Hsg
who dares wins
Collection has to do with intent, not the number owned. Only you know if you are a collector.
The intent to simply possess.
I understand now.
Collection has to do with intent, not the number owned. Only you know if you are a collector.
Collection has to do with intent, not the number owned. Only you know if you are a collector.
To the collector out there who owns a "Ralph Gibson MP Limited Edition" that is sitting in your beautiful display case. I've always wanted one but couldn't afford it at the time, then they were gone.🙁 I would be ever so grateful that when you pass from this earth & I'm still living, could you kindly will the camera to me. Your relatives can fight over the rest of the money from your other collection they sell at the estate sell. I promise to use it for what it was intended...To Shoot. I'm serious. Thank you in advance. GB Hill🙂
The thing is that the signal-to-noise ratio on the Internet is so high that it's not really worth wasting time talking to people who think they know a lot more than they do.
I will agree with Cal, well said! Collecting is accumulation with purpose. And, something made and marketed as a "collectible" item isn't really collectible, IMO.My small camera museum is kinda full. About the only camera I still want is a M-246, but that at this point would be a luxury as I am a very happy Monochrom shooter. I can't see downsizing or increasing the size of my herd.
I own more than a dozen, but less than 15 cameras that I all use. I'm a shooter who has a nice collection.
Some cameras are rare: black SL2-MOT; odd Wetzlar M6 with Wetzlar engravings on a Titanium top plate that pre-dates the titanium version by 5 years.
Some cameras are historical like my F3P that was a real "press" camera for the newspaper "Newsday" that was used in Operation Desert Storm.
Some cameras I bought because they were great deals (a like new F3HP for $150.00; a Rollie 3.5F "Whiteface" for $999.00).
Some cameras because they are interesting like a Plaubel 69W "Proshift" the only 120 camera with shifts (features a 21 Super Augulon FOV in 6x9).
Then it is just plain cool to have a big Fuji kit and a brace of lenses (GL690 and GM670: 65/8; 100/3.5; 100/35 AE; 150/5.6).
The best is to have 3 M-bodies so as to avoid lens changing, and then to own a IIIG just to have a LTM. I also shoot a R8 and love that is called the "Hunchback of Solms." LOL.
Cal
And, something made and marketed as a "collectible" item isn't really collectible, IMO.
Over the decades I've known a few serious collectors in the millionaire league and quite a few more who were experts and had good collections. I met a lot of them when and after I sold my own modest collection acquired in the late 1960s and early 1970s (because they bought what I was selling). Some have been photographers: some not. Few want to bruit their names abroad.
The thing is that the signal-to-noise ratio on the Internet is so high that it's not really worth wasting time talking to people who think they know a lot more than they do. There are a few experts who generously share their knowledge, but a lot of them know or knew the others personally in pre-Internet days.
This will no doubt trigger accusations of elitism and so forth, but then, this is not my problem. Or of the people I [used to] know who are/were generous with knowledge and the loan of equipment; the latter often on condition of anonymity. Several helped me with my History of the 35mm Still Camera, The Focal Press 1984, http://www.amazon.co.uk/A-History-35mm-Still-Camera/dp/0240512332
Cheers,
R.
there are plenty of collectors here.
Just start a thread on whatever collectible camera and see for yourself.
Absolutely right. 🙂
Same is true a few other places I like. A thread on long fast lenses and suddenly out come the 250mm F/2 lenses etc.
It would be hard to think of a lens or camera someone here does not own. 🙂
Failing some sort of stereoscopic nuclear bomb taking camera..... 😉
You are of course absolutely right: I had meant to reverse it and write "noise to signal" but then went on autopilot. Very embarrassing.Good points. My definition of a collector includes not only acquiring some number of the particular items (cameras, motorcycles, cars, metal lunch boxes. etc.), but the knowledge to know which are the more desirable items to pursue (rare, historically significant/particular provenance, etc.). The people I consider the true collectors generally, pursue a fairly small subset of the class, know a lot about the area of interest, and are never afraid to "overpay" for the right items.
I have a bunch of old cameras, even a couple of Leicas, but I am not a collector - I just acquire a fair amount of junk...
Also, I think you mean "signal-to-noise ratio on the Internet is so LOW..."
Dear Cal,. . . Some cameras because they are interesting like a Plaubel 69W "Proshift" the only 120 camera with shifts (features a 21 Super Augulon FOV in 6x9). . .
Just like being an artist then. 🙂
Once upon a time as a working photographer I managed to snag a near Mint Nikon SP with 50/1.1 lens - for just the repair cost.
I was determined never to be a damned collector,
and traded it off for a Nice Leica M3 and 3 lenses.
But I missed that beautiful SP and even more beautiful 50/1.1. dammit
so now I have more cameras and lenses than I could ever need
but I'm not a collector, no, not a collector .. not ME
I will agree with Cal, well said! Collecting is accumulation with purpose. And, something made and marketed as a "collectible" item isn't really collectible, IMO.