Polls always have to be refined to obtain the responses that will answer the poll question. One of the problems for the poll on “most beautiful” was there were more multiples of Leica than say Yashica so what has happened is the sheer number of Leica entries have overwhelmed other entries. I also feel that some people are voting for their cameras and not the looks of the listed cameras. Should we just rename this the LRFF not RFF? Then it would make sense to an outsider.
Rich, perhaps it might have been better to ask every one to send in their top ten and no more than three from on maker. Personally I found that people’s comments in the threads were often about criteria that were off the poll. The poll was about the “asthetic appearance” of the cameras listed. Several comments show selections not based on this criteria.
Some beautiful cameras have been given marginal recognition, two to my mind are the the Kodak Bantam Special and the Hassy XPan clean and elegant cameras that truly are ‘beautiful’.
Aesthetically Leica cameras are functional not beautiful. In black they look like stealth bombers, unlike a Concorde which has flowing lines and grace unafraid to shine. No hiding in the black recesses of the wings for them. I know I’ll hear the engineers come out and say functionality is “beautiful” we also know they are just engineers with no heart or soul. Art is lost on them and they shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Record the names of the engineers and block them from the next poll.. (joke!)
BTW none of my selections are in the finals. For what it’s worth I do have a Leica but even out of a box it was functional but wasn’t beautiful. I don’t confuse the two. The Bantam is not what I’d take to shoot, but it is what I considered to fit your criteria of “beautiful”. It would have helped if there had been more ‘beautiful’ cameras to choose from.
That could be the next topic, a “post the most beautiful camera” thread.