What was your most significant camera? Why?

Fuji Finepix S9500, it was the first camera I got with full controls and it for me into photography above just taking snaps.

I think then I got a Canon 30D, then a Sony Rx100 (still have and use it) and now a Sony A7R, next a Sony A7C.
 
Does an LPL enlarger count?

Started to love photography when I learned how to develop and print my own pics; it turned photography into magic!
 
My first camera was a Kodak 110, £11-99 from Boots in 1982. It was a passing phase then, it wasn't long before girls and fast cars became more interesting.

My most significant camera was a Canon Powershot A40, I still have it. I got it in 2004 and I didn't know it then but it is what sparked my interest in photography. I've upgraded over the years, now Canon full frame but that little A40, with all of it's 2.1mp, is what started it all for me.
 
My first "proper" camera was a Practica Pl Nova 1. I did actually want an Asahi Pentax, but could not afford one. The next best thing was a camera that used Pentax lens screw thread.
Practica was my first SLR - it had no metering, but the split image focusing was superb. Differential focusing was so simple with that camera.
I have used Nikon for over 40 years now and had the D810 since it appeared.
I have long periods when I don't take any photographs and think that cameras have become far more complicated than they need to be. I reckon I would have been better off with a camera where all the controls were at my fingertips and I did not need to delve into menus and sub menus.
 
RWDW said:
Does an LPL enlarger count?

Started to love photography when I learned how to develop and print my own pics; it turned photography into magic!
Click to expand...

I did my own B&W D&P. Seeing the image appear in the developing tray was magic. I loved that bit, but most of the rest was tedious and the smell of the chemicals was vile. I do prefer digital.
 
My dad's Voigtlander Vito B in the 70's.
I thought it was a thing of magic. I've no idea what ever happened to it, I keep meaning to buy one though, just to sit on a shelf above my desk.
 
Not my first by a long chalk, but the most significant camera I owned was a Calumet 5x4 monorail.

I spent a day in Wells with my RZ67 and shift lens photographing the churches and cathedral, and the next day popped into a photographic shop in Bath to buy some more film. We got chatting, and I said that I much preferred medium format to 35mm for the higher quality. I was then asked if I'd considered large format? They had 3 different ones in stock... I tried it, unsure if I could handle an upside down image. I found I could. Having spent the previous day with a very heavy shift lens, I was very receptive to the idea of every lens being a shift lens on a LF camera, and the saving in weight was a big bonus. After considering it overnight, I bought my first large format camera.

Eventually, I traded it in. It was a monorail (bulky) and heavy at 4.2 kg. I now use field (folding) large format cameras, in sizes from 5x4 to 10x8.
 
The first camera I had that was 'mine' was a Prinz 110 Luxe I got as a present for 'being good' when I had major surgery which started me thinking about making pictures and then about 5 years later I got a Zenit E which took me on my first steps towards 'proper' photography with a teacher/housemaster who taught me how to process and print
 
Probably my first SLR in the 80s, a Zenit B, being all manual and pretty basic meant you couldn’t leave any decisions up to the camera, excellent for learning. Also weighed a tonne so good for fitness :)
 
It must be a Cosina SLR I got in 1974. It was the first 35mm camera I owned and I remember the very first print I made from it in the bathroom of my flat. I let the enlarger power cord get in the way but it didn't stop the thrill I got as I watched this sharp and detailed print appear before my eyes. I made a better one on my second attempt.

The camera I loved the most was an Olympus OM-1. Only my Fuji has come remotely close to giving me that pleasure of handling.
 
practica TL1000 - alternated between being a solid workhorse and a film shredding device - 1 roll in 4 at random would just end up getting minced by it - but it was my first SLR, and taught me how to use a camera that was fully manual in all respects - and I got what I thought were some great pictures from it. Was mortified when I dropped it in the Alps*** and it was gone forever.



*** dropped it is sort of a understatement, "fell off a Bivi ledge on the Aig Du Midi, bouncing 3 times as it fell down over 1000m before burying itself into the glacier at the foot of the mountain" would be more accurate. Watching it drop/bounce for around 20 seconds, knowing it had taken us an entire day to climb up there really added a little perspective to that climb...
 
There's quite a few Practicas come up in the thread. Did anyone else view them as I did when they were current, as being what you bought if you couldn't afford a 'proper' camera? My brother had one for a while, also a good friend - any pictures taken always seems to carry a caveat "well, it was just a practica". There seemed a distinct pecking order, with Zenith at the bottom, Practica next and then the Japanese makes. There was also a layer above holding Contax, Leica etc, but few ordinary people aspired to such giddy heights.

Not knocking anyone's enjoyment or use of them.
 
ancient_mariner said:
There's quite a few Practicas come up in the thread. Did anyone else view them as I did when they were current, as being what you bought if you couldn't afford a 'proper' camera? My brother had one for a while, also a good friend - any pictures taken always seems to carry a caveat "well, it was just a practica". There seemed a distinct pecking order, with Zenith at the bottom, Practica next and then the Japanese makes. There was also a layer above holding Contax, Leica etc, but few ordinary people aspired to such giddy heights.

Not knocking anyone's enjoyment or use of them.
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember that pecking order. I never had a Pentax. I did have a lovely Contax but that disappeared, along with the house and the first mrs cockney.
 
ancient_mariner said:
There's quite a few Practicas come up in the thread. Did anyone else view them as I did when they were current, as being what you bought if you couldn't afford a 'proper' camera? ...
Click to expand...

Well, I would have liked an ASAHI PENTAX better, but this was too expensive for me in 1973, being a university student then, with a low income ... ---

(I should have bought a fixed lens camera like the Minolta Hi-Matic E, but I wanted a "professional camera" hence an SLR ... I never bought another lens for the CX-6 - practica ---)
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
There's quite a few Practicas come up in the thread. Did anyone else view them as I did when they were current, as being what you bought if you couldn't afford a 'proper' camera?
Click to expand...

They were the cheapest SLR in the Kay's Catalogue, I'm guessing lots of us were bought them as christmas pressies "on the drip" by our parents - I know the 14 year old me was...
 
My most significant camera was a Konica Pop I bought it just as I was getting into the "biker" world, it came with me to every rally, party and ride I did for 3 years living in the inside pocket of my bike jacket. It died in a bike accident and was replaced by a canon sure shot. I have about 50 albums made up of snapshots from this camera, many of friends I have lost over the years, I doubt there are more than a few proper photographs in them. It was not in anyway a good camera but it was always there and that taught me the old adage "the best camera in the world is the one you have in your hand" I have always had a compact camera in my pocket ever since! I'm off tomorrow touring on the bike again and though I will have a DSLR and lenses in the top box there will still be a compact in my bike jacket just to capture that "moment" I could and have tried mobile phone cameras but there is still something for me about holding a camera in my hand. Oh and the very best thing about it? It was bright red!
 
TheBigYin said:
They were the cheapest SLR in the Kay's Catalogue, I'm guessing lots of us were bought them as christmas pressies "on the drip" by our parents - I know the 14 year old me was...
Click to expand...
The Catalogue. I'd almost forgotten. :D
 
1st camera was a Polaroid land camera super swinger (ooh er missus) christmas 1972 followed by a Kodak apsc camera about three years later, then in 1983 the game changer for me the Canon AE 1.
 
Last edited:
My Dad's Rolleiflex TLR with which he taught me photographic parameters. I sadly no longer have my Dad but I will never part with that camera.
My first camera, a Miranda SLR. I don't know what happened to it but I learned a lot with it.
My third camera, a Nikon FM2, which I still have. We were joined at the hip for c.15 years and had many adventures. Aside from many satisfying photos, I also knocked out a knife wielding mugger with it.
I have zero attachments to any digital camera I have owned or still own, even though I'm a 100% digital shooter.
 
Panasonic FZ8 - my first step up from a regular point and shoot. I learnt a lot and it allowed me to learn the kind of photography I enjoyed - so when I was ready to move on to a DSLR I had more idea of the lens collection I would like.
 
Stuart_65 said:
My Dad's Rolleiflex TLR with which he taught me photographic parameters. I sadly no longer have my Dad but I will never part with that camera.
My first camera, a Miranda SLR. I don't know what happened to it but I learned a lot with it.
My third camera, a Nikon FM2, which I still have. We were joined at the hip for c.15 years and had many adventures. Aside from many satisfying photos, I also knocked out a knife wielding mugger with it.
I have zero attachments to any digital camera I have owned or still own, even though I'm a 100% digital shooter.
Click to expand...

Totally understand the attachment thing. Digital cameras don't have that "personality" that film cameras did/do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
A Canon 50D. My better half was a keen photographer and was already kitted up with a good array of lenses so it seemed like a good idea to stick with what we already had. Since then I’ve become the snapper n the household and have “borrowed” all the gear (as well as adding a few new bits and pieces ..... like three or four new bodies, several other lenses and other clutter).
 
My first camera was a Zenith B with a separate light meter, given to me by my dad when I was about 8, then I saved up for a Cosina CT-1G, traded that in for a Minolta X300, when I was about 15.
Later bought an X700 to go with it, also added a Mamiya 645, off a work friend.
Went to art college to study photography and that unfortunately killed any desire to do it professionally, I'd rather be in the darkroom.
I didn't touch a camera for years, until my brother sold me his Nikon D200, I still have that plus a D810 and an infrared converted D7000.
I still have all my cameras including my dad's Pentax ME Super I sold my Mamiya because I needed the money which I really regret now.
 
My Dad gave me my first camera a Zenit E, I could only afford B&W film so pictures where taken with great care and planning but I was hooked. After I started work I upgraded to a Canon AV1 and boy was it an upgrade. Now that I could afford Colour the bug really bit, soon I had added another Canon AE1 to my kit. By then I had my own darkroom and spent many hours PP when it involved imagination and an airbrush !.

Finally I could afford my most significant 'dream' camera the Canon A1 and all was well with the world, then kids came along, my darkroom became a nursery and by child two I had no time for my hobby.
I later sold all my kit and bought a Canon EOS500 (which I still have today) for family snaps.

Just recently I have rekindled my much loved hobby and joined the digital revolution !
 
Cockney said:
Totally understand the attachment thing. Digital cameras don't have that "personality" that film cameras did/do.
Click to expand...
I think one of the main reasons is that film bodies didn't go out of date whereas digital cameras are subject to constant and rapid improvement. It was normal to be using a film body that was often a couple of decades old, or more. Digital obsolescence is partly marketing driven but also down to a difference in the technology; improvements in film didn't mean having to replace your camera.
 
Stuart_65 said:
I think one of the main reasons is that film bodies didn't go out of date whereas digital cameras are subject to constant and rapid improvement. It was normal to be using a film body that was often a couple of decades old, or more. Digital obsolescence is partly marketing driven but also down to a difference in the technology; improvements in film didn't mean having to replace your camera.
Click to expand...
That’s true. We need something a bit like the Ricoh GXR. A modular camera where you slot in a new sensor. That seems to me (in my ignorance) to be eventually feasible once computing power becomes sufficient to be reprogrammed for the new sensor. Something like that anyway, it’s the parts your hands touch & eyes look at that lead to liking the physical camera when everything else is done in the darkroom, photoshop etc.
 
Stuart_65 said:
I think one of the main reasons is that film bodies didn't go out of date whereas digital cameras are subject to constant and rapid improvement. It was normal to be using a film body that was often a couple of decades old, or more. Digital obsolescence is partly marketing driven but also down to a difference in the technology; improvements in film didn't mean having to replace your camera.
Click to expand...
Not wishing to be rude, I think that's a bit of rose-tinted nostalgia. I bought a Canon A1 in 1980, and while it's still going strong (two services and 40 years later) when I was using it for gig photography in the early 90s it was seen by my fellow photographers as 'old hat', as they were using autofocus SLRs by that time. By 1998 Canon had introduced the EOS-3, with 45 eye-selectable AF points (you chose the AF point just by looking at it), a 21 zone metering system, lighting fast AF, with predictive AF and servo AF, etc. This camera was in a totally different league to the A1.

So yes, 35mm SLR bodies did go out of date and, as much as I love my old Canon A1, given the hard, cold, choice between that and something like an EOS-3 or EOS 30, if it came down to delivering the goods I would have to take the 3 or 30 (which still work with Canon's latest EF lenses). So, unfortunately, improvements in technology meant you had to replace your camera even in those days, probably around every 6 years or so, or get left behind, which seems to be around the same change point these days.
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
Not wishing to be rude, I think that's a bit of rose-tinted nostalgia. I bought a Canon A1 in 1980, and while it's still going strong (two services and 40 years later) when I was using it for gig photography in the early 90s it was seen by my fellow photographers as 'old hat', as they were using autofocus SLRs by that time By 1998 Canon had introduced the EOS-3, with 45 eye-selectable AF points (you chose the AF point by looking at it), a 21 zone metering system, lighting fast AF, with predictive AF and servo AF, etc. This camera was in a totally different league to the A1.

So yes, 35mm SLR bodies did go out of date and, as much as I love my old Canon A1, given the hard, cold, choice between that and something like an EOS-3 or EOS 30, if it came down to delivering the goods I would have to take the 3 or 30 (which still work with Canon's latest EF lenses). So unfortunately, improvements in technology meant you had to replace your camera even in those days, probably around every 6 years or so, which seems to be around the same change point these days.
Click to expand...

I understand your point but I think it's different in a professional context. Having said that. Don't you love your A1 a little bit, in a way you don't love the others?
 
Snip:
Cockney said:
Don't you love your A1 a little bit, in a way you don't love the others?
Click to expand...
Oh yes, very much so, see post #18 https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...st-significant-camera-why.716208/post-8789366 that's why I've just paid to have it serviced and I'll never want to sell it. It really was (and still is) very special camera to me.

The point I was making was that technology was steadily on the march (constant and rapid improvement) even in those days, otherwise we'd never have had the Canon A1 (the first camera to give us the PASM exposure settings we're so used to today) in the first place, let alone the multi-mode AF 35mm SLRs that followed within the following 10 years, which subsequently paved the way (features wise) to the full frame DSLRs many of us still use today.
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
Not wishing to be rude, I think that's a bit of rose-tinted nostalgia. I bought a Canon A1 in 1980, and while it's still going strong (two services and 40 years later) when I was using it for gig photography in the early 90s it was seen by my fellow photographers as 'old hat', as they were using autofocus SLRs by that time. By 1998 Canon had introduced the EOS-3, with 45 eye-selectable AF points (you chose the AF point just by looking at it), a 21 zone metering system, lighting fast AF, with predictive AF and servo AF, etc. This camera was in a totally different league to the A1.

So yes, 35mm SLR bodies did go out of date and, as much as I love my old Canon A1, given the hard, cold, choice between that and something like an EOS-3 or EOS 30, if it came down to delivering the goods I would have to take the 3 or 30 (which still work with Canon's latest EF lenses). So, unfortunately, improvements in technology meant you had to replace your camera even in those days, probably around every 6 years or so, or get left behind, which seems to be around the same change point these days.
Click to expand...

No rudeness perceived. As Cockney said, it certainly differed according to context, especially if one moved to AF or not. I had a F801s alongside the FM2 for a while and I remember being envious of the few people I knew who had a Nikon F4, but it was out of my budget and to be honest not necessary for most of what I did. In my context (mountaineering, travel "adventure" <vomit> photography) old manuals were de rigeur unless you were a sponsored pro. But yes you do have a point, I just don't think the obsolescence was quite the same. There are a small number of people sticking by their D700 or 5D mk1 but this is almost niche compared to the then normality of people using decade-old examples of the Nikon FM2, Pentax LX, Olympus OM4 or even the venerable C330 etc.

It feels like high-end camera development cycles are now less than 6 years, and I'm mainly a Canon shooter, not a company known for being quick off the line. I feels like Nikon and Fuji are releasing updates every couple of years, and the R5 and 6 are fairly hot on the heels of the R & RP.

Anyway, always nice to chat about old cameras :)
 
RWDW said:
Does an LPL enlarger count?

Started to love photography when I learned how to develop and print my own pics; it turned photography into magic!
Click to expand...
My father worked for Phillips, a chap he worked with sold him a Gnome enlarger. After working Saturday morning he brought home this strange contraption and told me he’d show me what it was once it was dark. I was about 8 or 9 I suppose, it felt like being 5 and waiting for Christmas! Eventually that evening with the curtains closed and the living room and hall lights out he performed magic by sticking a negative in it and voila! He didn’t even mix chemicals just projected the image,when he actually took me into the bathroom with a safelight on and printed one I was totally blown away! It turned out he’d kept a box with tank, trays etc since before he had kids (my oldest sister would have been 15) having bought a Praktica L he’d decided it was time to educate me!
 
A Nikon D300s. I’d been happily shooting a D70 up to the point I saw the D300s...it was the camera I had to have and introduced me to GAS.

When I did get it, for some reason I hated it! And I’ve been on the GAS train ever since. :rolleyes::ROFLMAO:
 
Mine was a Pentax ME super- and 50mm lens I took this to the Falkland Island whilst serving in the Parachute regiment- started me on the photography trail

I still have this camera and lens

YXspiZ7.jpg


Les :)
 
Used my brother in laws Practica Nova 1 to record the haul when we went fishing & that perked my interest so saved all my earnings from my job at the local butchers / farm and bought my first camera a Pentax MX, honed my skills with that before buying an LX a few years later then moved to Nikon for 30 years before switching to my Fuji's with the XT4 being the latest.
 
my first was a halina 35x that my parents got me for xmas in about 1966. I then begged and borrowed very basic darkroom stuff over the next year - oh and an old exposure meter to supplement my sunny 16 guesswork

Used it until 1970 then a hiatus because of university and work etc until about 1983 when I bought a used contax 139 with the 1.7/50. Love that camera and still use it today with a couple of other 139 bodies and more contax glass.
Now, after starting with digital ILC’s in 2010, mainly use same glass on a Z6 - much easier to focus than slr.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top