Second-string and knockabout cameras...

sepiareverb said:
I've just got smaller cameras for when I want to carry less. The T3 slips into nearly any pocket- the GR1s and GRD2 as well.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree. I have big cameras (Nikon F100 and D80) and small cameras (Olympus Stylus Epic and E-P2). Cheaper, crappier versions of my usual cameras don't have any appeal to me.
 
GSNfan said:
But in all seriousness, a camera is as good as the eyes behind it, so if someone cannot frame even if their life depended on it, you give them any camera and they'll produce visual boredom.
Click to expand...

Good photographers with bad cameras rarely produce anything worthwhile either.

I think a lot of people hide behind lo-fi (Holga, Lomo, Etc) technology because they don't want to admit that they can't take good pictures. I've had a bunch of them and nothing is more frustrating than taking a really good picture only to see the 'characteristics' of the plastic lensed piece of junk that took it overshadow the image.

As for back-up cameras, in twenty years of active photography I have never reached for one because my camera failed me. I have a closet of niche cameras that I use for specific things but I don't think any of them could be considered a back-up.

My .02.

Bob
 
chippy said:
really? i mean i appreciate that if you have a camera you have saved for you want to and practically have to make use of it, after all if no other options are available you have to make use of it...but what about a knockabout for use in BAD weather, no sense getting that multi thousand dollar camera all wet in the rain, snow and mud, well unless you dont care or can afford to risk it...

was nice when they started making cameras with seals and weather proofing, they cost a few bob though, not sure everyone could/can afford them
Click to expand...

Yes. I've owned some good cameras, but never any that were so valuable that it would be a big financial hit to lose. They aren't necessary. Nor even useful if you can't/won't use them.

Cheers,
Gary
 
I just use what I have and don't bother with a second-string or knockabout camera.

Over time though my cameras do tend to end up looking like second-string or knockabout cameras.

John
 
For me it's the weight. So I´ve used a 35RC or a Bessa R as additional cameras when I had the FM as my prime.
Sometimes weight and size were the arguments to take the second string camera and then I chose the 35 RC
 
I use the M3 for B/W and the Nex 3 for color. My Nikons have been crying in the corner lately especially my fav, the FM3a. But really, my go to second stringer would have to be my iPhone 4.
 
Thanks everyone. Keep 'em coming, please. What always (well, almost always) fascinates me about RFF is how many different viewpoints there are, often from unexpected sources -- though equally, there are always a few predictable responses from predictable sources.

Though most of us seldom change our opinions as the results of others' ideas, sometimes we do, even if only slightly, and in any case, it's always interesting to hear an honest difference of opinion.

I freely confess to conflating 'second string' and 'knockabout' (and the web piece was only about the latter), and yes, you can distinguish the X100 to varying extents from M-digi, but I thought it better to cast the net as wide as possible. Some people's comments on 'niche' cameras (e.g. Nikonos) make me glad I did. On RFF, tangential ideas are often at least as valuable as 'on topic' responses.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
I keep a camera in the car all the time. I don't always have a Leica with me and it's there just in case I see something. It gets frozen in winter and roasted in summer and it might get stolen so it has to be something cheap. For a couple of years I've had an XA2 in there but just bought a Cosina C1s with 35-70, allegedly mint, on ebay for £6.50 which I thought might be a bit more versatile. Waiting for the postie to deliver it. Other than that I always end up using my Leica gear and the other cameras I own are rarely used at all.
 
I had a Canonet 28 as my beater beach camera. I liked it so much I picked up a Canonet GIII 1.7. After geting great results with both cameras I found myself looking after them more and more and not wanting to damage them. Well they have both developed faults so I just picked up a FED 3 with a 50mm 2.8 lens yesterday. I have not shot a roll with it yet but I already know what will happen. If it turns out to be a good one then it will become more valuable to me and I will be less likely to take it to the beach or out in the snow with the kids and use it in situation where it may get damaged or wet. If it turns out to be a junk then it just won't get used.

I have considered getting a 35mm Nikon underwater camera with a 35mm lens. They should be pretty tough and great for the beach and snow. May actually be a better option.
 
I don't believe in shelf queens or trailer queens so all of my cameras and every hot rod/muscle car I have ever owned have been daily shooters/drivers.

I have a FE with one of those somewhat cheezy hippy style straps that plays the role of the second string camera sort of. Funny but I think I use it the most of all. It's easy to grab it and throw it under the car seat.

Someday I am going to have a M for wide stuff to go along with my F2 for long focal length stuff...a two camera two lens get up. When that day comes I am getting rid of everything else.
 
Wouldn't buy something so valuable that I didn't want to use it. I never really understood the "backup body" particularly with Leica's where you could probably use them to drive nails.

When I don't bring my M, it's because it's bigger and heavier than I want. Usually a Yashica t4 or a Ricoh GR1 meets my weight/smallness needs and one of them replaces the M. If it's black and white or I would have used the 28 on my Leica, it's the Ricoh and if it's color or I'm going somewhere like a beach, the T4. On a rare occasion I take a Pentax MX because I've got a 50 1.4 for it and I don't have that focal length or speed lens for my M. If I bought a 50 Summilux the Pentax would go.

There's also occasions where I just don't bring a camera. Not afraid to let photos go and focus on the experience itself.
 
I have a waterproof Minolta p+s for really bad weather. Other than that I have only cameras I consider best (for their purposes).
 
I once bought a preset 135 with good optics, telling myself that it would be cool and would be a throw-away if needed. Fact of the matter is if I think it is good I try very hard to take care of it when using it. If it isn't good why use it unless it has some charactoristic I want. Strangely, I never used the preset because I had a Fujinon that I preferred to use, and always took care of it when I did. I am not a pro so I don't have situations where I must deliver no matter, and can afford to throw away a camera or lens.

I have bought cameras for many reasons, including backup (not the same as throw-away to me). Or because they were neat, or for parts, or different, or small, or RFF GAS attacked. I have never bought one as a throw-away. That just isn't my way to use cameras.
 
Accidentally, I have ended up with second bodies (or more) as second-string cameras. This goes for 35mm Contax SLR's, m/f P6 slr's and for M's. The only things requiring thought about the finances were the Leicas, but that was justified by being what I mostly use these days and by being M3 and M6.

For tiny-camera use I have a little Rollei, or occasionally a battered Canon digital p+s. These might also get used for colour if I am carrying only black-and-white film for a larger camera.

The idea of having as-new tools sitting at home while I have to struggle with a less convenient, but 'disposable', something during (for example) climbing up a mountain somewhere does not seem sensible.
 
Roger Hicks said:
...why? Or perhaps, when? 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. 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). Who here has 'knockabout' or 'second string' cameras, and when do you carry them as an alternative to your 'best' camera(s)?

The argument is developed at greater length on http://www.rogerandfrances.com/, where there's also a pretty picture of a Nikkormat with a GN-Nikkor. If the Short Schrift has changed by the time you get to the site, just click on the link above the picture for earlier pieces, which will by then include this one.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Nice Nikkormat there, Roger. I have a very nice earlier version FTn that is just about through with it's first roll of color film ... for me. Using the really sharp 50mm 1.8 AF, I am looking forward to the images.:D

One day, maybe I can find a very inexpensive non-AIS lens for it.. The aperture ring is a PITA with the AF lens.:rolleyes:
 
oftheherd said:
I once bought a preset 135 with good optics, telling myself that it would be cool and would be a throw-away if needed. ........
Click to expand...

I tried this with two different FSU cameras. I wanted something to take out on the boat and not worry if it became a sinker. Ended up putting too much money into them and they still had issues that impacted, traded and sold and still gave money to fix after I sold the FED2 :bang::bang:

B2 (;->
 
I specifically bought a Rollei 35S as a "knockabout" camera. I take it with me snowboarding, biking, and any other time a larger and/or more expensive camera is not a good idea. It's the cheapest "full frame" camera with a Sonnar lens I can think of. I don't truly beat on it, as in throw it around, but I'm not overly protective with it either. I find its own little case and a ski jacket or biking jersey pocket sufficient protection for it, but sometimes it goes into a ziplock bag if its wet out.

If it had to honestly compete with a Rolleiflex or Leica then I probably wouldn't use it much. For me a second string camera is all about the opportunity to take photos in circumstances when I otherwise would not have a camera with me:

5417183332_dabcee760e_z.jpg


Cheers,
Rob
 
Well, been thinking about the Nikons I have and for the money and size, if a Nikon N80 is/was good enough for Galen Rowell...:):):)
 
About 20 years ago I picked up a GAF L-CM with a 50mm lens at a tag sale for 50 cents. Most of the fake leather covering was missing and it had a few dents.

Back when I was a newspaper photographer, I'd leave it in the trunk of my car with a couple of rolls of film - just in case...

These days I take it when I go out to the beach with my kids. The thing is just so ugly I couldn't imagine anyone stealing it. I'd be far more upset about losing the roll of film than losing the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom