Original , Restored or Modified ?

[dee]

What is your preference in camera collecting ?
I admit to prefering cameras in good or restored condition , whilst loving the patina of my twin black Leica IIs ...and seeing a 1930s Contax III restored with the help of another example .
I would also wish to clean , polish and recover a tired camera , rather than cling to originality .

Conversely , I love the opportunity to reinvent a camera to my unique specification , such as a 1930s Contax body [ from the spare ] with Kiev 4 meter and controls , even selecting a specific meter cover and door , with self timer removed .... Oh , and new leather ...

Is this interference Ok ? Or should I leave well alone ?

dee

[herron]

I have to admit it's always a thrill to find a classic in mint condition, but I've also had lots of fun restoring a beat-up one to great condition. Never tried to cobble something new from various parts of other cameras (with the exception of lenses), but wouldn't mind trying.

So, is one my preference? Yes! All of the above! ;D

[daveh]

There were plenty of MGs running round in the 1960s with Ford engines, rather than the old side valve originals. To the purists this was anathema. In fact it kept many MGs going which otherwise would have been totally scrapped. Yes a mint original is best, but all are welcome. The only one that worries me a little is the brand new MG made from parts, i.e. nothing on the car is original.

Like Ron , all of the above.

[Deleted]

Some of my Commie Cameras are original but if I had more than one of the same model I have sometimes replace the vulcanite with real leather and strap lugs. I've also had instances where, to get one "Red" Zorki 5 in working order I shipped two non working bodies to my Russian friend Oleg, who sent me back one working model made from the parts of two. Not a big deal with FSU cameras as there were many slight variations in original cameras depending on what parts were available at that particular time.

Don't know if I would be as cavalier with a pre war Contax (had one and sold it to a guy in Australia).

Wayne

[nikonbob]

I tend to like cameras restored to original condition OTH a customized camera is also nice. There is something about a tool that has been modified to your own personal specifications. I would never mod an original in near mint condition but a ratty one could be a base for customizing. Sooo, all of the above.

Bob

[mickeyobe]

I think all three options are acceptable.

I, personally, prefer to restore damaged and deteriorated parts of an old camera and clean it up but never try to make it look original. If it does (very rarely), I put a little note inside the camera stating that it has been restored. I feel that I am only the temporary owner and am holding it in trust for future collectors.

I have never modified a camera as the original instrument was my reason for buying it.

However, when one buys a camera I see no reason why they should not do with it as they wish.

Mickey

[dee]

Hmmm - so everything goes maybe .

I admit that modifying a Contax is a touch extreme , but three broken cameras have a new lease of life - and none have been
broken up for parts . [ though a couple of Kiev 4s died for the cause ! ]

ASD loves ' sets ' but Kiev cameras are divided into Kiev II / III type chassis and modified Kiev 4 ... and Contax , which I can read / resolve is much easier . Because of this , I bought a good Contax III for restoration , but it needed a rough second body for meter spares as I wanted it perfect [ most meters are long dead ] and Kiev parts won't fit .
It's wonderful , with age and patina .

I also bought a box of Contax II parts which the Arsensal Kiev Techs rebuilt with a Kiev II shutter .
I love it 'cos it is all New with no history and looks great .

The headless Contax III was mated with the early Kiev 4 top plate / compact meter , controls etc .
I love using a Kiev 4 , but the shear quality of a Contax, or early KNeB even a tired one , is special - and I will now have a set
of profiles in Contax style and another with KNeB name plates as a Kiev IIIa has been coaxed to mate with another Kiev 4 LOL .

Other than a near mint KNeB II bought in error [ terrible e-bay pic and cheap ] I would not buy a mint classic , unless a 1979 UK sourced Kiev 4a in box with all paperwork qualifies as a somewhat compromised classic .
It's too much of a responsiblity !

dee

[drako]

If value is important, the classics over time will be most desireable in a close to original condition as possible. The farther we move from film, the more such models will come to be seen as iconic of their era. And that -- a purchase of history -- is what will be most desireable in the years ahead.

IMHO!

[dee]

I anticipate not being here when my valueless Kontaxes come up for dee'sposal !
Hopefully , there will be no incentive to sell them , so one or two will see me out .
Leica IIIc prices have dropped dramatically , so maybe some of those classics may not be so desirable in this digital age .
dee