Vintage Digital Cameras?

[Dave]

I have a Sony Mavica, which I think was the first of its line. It is at least 23 years old, about 1994, or earlier. It stored on tiny floppies, about 2" total. Dave

[yashica1943]

My first digital camera, which I still have and use occasionally, is a Pentax Optio 30 3.2 mp camera. I bought it new in about 2003. For its size and price it was excellent and I like the fact that it uses AA batteries (2).
I had a 10 x 8 print made up from one image, not photoshopped or tinkered with and entered it in my local camera club competition. It scored 10/10.
I take the camera out for some exercise occasionally, very slow, but it does have an optical viewfinder, which for me is essential and is pocketable.
Never used anything else until I bought a Canon Powershot S100 ? 9 mp. but I caught it in a car door and broke the rear screen.
Current favourite (compact)is a Sony RX100. Picture quality is fantastic.

[hannes]

When I first thought about getting a digital camera it was the Coolpix 900 which was my favorite. But I did not buy it because I thought it never can replace slide film. I got my first digital camera in 2003, an Olympus C-300. I used it for family snapshots, but for "important" fotos I still shot slides with the Nikon F301. In 2007 I got a the D70s, and stopped shooting film in 2008.

I still have the Olympus C-300, it is still working but I retired it. The D70s is also retired now. It ws replaced by a D300 and now my actual digital SLR is a D700.

Since my camera collection started with the cameras I used, now my digital camera collection also starts with the cameras I used.

A few weeks ago on "Photo Börse" flea market I stumbled over a really nice working Coolpix 950. I could not resist. Loaded with fresh batteries it shoots good wuality images on a 256MB compat flash card.

Somebody wrote that old digital cameras may fail. I see not a big difference to electronic film cameras. In addition to failed electronic these cameras may fail due to plastic mechanical gear breaking.

My APS Nikon Pronea-S makes a terrible noise of grinding plastic when winding the film 8-(
My fist Nikon FA did fail due to broken metal gear in film winding, not to electronic problems.

Hannes

[kodaker]

Although I had a Sony Mavica and a Fujifilm MX700 before ,my first real digital camera was the Nikon 990 that I paid $900 for in 2000. That camera made a lot of pictures for me and I still have 50 or so of them printed at 11x14 or bigger and many of them framed. It was great at closeups. Many a bug or tiny flower posed for me then.

[yashica1943]

I joined a camera club in about 2004, I didn't stay there long, due to the 'clique' atmosphere. One night the chairman brought in his new Olympus C 5050? compact which had cost him about £500 and all the members present were gathered round him 'oohing and 'aahing' about it. I didn't rate digital photos and cameras then and my main camera was a 35mm Minolta 9000. Earlier this year one of the same Olympus cameras was on a car boot sale table for £5 for several weeks and nobody wanted it.

[hannes]

While I was looking for a Nikon Speedlight SB-28 for my Nikon F100 I found this:



A complete outfit Nikon Coolpix 995 whith SB-28, Flash bar SK-E900, flash coupler AS-E900, and the Tele and Wide Auxiliary lens. All together in a nice camera bag from a seller in Austria.

The Fisch Eye Converter FC-E8 I could find in another auction.

The Coolpix is really great for making close up shots and a cheap entry into the world of 180° ultra wide shooting.

[belgiumreporter]

I really liked those swivel bodied camera's, got a 995 and the later 4500 . When using the flash bracket and SB28 with diffusion dome it is possible to make interior shots with the fish eye converter, that are evenly lit across the whole image.
I used these camera's a lot they give great results even with the wide and fish converters. The only real drawback is the miniscule LCD screen on wich it is allmost impossible to decently compose a shot. The lens converters are expensive but they are really top quality and can be used on a lot of other camera's besides the nikons.
The first swivel body camera's i once bought were the Agfa Ephoto's i'm not really shure but i suppose nikon might have stolen the swivel body concept from them.

Another swivel body on wich the lens converters work well, the contax SL300R

No swivel body here, but a great fish eye combination, the fuji X10 and the (gigantic)FC E9 fish eye converter.

A shot i took in brussels with the 4500 and FC-E8 converter

[Dave]

I recently acquired all of the first generation Nikon professional digital cameras for next to nothing. These, according to what I understand, were the first digitals to be used professional. The D1, 2.7 megapixels, originally sold for $5580 in 1999. It used enormous Ni-Cad batteries, took any Nikon F lens. I paid $41 for it with two batteries and the charger, body only. It is fully operative and the photos are quite good. The D1H and the D1X came in 2001. The D1X was 5.5 megapixels, $5350, better menu system, same batteries and lens mount. The D1H was the high speed version, still 2.7 megapixels, but a big buffer for sports photography. Same battery, same lens mount. $4350. I paid $90 for the D1H and $25 for the D1X. Both are fully operational and both produce decent photos. They are BIG -- based on the body of the F5. The book covering them is The D1 Generation by B. Moose Peterson, long an authority on Nikons, and David Cardinal, a great wildlife photographer. I picked an autographed copy by blind luck. Fun to compare to a modern point and shoot, and, honestly, for most purposes, the results are at least equal. Dave

[yashica1943]

I thought I would add this to keep the thread fresh.
I have (had!) a good Panasonic Lumix FZ 72 bridge which has a 20-1200mm equivalent zoom. I have enjoyed using it and have taken quite a few reasonable photos of the moon hand held at different phases. Quite pleasing. I also like to take it to the beach and picture far-off objects such as ships, yachts & windsurfers. The quality is ok if a bit 'grainy' but the novelty wears off because at medium distances my DSLR and CSC are notably better.

Last week I was given a Fujifilm HS 10 bridge camera by a friend. The Fuji has less of a zoom (24-720) and less megapixels 10 as against 16 but I like the smoother images and better (or different) colour from the Fuji. I also really prefer the manual zoom control and on/off switch and use of AA batteries!
Disadvantages. The electronic viewfinder of the Fuji has a slight green cast but the rear screen is perfect (and articulated). The battery compartment door catch cannot hold the spring pressure on the 4 cells and is kept closed by multiple elastic bands. Not a problem for me.
So, the result was I sold the Panasonic for a decent price and am keeping the free Fuji for fuss free casual long & wide shots when I don't want to get my better cameras out -(in bad weather perhaps.).

[yashica1943]

re The Fujifilm HS 10 battery door. I have just realised that a spare tripod plate screwed into the tripod thread will hold the door closed. The one that I have used now is ok but not quite long enough so I have ordered a cheap 100mm lomg one from China.

[yashica1943]

I have just bought a 2004 Pentax Optio MX4 off ebay, in absolutely mint condition. This came with original box,charger, cables, disc & instructions. The battery seems OK too. It is tiny.
I have just given it my usual casual image testing out of my front door at max. & min. zoom. The result is stunning, detail, colour, everything. Yet this is a 4 mp camera.
Unfortunately despite the pistol grip, it is difficult to operate, control buttons in the wrong places, the folding screen is poor quality & gets in the way, the 4 way button too small and the bright green light on the on button not needed.
So, I imagine that most of these were forgotton about by 2010 and scrapped or put away in storage. Well worth keeping and taking out for exercise occasionally.