|
Post by belgiumreporter on Aug 9, 2014 6:02:14 GMT -5
Looking back on the history of cameras, what would be your nominee for the ultimate classic camera ? The nominee would have to changed the way people took photographs Please do not include any camera you happen to like because you own it, if you're a canon, nikon or leica fan boy please accept that the ultimate classic could be of another make than the one you fancy or are currently working with. As an example i would like to elect as (obvious) nominees the leica for their 35mm concept making 36 exposures on a roll possible. Or nikon's F for making the first decent 35mm reflex system camera ( sorry exacta), Or your (maybe less obvious) ultimate classic could be a polaroid for their concept of instant photography? or maybe just the humble kodak brownie box for bringing photography to the masses? Let's hear it boys aand girls, i'm sure you can think of a nominee and tell us why you think it should be the "all time classic"
|
|
|
Post by olroy2044 on Aug 9, 2014 10:01:57 GMT -5
I would nominate the Argus C3. Boxy and relatively inexpensive, it was everywhere and did much to popularize 35mm film. I used my brother-in-law's when I was about 11 or 12 years old, and was completely taken by its various knobs and controls. I have never owned one, but I will! That is a serious hole in my collection!
Roy
|
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Aug 9, 2014 10:23:57 GMT -5
Or the Kodak Instamatic, camera for the zillions. Or the Agfa Silette, millions produced, doing the same in the war-ridden Europe, as the Instamatic did overseas. (Or even the Praktica line - made the SLR cost-effective) Etc
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Aug 9, 2014 13:52:31 GMT -5
The Olympus Trip, fuss free and affordable. A modern classic still in use even now. My small collection:
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 10, 2014 15:52:40 GMT -5
There will never be one all-time classic.
Did any of the above really do that?
I would suggest that possibly the original Leica did, and before that whatever camera was first to use film on a roll rather than a plate, and, more recently, whichever camera was the first with digital.
Polaroid has a decent shout, as does the first automatic, a Kodak.
On the other hand, nothing has changed. Everything is still the same process. The camera records what it sees. The big advance was the ability to fix the image: later the ability to make faster emulsions. Another was being able to record the image in colour. Then along comes Photoshop with its ability do do what one wants with the image. The big advances have not been the cameras but the "emulsions".
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 10, 2014 16:07:37 GMT -5
The last camera to have altered photography was the first Leica, it popularised the format for at least 80 years.
Stephen
|
|
|
Post by genazzano on Aug 10, 2014 16:55:38 GMT -5
I was writing a piece for my future web site on a camera that I believe did as much as any other to change how people view photography. It is more than transient sales success or simple popularity. The camera changed how we look at photography.
The Kodak Instamatic 100. It will be accompanied by a late member of the promiscuously expanded Instamatic family, the unfortunate Instamatic 500.
David
|
|
SidW
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1,107
|
Post by SidW on Aug 10, 2014 17:55:36 GMT -5
The last camera to have altered photography was the first Leica, it popularised the format for at least 80 years Hot on its heels was the Kine Exakta that got almost everyone using SLRs, and spelt the end of most rangefinder cameras.
|
|
|
Post by John Farrell on Aug 10, 2014 20:07:06 GMT -5
The ultimate classic would be the first Daguerreotype camera. Before that, there was no photography.
|
|
daveh
Lifetime Member
Posts: 4,696
|
Post by daveh on Aug 10, 2014 22:19:05 GMT -5
The ultimate classic would be the first Daguerreotype camera. Before that, there was no photography. It's not the camera, though, it's the ability to fix the image that matters. The earliest surviving image is that taken by Joseph Nicéphore Niépce in 1826 or 1827 (or was it earlier? - who knows), about ten years before the first Daguerreotype.
|
|
|
Post by John Farrell on Aug 11, 2014 0:49:44 GMT -5
If Niepce's system had been a viable way of capturing images, it would have been developed. From memory, it involved a plate coated with a form of asphalt, exposed for 8 hours, and then rinsed in oil of lavender. It showed image capture was possible, but led only indirectly to a system of photography.
|
|
truls
Lifetime Member
Posts: 568
|
Post by truls on Aug 11, 2014 1:52:05 GMT -5
The mobile phone camera gave virtually everyone a camera, and this has been and still is a very popular method of snapping and sharing images. I believe more pictures has been made with mobile phones than any other previous camera. It changed the history of image making.
|
|
hansz
Lifetime Member
Hans
Posts: 697
|
Post by hansz on Aug 11, 2014 2:31:29 GMT -5
Spot on, Truls!
|
|
|
Post by belgiumreporter on Aug 11, 2014 3:43:51 GMT -5
The mobile phone camera gave virtually everyone a camera, and this has been and still is a very popular method of snapping and sharing images. I believe more pictures has been made with mobile phones than any other previous camera. It changed the history of image making. I rest my case, it was right in front of my nose and i didn't see it. Yes the mobile phone has changed how we take photographs, or should i say capture images? I rarely use the ability of my cell Phone to make photographs, but i would be i liar if i said i never use it, and i suppose lots of people do so in a situation where you haven't got a (decent) camera on you, but still feel the urge to record an image of something you're confronted with. What's more, as it has been calculated that there's more cell phones than people on this world, everybody anywhere in the world is now (capable) of photographing or filming. Still there's no peticular cell Phone that can claime the title of starting the cell phone revolution there's no leica, kodak or polaroid or any other brand that's able to claim that title. There's a lot that can be said on how (much) cell phones have changed our society but that's another discussion.
|
|
|
Post by genazzano on Aug 11, 2014 4:40:07 GMT -5
I think that it is perhaps premature to decide that the cell phone camera is the ultimate classic camera. Selfies don't represent a new way of viewing photography in my opinion (excuse me. I meant IMHO). Certainly the miniature digital camera can be put into anything, not just cell phones and iPads. This has led to some unfortunate combinations in fact. Further, the only difference between stills and videos is the amount of memory and the time spent on capturing and watching.
When the communications industry spotted a vast market for incorporating miniature digital imaging devices, they did not create the ultimate classic camera as a consequence. They certainly didn't place cameras into the hands of those who couldn't otherwise afford a camera for instance. The vast number of uses devised by adolescents is hardly a revolution in photography. The cellphone camera may be a milestone in product design, sales and marketting, but clearly not a classic camera, ultimate or otherwise.
Ciao! G2G
#DVD
|
|