What Was That Camera?

For goodness sake, what does it matter? Unless you're specifically looking for something that works at Everest-heights, it's totally irrelevant...
 
Ah, the humble but mighty Kodak Retina. Despite its small size, it was and still is a very capable camera.

The early Retinas are small and can easily be slipped into a pocket. When they were first released, they were affordable.

At the same time, Kodak also released the daylight loading 35mm cartridge that is more or less the same container that we use today.
 
What does any random piece of interesting information matter? And who or what is it irrelevant to? Yourself? Maybe it's completely relevant to something Cymro is doing, or something he experienced. Personally i'd like to know this too, not because I have any plan on going to Everest, but because it's interesting.
 
Sorry, I just get a bit sick of people talking about equipment rather than photography... at least the phrases 'M9' and 'full-frame sensor' haven't made it into the thread.

Damn.

🙂
 
g12 said:
Sorry, I just get a bit sick of people talking about equipment rather than photography... at least the phrases 'M9' and 'full-frame sensor' haven't made it into the thread.

Damn.

🙂
Click to expand...
Isn't that what most of the posting is about, the equipment? It's about shared knowledge, experiences, repairs, problems, trivia and so on. There is a Photo Gen section for photography generally...

Many of us here DO have an interest in the actual gear. Why did you pick yours, for instance, or did you just randomly pick "a camera"? Why do "Leica-nuts" (no offence intended) eulogise over Leica gear? Or Nikon-nuts...etc?
 
g12 said:
Sorry, I just get a bit sick of people talking about equipment rather than photography... at least the phrases 'M9' and 'full-frame sensor' haven't made it into the thread.

Damn.

🙂
Click to expand...

And yet in your few months of membership you have contributed to many threads about equipment, mentioned your M8 and GAS for lenses, the text under your user-name proclaims "too much stuff", and your signature lists a significant investment in equipment that is well beyond what is sufficient for simply making good photos.

Was this sarcasm? 🙂
 
Whoah everyone, this is not a 'beat up g12' thread, I did enough a few entries ago.

Why am I interested?

1.The camera took the first ever (published) photographs at the top of Everest. {Maybe Mallory & Irvine's story will be revealed one day}

2. There is a story that the camera was not handed to Tensing for a photo of Hillary as Tensing had never used a camera before and the top of Everest was not the place to learn. {Probably at that altitude and level of exhaustion / excitement a simple 'look through there and when you see me press that' instruction would be too much to ask or not even thought about!}

3. If I get the same camera (yes I collect but to CLA or repair and use, not decorate) I can experience its operation and perhaps get an insight into the difficulty of operating a camera through massive down-filled gloves. {Using a modern camera at 15000ft after hours of hard climbing took some doing so what the hell it was like up there???......p.s. my old Olympus Trip and Canon AE1 worked fine but my buddy's £750 digital-SLR didn't like the cold! }

(Top Tip: if you are outside in the cold cold, seal your camera & films inside a plastic bag just before going back in to the warmth. Wait for it to warm up to room temperature before putting it away. Otherwise the condensation from a cold camera in the warm fug of a tent/hut will kill your camera, film or lens!)
 
ChrisN said:
And yet in your few months of membership you have contributed to many threads about equipment, mentioned your M8 and GAS for lenses, the text under your user-name proclaims "too much stuff", and your signature lists a significant investment in equipment that is well beyond what is sufficient for simply making good photos.
Click to expand...

I hope you don't do research for a living, of the 39 posts I see listed, in four months of membership, one of them is recommending a lens, two were to do with a potential issue on a lens and one mentioned GAS in relation to thinking about getting a lens, not a serious admission of having a problem, similar for the user-name comment.

And it's not a significant investment in equipment, it's mainly buying cheap CV bodies and nice lenses for every purpose as well as getting an M8 that I rarely use. Everything else gets a regular run-out, with never more than two or three on a trip (bodies and lenses, different film stock in each body).

And don't worry, I'm not going to go through your posts, I can't be bothered.

Handbags eh...

PS I don't feel beaten up at all (apart from my knee from footie last night)... and I can't wait for the "Took my M8 up Everest, didn't work, totally ruined the trip" thread to appear one day (not saying it will be from Cymro) 😱
 
Ha, Ha. Thats you and me kissed and made-up, g12.

As for taking an M8 up the big hill, unlikely as I'd have spent my pocket money on the trip and would have to fall back on my field-maintainable semi-expendable collection of Olympus Trips/AE1s/FED-2s. All relaible for recording the trip but not the end of the world if dropped/sat-on or killed off by any other abuse.


Now pass me that toothbrush and I'll show you a real in-the-field CLA..............😱
 
The Advocate was 1 of the "official" cameras of the expedition (they had to have some British equipment, after all), but Hillary used a Kodak Retina I/118. Alfred Gregory, the official photographer, used a Retina II, a Zeiss Ikon Contax III, & a Rolleiflex (I don't know the model). The Contax gear was donated to the expedition by Time-Life, who had switched to the new IIa/IIIa models.

Cymro said:
What was the camera used by Sir Edmund Hillary for his awesome photos from the top of Everest?
Click to expand...
 
History, people, history 🙂

That's another thing we talk about around here, or at least I learned a great deal from since I picked up photography. Remember that history can teach us, inspire us, or warn us.

Retina, eh? wow...
 
KoNickon said:
And somewhere up there still, hopefully, is Mallory's Vest Pocket Kodak.
Click to expand...
On a stroll with my Sweet.Thang thru a flea market some years back, I spotted a little black Kodak in a glass case. Sure enough, it was a Vest Pocket B. Of course, I ask for a quick fondle - of the camera 😛 - and took a peek at it's hanging paper price tag. On it was the model, the price and a note: "Camera has film inside."

I instantly thought of that famous little old, cold Vest Pocket that more than likely still "has film inside." It too is waiting to be found, fondled and it's film processed.
 
shadowfox said:
History, people, history 🙂

That's another thing we talk about around here, or at least I learned a great deal from since I picked up photography. Remember that history can teach us, inspire us, or warn us.

Retina, eh? wow...
Click to expand...

Indeed, we enjoy a broad range of discussion on this forum, at times beyond photography. I'd hate to see that stifled. It's easy to simply pass on topics I don't enjoy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom