Second-string and knockabout cameras...

Olympus XA4 is my second string and knockabout because it fits in my pocket and is a good "point & shoot". I use it when I just want something small and light; tucked away and ready to use quickly and easily.
 
All my cameras will get exposed to the elements equally when necessary. I consider my Hasselblad kit to be the one to use when I want good negatives to print, when the circumstances allow. The M4 and Summicron 35 are therefore "second-string" in the sense that I'll use that if the Hasselblad would be impractical.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Second-string and knockabout cameras......why? Or perhaps, when?
Click to expand...

I have various cameras though none are "second string". I don't get the thing with "knockabout" gear.

I use the best gear for the image I want to make. Why would I settle for anything less?

Roger Hicks said:
Some people seem to be lusting after the X100 as a cheaper or lighter alternative to their existing M system, but when I look at the 'second string' cameras I have for my film Ms, I find I almost never use them.
Click to expand...

Do you sincerely believe that M system film users are "lusting" for a digital compact as a replacement for Leica systems?

If you never use your "second-string cameras then why keep them?

Roger Hicks said:
Why should the X100 be different? If I'm worried about risking $7000, I'm sure as hell not going to risk $1200 either, so I'll go for my old Retina IIa or Pen W. Or a cheap digi (not a $1200 one).
Click to expand...

So if you don't want to 'risk' your Leica, you'd use a Retina?

Why this contempt for the X100?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmmm for 135 I have three I consider to fit the 'expendable' category

1. XA 2
2. GSN
3. Nikonos III (it's indestructible)

I like the lenses in all three of these cameras. The Olympus XA 2 is pocketable, the Yashica GSN has great glass. The Nikonos III has Nikon glass and it is the toughest camera I own.
 
J.M. said:
Why this contempt for the X100?
Click to expand...

Contempt? Oh boy... No, I just think that I personally wouldn't use one, because I almost never use 'second string' or 'knockabout' cameras with film, so why woud I change with dgital? Some here feel the same way as I about 'second strings' and 'knockabouts'. Others have explained lucidly why and where they use them.

As for why I still have such cameras, (a) most of them aren't worth enough to justify the effort of selling, (b) they sometimes come in handy for illustrating articles and (c) 'almost never' is not the same as 'never'.

The reason for mentioning the X100 was the exact opposite of contempt. When I first handled it at photokina I was well impressed (and still am), but the harder I thought about it, the less I thought it likely I'd use it (by analogy with film cameras).

Sorry to have upset you so much.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've got 4 types of '2nd shelf-cameras':
- For size and portability: an XA that resides in my little rucksack.
- For it's ruggedness: an EOS 3 that I use not as often as I thought I would.
- As a backup: My 20D that wasn't worth trading in when I upgraded to a 2nd hand 5D.
- As an extra: a spare M645 that came attached to a lens I bought (light-seals are iffy).
All these cameras were bought used, and I must say it gives comfort to know that the first scratches are already there.

Dirk
 
I have two:

- Olympus XA: which is perfect when I have to travel very light.
- Olympus Trip: for those occasions when I really do have to worry about damaging my gear, such as when I am visiting construction sites for work.
 
Totally agree with your thoughts Roger as to why a Fuji X100 might not get used. I would like a Ricoh GXR but I keep asking why as my Leica M8 is digital weapon of choice and either a Ricoh or the Fuji wouldn't exactly be much smaller/handier to use than an M.

If I go into certain shadier areas where I would not want to risk carrying a Leica I dig out an old Olympus OM2 which is a perfect knockabout camera. Cheap, pocket-able, superb handling and a very fine camera indeed.
 
We are in complete agreement, I always use the best gear for the job, (as you, highlighted below).


Roger Hicks said:
Contempt? Oh boy... No, I just think that I personally wouldn't use one, because I almost never use 'second string' or 'knockabout' cameras with film, so why woud I change with dgital?Some here feel the same way as I about 'second strings' and 'knockabouts'. Others have explained lucidly why and where they use them.

As for why I still have such cameras, (a) most of them aren't worth enough to justify the effort of selling, (b) they sometimes come in handy for illustrating articles and (c) 'almost never' is not the same as 'never'.

The reason for mentioning the X100 was the exact opposite of contempt. When I first handled it at photokina I was well impressed (and still am), but the harder I thought about it, the less I thought it likely I'd use it (by analogy with film cameras).



Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Again I agree, I wouldn't use it at all. (I don't like the 35mm FOV).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have pocket cameras that I put in a pocket (usually in a bag) that I use when I am out getting Fruit and veg. Cameras get used depending on what I feel like or am doing, no camera is second class they just fit a need.
 
I didn't want to risk my M bouncing around in the utility/tool truck I worked out of, so I kept a Minolta SRT with a 45mm/f2 attached under my seat. The thing was a brick - just what I need it to be.

I'm inspired by Lewis Hine and his work and having 'the brick' on hand, I now have a number of pictures of important work experiences.
 
what kind of damage ....?

what kind of damage ....?

sonofdanang said:
I'm curious as to what kind of damage is imagined as being criteria for using a second string camera.
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Risks I run are not imagined. It's usually related to dropped gear and dirt. Climbing, crawling, lowering or swinging cameras into walls, door jams, stairwells.

I still use good stuff despite that, but it's pretty well 'battle scarred'. I buy used and seldom more than $300 for a camera body.
 
2nd string? X100? Bah... This isn't "2nd string". That's justification for buying a new toy. You already have cameras - tons of them, but this new one... mahn, it's the cat's pajamas... I just gotsta have it!!! I gots GAZZZZZZZZ!!! Must. Get. Relief. ... for this gazzzzzzz pain! A "second string" camera is a: Minolta Hi Matic AF, Olympus Stylus Epic, a Canonette 28, an XA2, a Konica C35... a fixed lens point-n-shooter you bought in a thrift store... (And kinda like riding a moped, it don't look cool, but it's fun... It's okay. I won't tell your pals... Your secret is safe with me.)

The X100 - very capable shooter. Innovative actually. And the $1200 beater for the Leica crowd.
 
Last edited:
By second string, I guess you mean substitute cameras.

Never had a substitute camera. I have several but that is because they do different things well. Only when I was a working photographer did I have a, so called, backup camera; but it wasn't really it was just a second body identical to the primary, and it was used for convenience. Different film, different lens, so I would not run out of film at an inopportune time, etc. Identical so I did not have to think about which camera I was using. It did, of course, serve as a back up body, but that was way down on the list of its uses.

Other than my primary 35mm kit, I never had an extra body or camera. Cameras just don't fail all of a sudden for no reason very often. They are not like sync cables, which I would not have gone out the door without a spare of.
 
Nikon N8008s and a D200 Both- tough as NUTS!!!!!
Canonet GIIII and a Kiev 4a and a Nikon Underwater camera
All so cheap I never worry about losing any of them!!!!!!!! Pulse it does help to have commerical insurance on all my gear. So no worries Mates!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-Kievman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom