of the north starting in the traditional manner - i.e. North of the mouth of the Humber (hence Northumberland - or as you southern jessies (frenchies to the man!) have it on your maps "beyond here there be dragonf" )
)
- Messages
- 3,136
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
North isn't a place, it's a state of mind. Anyway, back on topic!
As I'm in the fortunate position to own an F100 and an F6, I can confirm that the F6 is a fabulous camera. It is slightly bigger and heavier though, but much as I love the ergonomics and feel of the F100, the F6 is just nicer to use somehow. Whether it will be the last proper SLR to be released remains to be seen, but I doubt anything can surpass it as an all rounder.
Nikon F6 (instead of your F100), because it really IS genuinely the last word in 35mm SLR design. Probably betters the F100 in every regard (and I don't think it's much heavier either). But that doesn't make me right of course
As I'm in the fortunate position to own an F100 and an F6, I can confirm that the F6 is a fabulous camera. It is slightly bigger and heavier though, but much as I love the ergonomics and feel of the F100, the F6 is just nicer to use somehow. Whether it will be the last proper SLR to be released remains to be seen, but I doubt anything can surpass it as an all rounder.
- Messages
- 839
- Name
- Francesco
- Edit My Images
- Yes
North isn't a place, it's a state of mind. Anyway, back on topic!
As I'm in the fortunate position to own an F100 and an F6, I can confirm that the F6 is a fabulous camera. It is slightly bigger and heavier though, but much as I love the ergonomics and feel of the F100, the F6 is just nicer to use somehow. Whether it will be the last proper SLR to be released remains to be seen, but I doubt anything can surpass it as an all rounder.
Lucky man, it's the one Nikon body I don't have that I really want.
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
TheGreatSoprendo said:
It's on my list as well, of the classic F single figure range I need an original F and F6 to have the full set, one day
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,136
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- No
It's the only one of the top end F range I have. I keep looking at F3's but I'd probably not use it much if I got one, as my FM doesn't get much use these days. Actually, my F100 hasn't had much use either since I got the F6.
- Messages
- 11,308
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I also have to give a mention to the Minolta Dynax 9, a beast of a camera with autoexposure and autofocus that was a match for the Nikon F5 and focal plane shutter that went from 30seconds to - 1/12,000 of a second, now that's fast
- Messages
- 2,104
- Name
- Samuel
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I also have to give a mention to the Minolta Dynax 9, a beast of a camera with autoexposure and autofocus that was a match for the Nikon F5 and focal plane shutter that went from 30seconds to - 1/12,000 of a second, now that's fast
And the fact that it could also sync flash at 1/300th as well as right up to 12/000th when using high speed sync!
Probably the fastest focal plane shutter ever built into an SLR as the early CCD Nikon/Canon DSLR's were only able to reach over 1/8000th (up to 16,000th) and 1/500 flash sync by using sensor switching.
- Messages
- 265
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I would say the Canon T90 for me was the starting block for the ergonomics and shape of all Canons pro cameras like the EOS 1v and 1D models now. I really liked the way the T90 worked, it's buttons seemed to placed in the perfect position.
PS I'm in Newcastle Under Lyme which is in the Midlands - I don't consider Crewe to be "proper" Midlands either hehehe.
PS I'm in Newcastle Under Lyme which is in the Midlands - I don't consider Crewe to be "proper" Midlands either hehehe.
- Messages
- 1,076
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Interesting that so many people have suggested so many 'high-end' cameras; apart from the immortal brownie, and the enthusiasts Trip. But where did we all start?
Two unsung heros's for you to consider:-
The Konika C35. It was not revolutionary, nor evolutionary. It wasn't particularly sophisticted; but... when I was a kid... this was the camera every-one was snapping with.
Grandad, was 'farting about' with a Kodak Retinet, waving a light meter around, and getting frustrated with the range-finder, hunting for a tape-measure, doing anything and everything BUT take a photograph...
My dad was getting all pretentiouse, with a Pentax...
And there was my auntie, using her hubbies Konika... "Its simple darling; just point and press.... just remember to take the lens cap of first...."
It was one of the first mass produced electronic shutter instamatics offered at a mass market price, and it got people taking pictures, and pretty good ones..... when they remembered to remove the lens cap!
So enter it's successor...
The Olympus XA2. It solved the lens cap issue with its award winning 'slide'; a feature so many cameras adopted in the years that followed! Its much vaunted sales feature was it used the same off-the-film metering system as the then vaunted OM series SLR's. It was small and compact; easy to carry, easy to use, and while the dedicated detacheable flash made it a bit more bulky, did hint towards fully integrated flashes.
I was given one by my Dad for my 10th birthday, in 1980. I had the choice between that and a Pentax 110 SLR, and while the Pentax now may have novelty value; that little Olympus has delivered, and delivered, and delivered. For twenty years, that little camera went almost every where I did. It's bashed and battered, and ten years ago I realised that the occassional bit of flare I was getting was actually the lens coating disintegrating, but its had more meters of film pass through it than any other camera I have ever owned... which makes it a 'great' camera to ME.... but for the same twenty years, it set the standard for a compact camera; and SO many people, particularly women, uninterested in fiddling with dials and buttons, got into photography using one, to take pictures that were, pretty impressive for such a little camera.
Two more?
The Russian Zenit and East-German Praktica, Pentax copies. The Praktica's even got Through The lens light metering! Not sure the Zenits ever did, but still! You used to be able to buy a Praktica 'Kit' in Dixons, with about three lenses, a flash, and a guide to SLR photography, all in a profesional looking aluminium case, for about £50, when my Olympus XA was almost twice that!
Simple, unsophisticated, rather err... clunky, and old fashioned, they were, like the two compacts, neither revolutionary, nor evolutionary. They were... cheap. But for so many a school-boy, they were a christmas present that introduced them to the persuit. For so many grown-ups starting out, they were the toe in the water, that got them going.
Might not be cameras we would aspire to; not cameras we would normally applaud; but for so many they WERE the camera they took pictures with!
End of the day, photo's are taken to get pictures, pictures for people to look at. They aren't really interested in what took them, only whether they are 'interesting'. And you cant get an interesting photo unless you have a photo, and you cant get a photo without a camera, so these, humble cameras that did THAT and got SO many pictures that other wise just wouldn;t have been taken? I think that gives them some measure of greatness.
Oh... hi, btw... I'm Mike & I've just joined. And from Warwichshire. That bit of Britain in the middle neither you northern monekeys nor southern pansies wish to include in your domanse! & signing in, having just aquired my first DSLR, and trying to work out HTF to get a RAW image out of it onto the puter, and why, it says NEF not RAW!?!?!? I'm sure I'll figure it.... at some point! Hey! Its cheaper than buying film! So far that's one of the few plus points I ca find for it... whether I'll find any more I dont know.
Two unsung heros's for you to consider:-
The Konika C35. It was not revolutionary, nor evolutionary. It wasn't particularly sophisticted; but... when I was a kid... this was the camera every-one was snapping with.
Grandad, was 'farting about' with a Kodak Retinet, waving a light meter around, and getting frustrated with the range-finder, hunting for a tape-measure, doing anything and everything BUT take a photograph...
My dad was getting all pretentiouse, with a Pentax...
And there was my auntie, using her hubbies Konika... "Its simple darling; just point and press.... just remember to take the lens cap of first...."
It was one of the first mass produced electronic shutter instamatics offered at a mass market price, and it got people taking pictures, and pretty good ones..... when they remembered to remove the lens cap!
So enter it's successor...
The Olympus XA2. It solved the lens cap issue with its award winning 'slide'; a feature so many cameras adopted in the years that followed! Its much vaunted sales feature was it used the same off-the-film metering system as the then vaunted OM series SLR's. It was small and compact; easy to carry, easy to use, and while the dedicated detacheable flash made it a bit more bulky, did hint towards fully integrated flashes.
I was given one by my Dad for my 10th birthday, in 1980. I had the choice between that and a Pentax 110 SLR, and while the Pentax now may have novelty value; that little Olympus has delivered, and delivered, and delivered. For twenty years, that little camera went almost every where I did. It's bashed and battered, and ten years ago I realised that the occassional bit of flare I was getting was actually the lens coating disintegrating, but its had more meters of film pass through it than any other camera I have ever owned... which makes it a 'great' camera to ME.... but for the same twenty years, it set the standard for a compact camera; and SO many people, particularly women, uninterested in fiddling with dials and buttons, got into photography using one, to take pictures that were, pretty impressive for such a little camera.
Two more?
The Russian Zenit and East-German Praktica, Pentax copies. The Praktica's even got Through The lens light metering! Not sure the Zenits ever did, but still! You used to be able to buy a Praktica 'Kit' in Dixons, with about three lenses, a flash, and a guide to SLR photography, all in a profesional looking aluminium case, for about £50, when my Olympus XA was almost twice that!
Simple, unsophisticated, rather err... clunky, and old fashioned, they were, like the two compacts, neither revolutionary, nor evolutionary. They were... cheap. But for so many a school-boy, they were a christmas present that introduced them to the persuit. For so many grown-ups starting out, they were the toe in the water, that got them going.
Might not be cameras we would aspire to; not cameras we would normally applaud; but for so many they WERE the camera they took pictures with!
End of the day, photo's are taken to get pictures, pictures for people to look at. They aren't really interested in what took them, only whether they are 'interesting'. And you cant get an interesting photo unless you have a photo, and you cant get a photo without a camera, so these, humble cameras that did THAT and got SO many pictures that other wise just wouldn;t have been taken? I think that gives them some measure of greatness.
Oh... hi, btw... I'm Mike & I've just joined. And from Warwichshire. That bit of Britain in the middle neither you northern monekeys nor southern pansies wish to include in your domanse! & signing in, having just aquired my first DSLR, and trying to work out HTF to get a RAW image out of it onto the puter, and why, it says NEF not RAW!?!?!? I'm sure I'll figure it.... at some point! Hey! Its cheaper than buying film! So far that's one of the few plus points I ca find for it... whether I'll find any more I dont know.
- Messages
- 5,326
- Edit My Images
- No
Superb first post, welcome to TP and especially F&C. I see digital is giving you problems... tempted to go back to the dark s(l)ide?
(NEF is Nikon's own RAW format, Canon has an equivalent CR2. You need to put it in software like View NX/Capture NX/Lightroom/Photoshop, any software with a RAW processor)
(NEF is Nikon's own RAW format, Canon has an equivalent CR2. You need to put it in software like View NX/Capture NX/Lightroom/Photoshop, any software with a RAW processor)
- Messages
- 6,732
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Welcome Mike. As for your RAWs I recommend soaking the whole thing in 1:100 rodinal for an hour. That will get something usable out of most things!