[jhb_airlines] Re: Kid with a new toy syndrome.

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 20:19:10 +0100

Strange but I was a whisker from going the Zenit, Ricoh route myself. I
was impressed by the specs of the XR7 and by its looks but I went for
the manual OM1 in the end. In fact I never have bought an aperture
priority camera - all mine are manual except for the compacts/digital
collection.

The nice things about the C765 is that you can take it off automatic
exposure and set your own values.

Bad news as I write. One of my hard drives has started the dreaded death
watch beetle clicking. I think I may be heading for yet another failure
soon.

bones

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwinsk@xxxxxxx
> Sent: 14 August 2004 12:16
> To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Kid with a new toy syndrome.
> 
> 
> It's not that SWMBO has just arisen just that I forgot I was 
> going to look for my 
> accumulation of cameras. The stock stands at:
> 
> Bencini Comet: Italian imitation 35mm, sold by Boots. My first camera.
> 
> Zeis Ikon Nettar: bellows camera. My next purchase. Now has 
> shutter spring prob
> 
> Zenit E: purchased whilst trapped in Czechoslovakia. They 
> paid me a daily allowance 
> but didn't mention that there was nothing to buy and illegal 
> to take cash out of the 
> country. The Zenit was all I could see to spend money on. I'm 
> still quite impressed. 
> Decent lens and built like the proverbial outhouse. When the 
> shutter was released, birds 
> left the trees in their thousands! If you receive complants 
> that the earth doesn't move, 
> anymore, buy her a Zenit!
> 
> Ricoh XR7: purchased when it was launched. With an increasing 
> collection of lenses, 
> my usual device, until 2002.
> 
> Panasonic NV-DC1000: a expensive surprise present, from SWMBO 
> and son. I'm 
> surprised digital photography survived its coming. Pocket 
> sized but awful results, if you 
> tried to enlarge anything.
> 
> Olympus C4000 Zoom: Digital purchased before round world 
> trip, 18 months ago. 
> Brilliant, apart from motorsport, where lack of 
> interchangeable lenses, reset times etc, 
> are a limiting factor. Unmarried son has Cannon equivalent. 
> The same limitations have 
> him deciding to buy a Nikkon digital SLR. Very pricy. Then I 
> find that doesn't include 
> lenses. Unmarried status simplifies life. He's decided the 
> cheapest way around the lens 
> situation is to buy a second hand, non-digital Nikkon, 
> complete with autofocus lenses, 
> because these can be used on the digital SLR. Why can't I 
> indulge in this obstacle 
> removing logic! 'Cos I'm married, that's why.
> 
> Voigtlander Vitoret: passed over by SWMBO's uncle.
> 
> Rollei XF 35: Compact, from same source.
> 
> Yashica 635: purchased, on a whim, at local auction. Haven't 
> yet got around to looking 
> for film. Weighs a ton!
> 
> Kodak Duaflex II: belongs to daughter. Cheap TLR.
> 
> Kodak Hawkeye Mod CC: A box Brownie type. Also belongs to daughter.
> 
> I'll put them away, quickly. I feel a distraction coming on.
> 
> Gerry Winskill
> gwinsk@xxxxxxx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 13 Aug 2004 at 23:49, Peter Dodds wrote:
> 
> > > cameras I've gone through in the last 40 years.
> > I have 5 camera, the latest of which I bought in 1970 (Pentax
> > Spotmatic and several lenses) and still use as my main camera.  
> > The sharpness of its photographs is better than any camera 
> I have seen
> > the results of in all that time. 
> > 
> > I have a 1980s Pentax automatic which used to be my mother's
> > which isn't bad, and an early 2.5Mp digital camera (1997) which I
> > bought 2nd hand in a pub carpark (from the legit owner).  I 
> also have
> > an Ensign bellows camera which was my mother's when she was 
> young - it
> > was used to take pictures of me as a baby, apparently (!) and this
> > still works perfectly, and an Eastman bellows "Autographic" camera
> > which is large format - about 4.5 x 3 inches which I bought in
> > Australia in 1968 to make into an enlarger, but it was so 
> beautiful I
> > kept it.  I have used it on occasion - in the 70's you 
> could still by
> > the film for it, but I made a mask and some inserts so I 
> could use it
> > with 120 roll film.
> > 
> > Photography - where did i find the time to do all that...?
> > 
> > Peter
> > 
> 
> 
> 


Other related posts: