Camera Colecting

Leica never made 2x2, they practically invented the 35mm format, and the finest rangefinders in the world.

Maybe you're thinking of Hasselblad.

 

That is exactly what I was thinking of. I seem to have mixed up the cameras. My mistake. It's been a lot of years. I always wanted a Hasselblad .. that's the camera that should be substituted in my prior post. Except...I don't know as Hasselblad EVER came out with a 35?? Anyway...it was a great camera and the Leica was too. I did a lot of 4X5 and 8X10 box stuff too. More of that, actually. Think they were a Zeiss lens IIRC. I might add, however, that photography was not my vocation...just a part of it.

 

Didn't he drive an ugly modified Firebird in some TV show in the eighties? And then was a lifeguard or something like that with a bunch of poor skinny deformed young ladies on another show?

 

LMAO at Saf!!

 

The next roll of film I get developed which used to be twenty dollars twenty years ago and now is only six dollars I am going to get them to do me a disc also...I think it is only a couple of dollars more and then can go straight onto the computer with them also....I purchased a scanner for scanning photo's but it would scratch the pictures so it has become closet art...
I was talking to a fulla a month ago that had a F1 camera for sale and he was a photographer and he was telling me that he has his garage full with developing stuff and the cost was over forty thousand and now not even worth five thousand if you could even find a buyer...

Happy to see the reply's and see that there is still an interest in film camera's...

 

If it clicks, its one of 4 things, my dead starter, my teeth in -40c, my mouse or a camera. Funny thing is we own a few, including an old Pentax, a Sony and only use the digital. The older ones are simple enough for me. Still haven't read the digital manual.

 

LOL....I bought a brand new Olympus digital camera YEARS ago. How many years ago....well....it's a 1.5 mega pixel!! Anyway, the point is, I'm like Norm....Not only have I not read the instructions....I never took it out of the box. I OPENED the box....saw that little card and all the stuff and said, Nope...too complicated for MY non-puter brain!

 

Mike, I know why Hugh is a shutter bug!

Cruise through these gorgeous pics! If its wearing chrome or lipstick, he's on it!
http://www.stationwagonforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4318

 

Yup....I was through all those posts by FF. A really interesting guy. I only have half his ability......if it wears lipstick I'm ON IT!

 

Yeah. He's got the touch for classic curves. We probably all do, if we have wagons. Women obviously inspired those Imperial curves, but I don't know about our big-a$$ wagons.

Someday, some gal is gonna see this post and kick my butt, but for now...

 

Holy cow, that's some collection. My first camera was a Polaroid Swinger. I loved that little thing. I bought it with money I made from my paper route. Yes, they had newspapers back then!!

 

For someone who is a camera-phobe, you can't beat digital. No film to develop, No prints to yellow over time, no negatives to store in a cool, dark place (they'll degrade over time anyway). My eye is not sharp enough to pick up the differences between a 33mm print and a print off digital. No contest for me.

 

While I agree with your facts about time and trouble I disagree with the look. The look of film is far superior IMHO.

 

Just saying me eye is not sharp enough to pick up the difference....
I have a hard time picking up the difference between regular and HD TV.......

 

I think the difference now is in the way one sees the world.
I believe that you look at things differently when you have a distinctive old camera in your hands than when you have a $100 7.5 megapixel job from malwort, uh walmort.