The Poor Boy Camera

Wayne R. Scott

Wayne R. Scott

Half fast Leica User
Local time
5:58 PM
Joined
Dec 25, 2003
Messages
1,315
In the late 1700’s to mid 1850’s in Colonial America there evolved a working man’s rifle that has been named the Southern Poor Boy Longrifle. While the Kentucky/Pennsylvania Longrifle was stocked with fancy curly maple wood ornately carved with brass and/or silver engraved inlays that showed pride in ownership; the Poor Boy rifle was plainly stocked with no carvings or engravings and the metal hardware (if any) was normally a dull browned iron. This was a tool that almost any one could afford and as a practical matter it did not glisten in the sunlight spooking wild game that might become tonight’s dinner nor drawing the attention of hostile enemies. It could be used effectively on a daily basis and if it were scratched or dented from using it as a last ditch defensive club there would be no shedding of tears for the bruises it suffered.

I was thinking of comparable rangefinder cameras. Which cameras would you classify as a “Poor Boy Camera”? What would you list as the working man’s cameras?

Wayne
 
depends on whether the user is making a living from photography or not.

also, today a Poor Boy Camera would not be a rangefinder, if you are depending on it to make money.

really depends on projected use. You could say one of those Argus bricks or a Leica M6, despite the price
 
most working man's cameras fall outside the framework of this website i'd think. as for the poor guys cam, it's relative isn't it. for the dentist crowd it could be a used m7, or a non edition mp if we're talking new, for the student (not son or daughter to the dentist) it might be a fixed lens rf from the seventies. just about any of them... currently in production, m-mount and such, it'd have to be an RxM or A...
 
For most people in film photography, Pentax K1000 or Canon AE-1.

For RF, a Canonet.

For digital, Canon Rebel series.
 
Pablito,

I had not thought of the "working man" to be a professional photographer, but I can see how that definition could work. To continue the rifle analogy the "professional" in Colonial America would probably have been the free trappers or mountain man and they most likely would not have used the Poor Boy Rifle. They would probably have chosen a larger caliber 1/2 stock "Plains" rifle like the Hawken and it was considerably more expensive than the Poor Boy. Kind of like the Professional photographer using a Mamiya 7II instead of a Yashica GSN.

Wayne
 
The objective is great results, reliably, on the cheap, right?
Almost any manual focus, metal construction SLR will fill this bill.
 
thoriv,

Let's not pick on dentists, there have been a few times in my life when I have been very grateful for their profession:) But you are correct in that one person's definition of poor can be very different form another person's.

When I first joined RFF most of the threads dealt with lower priced cameras and over time we have evolved into many more threads discussing higher end cameras.

Wayne
 
Last edited:
Bryce said:
The objective is great results, reliably, on the cheap, right?
Almost any manual focus, metal construction SLR will fill this bill.
Click to expand...

Yes, basically that is correct. Some of the ones I had in mind were the Pentax Spotmatic series, the Minolta SRT 102 and 202 and some of the Canon SLR's that use FD lens like the AE-1 and FTN.

I also thought that the press cameras in 4x5 with graflock backs to accept roll film holders would be good examples.

In rangefinders the Yashica GSN, Canon QL-17 G-III, Olympus RC, etc.

In digital ---????????? I don't have a clue as I still do not own one.

Wayne
 
Wayne R. Scott said:
When I first joined RFF most of the threads dealt with lower priced cameras and over time we have evolved into many more threads discussing higher end cameras.

Wayne
Click to expand...

And I bet most of the people with the higher end cameras are not dentists.
 
Zorki's & Fed's in their various lines. Many in the later forms were definitely not pretty, so a Zorki 4K or Fed 2 or 5 would top the list.
 
I think most every camera I have might qualify. I tend to chose for utility and value. Perhaps more the "middle-class" guy's cameras than poor boy.... In any case, not one of them likely to be chosen by a working professional, for the ultimate experience, or as a status symbol.
I have a number of old Balda RFs from the 50s. All "family snappers" at best.
Nothing in the world more "workman like" than my Fed-2s.
Minolta 7SII
Sears 35|RF
Canon AE-1
Canon 300D
Bessa R3A
 
I like the Argus A and the Kodak Instamatic and probably the Kodak Box cameras. I hadn't thought of any of those cameras but I think they are definitely "Poor Boy" candidates.

Wayne
 
In the UK, at least, I'm pretty sure the Zenit E was the equivalent camera.

Whenever people see me shooting film cameras they almost always start reminiscing about when they shot film, and that reminiscence almost always involves a Zenit.

Lots of people shot Olympus OMs too. I have an uncle who is a pretty good amateur photographer -- family snaps, plant macros, wildlife photography -- and he's been using his OM2 since the late 70s.
 
Some of the ones I had in mind were the Pentax Spotmatic series, the Minolta SRT 102 and 202 and some of the Canon SLR's that use FD lens like the AE-1 and FTN.
Click to expand...

When I was growing up and showed an interest in photography my father went out and bought an SLR system. The Canon AE-1 was the hit new system, everyone who was someone had one. Nikons were professional cameras. My father bought a used SRT 101. I always wanted a Canon or Nikon, but I still have that 101 and enjoy it.
 
At garage sales and flea makets, Kodak cameras rule, at least in the US. My mom had a Brownie, a box with a lens, and took hundreds of pictures, as did most of the parents of the post-war generation. Dad had an AE-1 later. My vote would be something from Kodak.
Interesting point, in the book "Devil and the White City", about the World's Fair in Chicage in the 1890s, the is a reference that photogs would be charged to bring in their own cameras. an attempt to corner the sales of photographs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom