Classic Cameras Every Collector Should Own . Let’s make a List!

[raydm6]

In no particular order 😛

Canon
Alpa
Mamiya
Ebony
Rolleiflex
Argus
Sinar

 

[jsrockit]

I’m not a big fan of collecting... especially those that only look at their collection. However, a nice Rolleiflex, a Leica 1a, and a nice 8x10” view camera never get old to look at.

 

[Ambro51]

All these choices are Great! But we know it’s all about what tickles yourself and what you can afford and what you can get past the Wife. 1. Nikon F (black photomic) 2. Rolleiflex (any). 3. Barnack Leica (including mild GAS attack). 4 Brownie (1930 Annv. is good choice). 5. SX70 6. Speed Graphic (why not?) 7. Nikonos ( climate change is real) 8. Fotron (conversation starter poster child) 9. Vest Pocket Kodak (strut version). 10. Original Diana

 

[Rob-F]

Leica II (D)
Leica M2
Leica M8
Nikon FE2
Hasselblad 500CM
Baby Rolleiflex
Fuji X100 (for its hybrid finder)
Minox B
Rollei 35
Speed Graphic

 

[webOSUser]

Argus C3
Zorki or FED 1 with one of the FSU Elmor copies.

 

[Vince Lupo]

A few suggestions that have already been mentioned, plus a couple more...


Old Standard1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


One More Try by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Revere Stereo1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


SLR10 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


contax1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


Pentax3 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


E1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


m5-1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr


graph1 by Vince Lupo, on Flickr

Plus - just for kicks - I’ll add a couple of modern ones: The Leica M-D 262 and the new Hasselblad 907x. Just because 🙂

 

[Forest_rain]

Yes I almost forgot about the Pre-war Contax, Exacta Ihagee Dresden, and early Rolleiflex.

The Pre-war contax should allow you to use some interesting lenses, especially in Contax RF mount (I think it fits/has compatibility with Russian Contax mount lenses also? What about the post-war contax?) Since this mount seems much more rare, buying a contax seems like it would allow you access to quite a few, perhaps cheaper, lenses as well...

That being said, I personally won't be purchasing an early rolleiflex, or Ihagee Dresden Exakta, because I probably would never use them in practice.

I "collect" in order to use only, and will sell stuff that I rarely use.

 

[cary]

Minolta SRT
Leica screw mount
Argus C3
Minox subminiature
Pentax Spotmatic
Nikon F
Leica M3
Olympus OM-1
Speed Graphic
Leicaflex Standard
Nikkormat
Nikon FM

 

[Bingley]

M2
M3
Nikon F (eye level prism)
Rolleiflex 2.8 (B-F))
Contax IIa
Leica II any version
Leica IIIg
Hasselblad 500C

David's list comes close to nailing it for me. I would add:

Rolleiflex TLR from the 1950s (in my case, the Automat MX EVS, but others qualify)
Rollei 35
Olympus XA

 

[PaulDalex]

Incitement to GAS thread

 

[JeffS7444]

Hansa Canon
LeCoultre Compass
Kiev-90

I realize that not everyone can have the items listed above, so here are more readily accessible items:

Alpa 7
GOMZ "Sport"
Ducati Sogno
Spirotechnique Calypso
Zenit-16
Riga Minox
Ilford Witness
Kodak Medallist

As a survey of creative miniature rollfilm camera designs from around the world, I figure it's a very incomplete list, but it's a start.

But in real life, I'm more of a dilettante than a serious collector, and Olympus Pen-FT is more my speed: Highly original design yet common and not too expensive. It's a good user too.

 

[markjwyatt]

I want to add a little spice to this discussion. I started thinking about the most collectible cameras- Leica, Contax, Zeiss, Exacta, Nikon, Mamiya, Alpa, Hasselblad, Rolleiflex, etc. Then I thought, which cameras (of major producers) are the least collectible, or say less collectible, and I came up with : Canon.

I would say Canon has been one of the MOST successful camera companies, and has produced some of the best cameras. But what makes a camera "collectible"? Collectable cameras are generally ones that had firsts (Leica, Contax, Nikon), were innovative (Ihagee, Zeiss Ikon), drove the market (Exacta, Nikon F), etc. They had something unique and special. Of course you can collect cameras just because you like them too. But Canon always seemed to be more of a follower. The Canon rangefinders are excellent cameras, and based themselves on Leica thread mount. The Canon SLRs were great and very popular, but did not lead the way, and did not really have a lot of amazing firsts. Canon digitals are a clear sales leader across all segments. But nothing in Canon is really out of the ordinary.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Nikon S2


Erik.

 

[David Hughes]

Hmmm, to begin at the beginning I'd suggest a Fox-Talbot "mousetrap" you can't buy them but he made them from oddments of wood and lenses and so on. Important because he gave us negatives and positives, which led to making several copies of each photo.

Then a jump to a heavy glass plate camera and an early SLR like the "Soho" might be an idea as it combines two early ideas.

Then one of the amateur plate cameras with a roll film holder; killing several birds with one stone suggests a "Sanderson" in quarter plate with a 120 roll film holder. Better still, the amateur’s “Junior” version.

Getting away from rich men's toys, how about one of the early Kodaks, preferably a folder. I'd suggest one of the squarish red bellows models like the No 2 (meaning 120 film again) Folding Pocket Brownie.

And the early versions of the pocket camera like a Houghton "Ensignette" the first version with one of the decent lenses.

Then Kodak's retaliation meaning the 127 VPK with the Tessar lens or the focussing one, even though they were the "Autographic" versions.

One of the larger box cameras might be an idea. There's a lot of simple ones that took 70mm wide roll film meaning film for 2½ x 4¼ contact prints. Perhaps the Kodak No 2A Brownie Model B but there's too many Kodaks here. Important as it became 35mm cine film, thanks to Edison.

That gives us the Leica in its first 1925 version, which I call "The Leica" but not many do

And something posher like (say) a CZ box Tengor.

Naturally the Rollei, I'd go for the old standard; mostly because I like the weird sports VF.

Then the Leica model II, because they don't get more classic and the classic lens is the f/3.5 Elmar.

The rival from CZ in the shape of the Contax original or perhaps the II to bring in the f/2 Sonnar.

And the Minox in the original version.

Lastly the Exakta in the pre-war version.

As we are talking classics I wonder if we ought to go beyond WW2; perhaps just to squeeze in the Leica IIIc and the Summitar or would the IIIb be the better body?

Regards, David


PS (Edit) I should have included stereo, panoramic, detective, instant and falling plate cameras but don't know enough about them. The "Facile" ought to be mentioned as it inspired Paul Martin to become the father of all street photography...

 

[DennisM]

Classic

Classic

Maybe not a “classic” whatever that means, but how about the indestructible Minolta SR-T 101 & derivatives; mine purchased new in the early ‘70’s & several others perform flawlessly; the Rodney Dangerfield of cameras.

 

[juraj_v]

I would add these two. The first one is the Zorki 3M, it's rather rare but so much smoother than the 4/4K, also more compact, better looking...and joy to use.

The second is the also rare Retina IIC, so called big C, it was in production just for a year, I consider it the best of all retinas.

 

[Dralowid]

Tessina anyone?

 

[JeffS7444]

I think this is one instance where life is much more interesting when no one really agrees! (In case it wasn't clear, my own list was more than a bit tongue in cheek, though I do think the Hansa Canon is pretty cool, and I've even gotten to handle one). But as far as what a person "should" collect, I haven't got a clue. Maybe the best sort of collectable is something which has has far more emotional appeal than monetary value.

 

[Hari]

Voitlander Vitessa w/50 f2, no meter

 

[Wouter2]

I'd say the Zeiss Ikonta 532/16 and Voigtlander Bessa II with Color-Heliar lens are essential. Furthermore I'd include the Olympus 35SP, Canon 7S and P, and Bronica RF645.