Woke up a couple of oldies today

[cmedin]

I've had some cameras sitting around for a while that needed a little attention. Bought a Spotmatic SP and a Pentax SL mainly for the lenses they came with, and neglected the cameras themselves for quite some time. Had a few hours to kill today and decided to see what I could do about these old lovelies.

Both needed light seals, badly. What little was left had deteriorated into horrible, nasty gunk. Surprisingly, the mirror foam was ok -- not sure why, but neither needed it replaced.

The Spotmatic had a battery corroded into place, and when seeing that I bought a replacement battery cap. What a major pain it was to get the original one out since it was practically welded in place at this point, and the previous owner had gouged it so badly there was nothing to hold on to. Ended up using some vice grips to grab it while protecting the bottom plate with some fabric. New battery cap worked well with the replacement Wein battery.

Replaced light seals in both and while not a big deal it is a time consuming procedure to do right; you have to soak the seals in some solvent and then gently scrape the remnants out. Once that is done, you have to carefully work the replacement foam strips into place, and get the shaggy strip thing by the door hinge just right.

Then you close the door and check the shutter. It's been five decades since these things were assembled. You eyeball 1/60th and it seems to be in the range. Place the dial on 1 and go 'one-mississippi' and what do you know, it's about right too. Crank it all the way to 1/1000 and you are rewarded with a mechanical, precise 'schnick'.

Five decades, and I bet neither of them has seen service.

And they work just like the day they were assembled.

Is it just nostalgia, or were things simply built with a care and concern that we completely lack today?

Do we lack the same pride in workmanship and quality because today, things are considered disposable, and while a Canon 1Ds Mk II might be a fantastic camera capable of fantastic images, there is no reason to keep it working past 5-7 years?

I love progress, but it makes me sad to think of all the things that end up in a landfill simply because the next great thing came along.

What is it we are really looking for?

 

[ErnestoJL]

Things made "yesterday" were designed and made to last.
Now, almost everything made today is disposable either as for being unserviceable, or simply obsolete (technically).
My eldest camera, which BTW is in full working condition, is 71 y.o.
The newest one (Canon A580) hopefully will work for the next 4 / 5 years, but at this time it´ll be superseded by a newer, better and cheaper one.
This last is something that didn´t happen with the old cameras.

Quote: Is it just nostalgia, or were things simply built with a care and concern that we completely lack today?
I guess you´re right, it´s not nostalgia.

Cheers

Ernesto

 

[bmattock]

I love progress, but it makes me sad to think of all the things that end up in a landfill simply because the next great thing came along.

I have an Olympus D-220L. Fine digital camera, well-made. Fixed focus meniscus lens, SmartMedia card with a 32 meg maximum capacity, 640K images (2/3 of one meg).

I bought it in 1998. Does it matter that it still works well? I'm not going to be using it again as anything but a curiosity. For what reason should it have been made to the standard of my Canon FX, built in 1964 and still going strong after one CLA recently?

What is it we are really looking for?

Appropriate technology. Manufacturing quality to match the expected lifespan of the product, when the underlying technology is in a state of flux and moving upwards at a rapid clip.

If digital technology had reached the plateau in development that film has (incremental improvements over time, nothing revolutionary in the past 30 years), then it would be entirely appropriate to build digital cameras to the standard film cameras once were. But it has not.

No one wants the very well-made Nikon-bodied Kodak DCS digital SLR cameras from the late 1990's and early 2000's now. They continue to function (I suppose) as they have incredible build quality. Kodak lost their shirts on them.

So how now? It would appear that making things to last when they're only going to be in demand for the next couple of years, tops, is somewhat of a bad idea, business-wise.

 

[nikon_sam]

Kodak DCS Pro 14N

Kodak DCS Pro 14N

No one wants the very well-made Nikon-bodied Kodak DCS digital SLR cameras from the late 1990's and early 2000's now. They continue to function (I suppose) as they have incredible build quality. Kodak lost their shirts on them.

I just discovered this camera recently and it's really caught my eye...plus the price is right these days...
This is the one that might open the digital door for me...maybe in a couple of years...🙂

 

[Doug]

cmedin, congrats on waking up your sleeping Pentaxes... great old gear. I still have an SV and a Spotmatic that get occasional use. BTW, you don't need the Wein cell for the Spotmatic as the meter has a bridge circuit to handle off voltages; I use an S625PX silver cell.

 

[Nh3]

Here is my cynical take.

Its simply boredom. When photos gets boring and ideas fade away, the only tangible artifact left in hand is the camera and thus the camera (and lenses and accessories) become the object of curiosity and enjoyment in-themselves.