Jason's 20 Greatest Cameras of all Time -- Hits? Missess ?

check out his just re-published list from 2018

Does Noteworthy always translate to Greatest?

Why not the Epson RD1 instead of the trouble prone Leica M9?

Why not the Konica Hexar RF as the first of the NON Leica M mounts?

Why not my favorite Canon SLRs - the T90 and RT?

The Pentax K1000? Really? Does best selling = Greatness?

Why not the Hasselblad V?

as the usual suspect greatest cameras duke it out among their fans ...

Stephen
 
Click to expand...
Erik van Straten said:
Very nice M4! The frame counter window seems to be replaced. Does that Leicavit fit?


Erik.
Click to expand...

Erik, I'm not sure about the frame counter window. Don Goldberg adapted it so the Leicavit fits, while doing a CLA for me when i bought it in 2019
 
I've seen old black paint Leicavits with an asking price of EUR 25.000,00. That was why I asked. Most new ones do not have this engraving.


Erik.
 
Yes, I've seen the prices for the old Leicavits. The new ones with the engraving were apparently produced for the Leica Historical Society in 2005 along with the MP-3.(500 black paint / 500 chrome) I was able to get this one from Japan.
 
M3 Forever!

M3 Forever!

Rob-F said:
The Leica M2 should be included. It was the basis for all the .72 finder models that followed. And I would add the fuji X100. I think that highly of it!
Click to expand...

If you have to pick one Greatest, it's gotta be the Leica M3 because it established the M Leica series and was brilliantly executed, and light years ahead of anything else at the time. IMHO the Leica M2 and M4 are basically offshoots based on the original M3 concept albeit with significant differences. Both are certainly great cameras in their own right, but I don't think it would not be appropriate to list them separately in a 20 Greatest list that included the M3. I do respect the fact that others may disagree with my logic.
 
Jason Schneider said:
If you have to pick one Greatest, it's gotta be the Leica M3 because it established the M Leica series and was brilliantly executed, and light years ahead of anything else at the time. IMHO the Leica M2 and M4 are basically offshoots based on the original M3 concept albeit with significant differences, Both are certainly great cameras in their own right, but I don't think it would not be appropriate to list them separately in a 20 Greatest list that included the M3. I do respect the fact that others may disagree with my logic.
Click to expand...

When you think about this all the cameras are offshoots from the camera obscura!

Erik.
 
Erik van Straten said:
Very nice to have this on an M4. Usually M4's do not accept Leicavits afaik. So Don made a connection. Was this an expensive operation?


Erik.
Click to expand...

Erik, since the camera was apart for the CLA ( incidently ..... the only Leica service on any body in decades of using Leica M), the modification was not very expensive. I called Gerry Smith at Kinderman, then Horst Wenzel also in Canada, then Cameraquest and Youxin Ye in the USA.....none of them had the parts. When I called Don (DAG) he had the parts and had the camera back to me within 30 days. It is now smooth as silk.
 
Vince Lupo said:
I've always been curious about the RE Super / Super D / Super DM. I've never ended up owning one, but they look like really interesting cameras. Kowa Six was another one. Ah too many cameras still yet to try!
Click to expand...


I have an earlier Topcon, ex-Captain Jack collection. It's a very solid camera - very heavy and very huge. I'd love to get a RE Super as they're rather more refined, but the prices for bodies and lenses always gets me teetering on the decision and so far I've always fallen on the no side.
 
I have a Topcon Super D, a rather wonderful and exceptionally solid piece of kit. The metering is so clever - lines etched into the mirror to let the light through to the meter (although mine is somewhat inaccurate). It's one of those cameras I ought to use more, but with the shutter release on the front where I would normally grip, and a film advance that is so macho it always pulls the film out of the capsule at the reel end I need to be alert.

Glass is gorgeous.
 
Erik van Straten said:
...
The M2 comes close to the perfect M with very good framelines for the 50mm and the 35mm. But the frame counter is always off...
Click to expand...

The M2's frame counter is the one thing that has prevented me from buying one. It just looks wrong. After the beautiful one on the M3, I don't understand why they chose that exposed thin disk for the M2.

Now, with your comment, I discover they're not even reliable!

Yet similar ones on my III and IIIf work perfectly.
 
Pál_K said:
The M2's frame counter is the one thing that has prevented me from buying one. It just looks wrong. After the beautiful one on the M3, I don't understand why they chose that exposed thin disk for the M2.

Now, with your comment, I discover they're not even reliable!
Click to expand...

Pal, Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I used M2s for years and they are my favourites. If you re-set the dial when you load the camera the frame counter works fine. In any case you can feel if you come to the end of the roll when you're advancing the film. IMO the M2 is as reliable as it gets. Incidentally, the M2 was Tom Abrahamsson's favourite too.
 
Potshots

Potshots

css9450 said:
This thread, though, got weird when Jason started responding to our opinions. Which is all they are - our opinions. They're not "potshots at the writer's choices". Everyone's opinion is valid, is it not?
Click to expand...

Thanks for your observations. It's clear in context that I not only don't mind RFF-ers taking issue with my Best 20 Cameras picks (which BTW were made 3-4 years ago) but my intention in posting it was to spark a lively dialogue, and metaphorical "potshots" are definitely welcome. I also defend my picks when I think they're on target as is the case with the Pentax K1000. Yes, everyone's opinion (including mine) is worthy of consideration, but whether a choice is "valid" also hinges on its factual accuracy. Example: The Kodak Ektra of 1941-48 is a magnificent machine, but it's shutter is so notoriously unreliable it's not a defensible choice on a Best 20 Cameras list. Same with the fascinating, beautiful, historically significant, and unreliable Hasselblad 1600F.
 
Was the accompanying image shot with the Nikon S-2?

Was the accompanying image shot with the Nikon S-2?

p.giannakis said:
Hi Erik,
What makes the S2 preferable over its rival the M3?
Click to expand...

This is a lovely and engaging picture with that indescribable vintage look--I love the way all the fascinating and distinctive individuals are rendered in 3-dimensional space. The rendition is reminiscent of one of my favorite "vintage look" lenses, the 50mm f/1.5 Zeiss-Opton Sonnar on my Contax IIIa--hardly surprising since the acclaimed 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor S.C. was closely based in the Sonnar. Bravo!
 
Jason Schneider said:
Thanks for your observations. It's clear in context that I not only don't mind RFF-ers taking issue with my Best 20 Cameras picks (which BTW were made 3-4 years ago) but my intention in posting it was to spark a lively dialogue, and metaphorical "potshots" are definitely welcome. I also defend my picks when I think they're on target as is the case with the Pentax K1000. Yes, everyone's opinion (including mine) is worthy of consideration, but whether a choice is "valid" also hinges on its factual accuracy. Example: The Kodak Ektra of 1941-48 is a magnificent machine, but it's shutter is so notoriously unreliable it's not a defensible choice on a Best 20 Cameras list. Same with the fascinating, beautiful, historically significant, and unreliable Hasselblad 1600F.
Click to expand...

Hi Jason. I think that if the general response is that 80% of the choices make sense then you've done pretty well.

I think that the deficiencies were essentially "corrected" at the time by the extra 10 cameras: a total of the top 30.

For all that, I still disagree about the K1000. But I understand your logic though I don't find it compelling. The Brownie would be an essential if the K1000 logic is compelling. And some really serious thought would need to be given to the most popular (if simultaneously invisible) film camera of the last 40 years: the Cosina CT-1 (and its badge engineered children). Every major camera company sold it. My Ricoh version has a school name carved into it, and I wonder if more photography students have used the K1000 or a Cosina CT subtype of essentially any lens mount. And that's before we even consider the CV descendants.

But it is fun to discuss!
 
Press & View Cameras in The Best 20

Press & View Cameras in The Best 20

Deardorff38 said:
I'd expect to see a view camera there & maybe a press camera too. Deardorff is almost the solid equivalent of Nikon, building cameras from 1923-1988.
Click to expand...

I agree that large format press cameras like the immortal Speed Graphic 4x5 (which, if you've ever shot with one, you know is a glorious clunker) and the nicely made wooden Deardorff View Cameras certainly merit consideration on any Best 20 Cameras list. However IMHO they're really separate categories that deserve their own Best lists. For example, the Linhof Super Technika V is really a much better camera than the Speed Graphic even though it doesn't have its storied history. Ditto for the Sinar P Expert view camera which is much more advanced and offers far greater precision than the lovable (and competent) Deardorffs (I regret selling my 11x14 Deardorff for it's unlikely I'll ever acquire another.) As a teenager I shot scores of weddings for a "wedding mill" on Long Island with a 4x5 Crown Graphic, schlepping a hard case full of Lisco 4x5 double sheet film holders, When my bosses switched to Rolleiflexes a couple of years later I thought I had died and gone to heaven. Happy days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom