Camera beauty contest

The Nikon S2 is the closest to the original prewar Zeiss Ikon design among all the other Nikon rangefinders.
Click to expand...

I think the S and Ms are closer in appearance to the Contax II. The windows are smaller and they use knobs instead of levers.
 
Last edited:
My favorite RFs would be the Leica IIIf with the red dial. As for the SLRs, my all time favorite is the F4s, close behind would be the F3T...
 
I wholeheartedly agree w/you on your 1st choice (& I think that's what I voted in the poll). Walter Dorwin Teague hit a home run on the Bantam Special. Perhaps the only black camera I really like. :p [I once saw a rare colored (red I think) Bantam Special @ an Art Deco expo & I think there was a white model offered, too.] Moreover, the good design elements aren't limited to aesthetics: e.g., the pull-out "foot" that levels/stabilizes the camera for table-top use is a nice touch. If only Kodak had hired Teague to design some 35mm cameras, too, like maybe a Retina model or the Ektra . . .

Parker51 said:
The most beautiful camera?
I will say the BANTAM SPECIAL designed by Walter Teague ,marvellous streamline art deco rangefinder camera. ( sorry, I don't know how to post a picture ).
and also black paint M2, and third, black SP....
Click to expand...
 
f2eyelevel said:
The (large) S2 main viewfinder window has +/- the exact size of the Contax II one. The M and S one are very small (+/- the size of a Leica screwmount composing window). True to say that the M and S use knobs rather than cranks and levers actually but the Contax II knobs are larger and closer to the S2's in size when viewed from the front of the camera. Also, the Contax II low-profile rewind knob, with its large flattened flange, can be seen as a precursor of the Nikon habit of having a large and flat rotating disk for various settings under the quite flat rewind unit. This feature came out first on the Nikon S2 and we find it again almost identical in design on the 1980's FE2, for example.

Main point IMO is that the S2 frontplate has the distinctive quartermoon rounded Art-Deco bezel of the Contax II ; the M and S don't.

This very special design feature is obviously a tribute to the Contax II designers from the Nippon Kogaku design team. When the S2 was launched, the prewar Art-Deco style was in fashion again.
Click to expand...

no, it's a tribute to the Leica M3, that Nikon sadly found itself competing against with the antiquated Nikon S. the M3 decimated its RF competition, the Contax IIA/IIIA, the Nikon S, and the Canon IV series.

Stephen
 
loneranger said:
none comes close to the physical beauty of the Nikon S3 (and SP). It is not the most comfortable or intuitive camera but in terms of pure beauty, it is the ultimate! Sorry leica, I have decided to dump you.
Click to expand...


Regards ;)
 
At risk of being unaesthetic, I have to admit that in nearly 20 years of use, I never gave the beveled curve of the S2 much thought. The S3/SP is more angular and perhaps more "modern."

I consider the S3 to have a very "businesslike" look, with nothing unnecessary to the photographic experience. The SP looks longer and lower due to the shape of the distinctive front window. Both cameras represent fully refined designs.

467px-Sp-s3w.jpg
 
Last edited:
f2eyelevel said:
I guess that all the Barocco, Classic, Art Deco, Bauhaus, Art Nouveau, Pop Art, Modern Style designers locked together in the same brain-storming room for hours could not get out with such a moving design masterpiece.

Where did you buy that thing ? I want the store address right now !
Click to expand...
It's...a collectible? ;) The Leica IIIs attract all spectrums (spectrae?), it seems :D
 
furcafe said:
I wholeheartedly agree w/you on your 1st choice (& I think that's what I voted in the poll). Walter Dorwin Teague hit a home run on the Bantam Special. Perhaps the only black camera I really like. :p [I once saw a rare colored (red I think) Bantam Special @ an Art Deco expo & I think there was a white model offered, too.] Moreover, the good design elements aren't limited to aesthetics: e.g., the pull-out "foot" that levels/stabilizes the camera for table-top use is a nice touch. If only Kodak had hired Teague to design some 35mm cameras, too, like maybe a Retina model or the Ektra . . .
Click to expand...


nuther vote for the Bantam... it's the most beautiful camera I've ever seen. Been lusting for one at yard and garage sales for four years. Someday....
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
It's...a collectible? ;) The Leica IIIs attract all spectrums (spectrae?), it seems :D
Click to expand...

I make so many mistakes when I write that I am really happy to be able to correct someone at least one time ;) The plurals of specrum are spectrums and spectra (with no e at the end).
Aaaaaah...

GLF
 
The features of the Nikon S2, particularly the 1:1 viewfinder were definitely a response to the Leica M3 introduced the previous spring. The Canon IV and the Nikon S were already obsolete, the M3 just made them more so.
I personally find the Art Deco feel of the curved 'N' in Nikon appealing, but the straighter N was not a 60s marketing decision, but a 50s one. Not only does the SP and all later Nikons have it, but it also appeared on the Nikon literature starting in 1957, usually slanted.
As for the most beautiful, I will admit I like all the Nikon RFs except the S3, but I find the low deck, low-shine chrome and simple details of the early Ms more interesting than the later crowded features. WES
 
jan normandale said:
nuther vote for the Bantam... it's the most beautiful camera I've ever seen. Been lusting for one at yard and garage sales for four years. Someday....
Click to expand...

I feel good...I'm not the only one to find the BANTAM SPECIAL the most beautiful camera ever designed.
That's really" streamline" art deco design.
As soon as I have seen a picture ,i fall in love with the BANTAM SPECIAL and keep searching until I found two of them.
It's a pity Kodak stop making 828 film for that camera in the seventies...
We can use 35mm film ,but it's not nthe easy way
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
Regards
Click to expand...

328737977_43efb9f631.jpg


attachment.php


You all ain't getting your Leicas to win the beauty contest by putting pretty models behind them!!!
Sooner or later there will be a Black S2....

Kiu
 
I'm split between the Leica MP 2003 and Leica M3 for what I consider the best looking camera ever made. After those two, I love the Barnacks (including their clones) and the Rollei TLR's.

I'm somewhat indifferent about the looks of the Nikons, the Contaxes and Kievs, I don't find them anywhere close to the Leicas M's or Barnacks in terms of beauty. There is just something about them that looks slightly off and I can't put my finger on it. To me, they almost have a Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hide duality. Sometimes I see a photo of one that is just right and camera looks absolutely gorgeous. In other photos, the camera looks big, chunky and unrefined. I can't say the same thing about the Leicas. Whether the photo is good or bad, the Leicas always look beautiful.
 
HuubL said:
As for aesthetics and function nothing beats this cpmbo (for me)
M4Summicron35.jpg
Click to expand...

Except this combo

531829940_55ff12f250_o.jpg


Why settle for a poser when you can have the real thing

aw, snap M2 in the house
; )

(automatic frame setting and rewind lever would be nice though)
 
Last edited:
Hub, just to know for me as a non Leica expert: why has your M4 some levers and controls of the M2/M3? This would be a Leica for me too!

As to the contest, you probably know that I'm basically a CANON guy, and so I let u all know that there Canon RF's who aren't UGLY... :cool:

Canon_L1_VIL_04_800.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom