Your camera -- a fashion statement!

[mjflory]

I was browsing the classifieds when my wife brought in the latest "Sundance" mail-order catalog. There, on page 59, among the "flounce skirts" and the "zen sandals," was a Seagull twin-lens reflex camera (model unspecified, price $295). The blurb assures us that "this classic model by Seagull has lately become a fashion statement in its own right," praising its "retro-chic looks."

Well, I thought, an old rangefinder's got a new TLR beat in terms of retro-chic any day. I guess I'll just have to remember to wear the right accessory when I step out... But which one? The discreet charm of a screw-mount Leica? Or should I have a little of the swinging sixties swinging from my neck -- maybe a fixed-lens Canon or old Konica RF? I could even go for the film-noir look and cart around the old Busch Pressman (if I didn't have to cart if too far).

Maybe we need a new forum here for advice on coordinating our look. What's the right camera without the right photographer's vest? Can I consider my Gold Crest meter a piece of jewelry?

I suppose the ultimate accessory would be the right photographer's car. Ansel Adams was known to climb on the roof of his Cadillac wagon, but there's none for sale in this catalog. Wait... That '69 Ford Bronco on the cover, the one with the model standing at her easel on the roof -- it's for sale, right on page 6 -- for only 20 grand! And it's just the right color to go with my FED...

Michael

[SolaresLarrave]

Well, some tough questions to begin with...

Would an old BMW the best bike to match a 1955 M3 camera?

How do you coordinate clothing with a Nikon F100?

On that vein, rugged-looking photographer's vests go with SLRs but what goes with Leica Ms?

Then, what kind of glasses does a photography nut wear? Teardrop, circular (á la John Lennon), small and squarish (the hottest style in Europe) or do you suggest something else? I guess good photographers wear contacts!

I have a nice Land's End Classic Red squall jacket. Does it go better with a silver chrome Leica or should I take the black one?

The possibilities are almost inexhaustible!

[reagan]

Luckily, winter in northern Illinois rather simplifies things. Before going out, you simply put on every single article of clothing you own... layered, of course, and accessorize with one Zorki. It's a well matched ensemble since, both the clothing and the Zorki are ... heavy … AND neither the Zorki nor the clothing ... are quite enough.

[mjflory]

I'm not so sure about the BMW bike and the M3. Our landlord has an old BMW motorcycle but it's noisy and parts are always falling off. Not at all like an M3. (It could just be his cycle, of course.)

We have a great Harley-Davidson store up the street, but I'm not sure what would go with one of their hogs... Maybe a Nikon F2? Big and heavy, but a little short on chrome. Maybe my Koni-Omega.

Ah, the vest. One doesn't need to carry a lot of accessories with an M (or any other Leica) -- Maybe a slim-fitting tailored one. Red would go well with the dot...

I think you're right about the contact lenses. My cameras don't seem to like my glasses at all. They scratch them, in fact. (After 40 years of wearing glasses I'm wondering if I should get contacts so I can see the outer framelines on my cameras.)

I think I've got the same Land's End jacket. The red isn't quite Leica-spot red, but it's close. Then again, the black and chrome would go together so well... and my IIIf doesn't even have a red dot anyway.

The dilemmas!

I suppose Erich Salomon was the true well-dressed photographer...

[mjflory]

Originally Posted by CVBLZ4

Luckily, winter in northern Illinois rather simplifies things. Before going out, you simply put on every single article of clothing you own... layered, of course, and accessorize with one Zorki. It's a well matched ensemble since, both the clothing and the Zorki are ... heavy … AND neither the Zorki nor the clothing ... are quite enough.

Hah! (I grew up outside Milwaukee; these wimpy New York winters just don't seem real to me.)

Maybe I'm speaking too soon, though, as the big Midwestern storm is supposed to be heading our way.

I wonder: if I heated my Zorki a little in the oven, would it keep my hands warm if I walked all the way around the block? (Would it soften the grease and make the knobs a little easier to turn?)

[visiondr]

Originally Posted by mjflory

Hah! (I grew up outside Milwaukee; these wimpy New York winters just don't seem real to me.)

You're kidding right? U.S. midwestern winters cold, hah!
I grew up in Saskatchewan; the flattest, windiest, coldest damn place anyone would want to grow up in (next to Northern Canada or the interior of Alaska). How does 40 below zero (without wind chill) sound? It happens all the time back home. I remember trying to start my plugged in car on cold mornings only to find that the tires were half flat and rock hard; I can still hear the "thump, thump" of the tires as my car ambled its way down the ice-covered streets for the first mile or so. Anyway, I live in Portland now, and all my close friends have moved away from that crazy, frozen wasteland. I can't say I miss the winters at all. BTW, good luck with that storm coming.

Ron

[mjflory]

Originally Posted by visiondr

You're kidding right? U.S. midwestern winters cold, hah!
I grew up in Saskatchewan; the flattest, windiest, coldest damn place anyone would want to grow up in (next to Northern Canada or the interior of Alaska). How does 40 below zero (without wind chill) sound? It happens all the time back home. I remember trying to start my plugged in car on cold mornings only to find that the tires were half flat and rock hard; I can still hear the "thump, thump" of the tires as my car ambled its way down the ice-covered streets for the first mile or so. Anyway, I live in Portland now, and all my close friends have moved away from that crazy, frozen wasteland. I can't say I miss the winters at all. BTW, good luck with that storm coming.

Ron

Ron, you make me feel like I was pampered -- I don't remember any worse than 30 below in Wisconsin. (Of course we were in the temperate south. I was grateful not to have been in the Twin Cities or Duluth. We didn't dare think about Saskatchewan.)

Thanks for the good wishes! So far the storm is an anticlimax. We were supposed to have snow all over by rush hour, then they said midnight. I'm up too late, but I don't see much out there even now.

Somehow the cold seemed easier to take when I was in grade school. Then again, I do remember waiting for that bus at dawn...

-- Michael

[mike goldberg]

Being 'in' or fashionable is nice, yet I'm a very casual dresser... usually jeans and a light jacket in Jerusalem's mild winters. Truthfully, I DON'T want to call attention to myself with photo gear. As I read 'feedback,' more than 90% of those who glance at me, with my 1965 M2 neither know, nor care what I'm carrying.

Over here, I'd be 'making a statement' driving a stick shift anything, especially a VW Beetle, Willy's Jeep or Subaru station wagon from the '90's. A Bessa T and Aussie hat [the hat, increasingly popular here]... would complete the fashion package, just right. BTW, I get around mostly by taxi & bus ;-)
Ciao, mike

[Jocko]

One could not do better than follow the lead of the world's most fashionable astronaut, princess, ballerina, vet and... er... woman.....!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-Bar.../dp/B00004TC8B

Cheers, Ian

[sejanus]

Speaking of astronuts, sorry 'nauts', are nappies in for the well dressed woman around town these days?

[fidget]

I thought that most of us were here because we couldn't give a stuff about what was fashionable, even sort of anti-fashion. What will the anti-fashion gang do if all and sundry take off with RFs. Could be kewl eh?
Seems that Leica could be a prime victim, I recall Victoria Beckham being caught on camera pointing her shiny Leica at the photogs assembled near her home. She had forgotten to remove the lens cap, which made it (almost) news worthy. Still, I think that some of us can identify with that error. (the lens cap, that is).

Dave...

[Abbazz]

For the looks, try a Kodak!

Kodak Regent:
http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/B...nt1Gallery.htm

Kodak Bantam Special (even the camera case looks good):
http://www.cameraquest.com/superban.htm
http://www.collection-appareils.com/...tml/bantam.php

Too bad both use obsolete film formats.

Cheers,

Abbazz

[HuubL]

Glossy shiny Contaxes go best with modern lip gloss.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Abbazz

Kodak Regent:
http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/B...nt1Gallery.htm

620 film is actually still available; e.g. Fotoimpex sells 620 rolls of Fuji Acros 100 and Fujicolor Superia 100, page 18 of their German catalogue.

EDIT: And for 828 film there is a lot of guides on the Web for respooling 35mm film (here, here) and for cutting rolls of 120 down to 35mm width (here). Thanks for giving me a GAS attack, now I want a Bantam Special.

Philipp

[Abbazz]

Originally Posted by rxmd

620 film is actually still available; e.g. Fotoimpex sells 620 rolls of Fuji Acros 100 and Fujicolor Superia 100, page 18 of their German catalogue.

EDIT: And for 828 film there is a lot of guides on the Web for respooling 35mm film (here, here) and for cutting rolls of 120 down to 35mm width (here). Thanks for giving me a GAS attack, now I want a Bantam Special.

Philipp,

I know you can find respooled 620 film, but 6.49 euros for a roll of Fuji Superia 100 seems a little bit expensive for every day shooting. And doing the respooling yourself, or trimming a 120 spool's flange to fit a 620 camera, or cutting down 120 rollfilm to fit a 828 spool is a major PITA. That's why I said that these films were obsolete. Unfortunately it's the same problem with the glorious 122 rollfilm format that fits my Kodak Folding Special 3A (3 1/4 X 5 1/2 = 8.25 x 14cm negatives). Of course I could always buy respooled film from the web... at $30 a roll!

Cheers,

Abbazz

[rxmd]

Abbazz,

Originally Posted by Abbazz

I know you can find respooled 620 film, but 6.49 euros for a roll of Fuji Superia 100 seems a little bit expensive for every day shooting. And doing the respooling yourself, or trimming a 120 spool's flange to fit a 620 camera, or cutting down 120 rollfilm to fit a 828 spool is a major PITA. That's why I said that these films were obsolete.

Of course you're right - it's, of course, nowhere near the conveniece of 120 or 135 film. 6,50 EUR (or 5,30 if you buy Acros in boxes of ten) is rather steep, but still bearable IMHO if you compare it with $30; it's obsolete, but the market is still large enough that the cameras aren't completely unusable, which is nice IMHO.

And cutting film and respooling it on smaller rolls is something the 16mm and Minox crowd apparently does on a daily basis

Originally Posted by Abbazz

Unfortunately it's the same problem with the glorious 122 rollfilm format that fits my Kodak Folding Special 3A (3 1/4 X 5 1/2 = 8.25 x 14cm negatives). Of course I could always buy respooled film from the web... at $30 a roll!

I've always wanted a Kodak #3A to use as a panoramic folder with 120 film - 6x14 gives a pretty impressive negative, especially with slides

[Ash]

Originally Posted by mjflory

I was browsing the classifieds when my wife brought in the latest "Sundance" mail-order catalog. There, on page 59, among the "flounce skirts" and the "zen sandals," was a Seagull twin-lens reflex camera (model unspecified, price $295). The blurb assures us that "this classic model by Seagull has lately become a fashion statement in its own right," praising its "retro-chic looks."

Seagulls are rubbish, they break, and for that price you can get a decent Rollei. GRR!

Well, I thought, an old rangefinder's got a new TLR beat in terms of retro-chic any day. I guess I'll just have to remember to wear the right accessory when I step out... But which one? The discreet charm of a screw-mount Leica? Or should I have a little of the swinging sixties swinging from my neck -- maybe a fixed-lens Canon or old Konica RF? I could even go for the film-noir look and cart around the old Busch Pressman (if I didn't have to cart if too far).

This is why I don't use a neck strap or half case. Nothing ever goes with black. I keep the camera in my side bag, which suits everything I wear

Maybe we need a new forum here for advice on coordinating our look. What's the right camera without the right photographer's vest? Can I consider my Gold Crest meter a piece of jewelry?

I don't think it would take off... but amy has always managed to pull off any style

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43...tled-11_sm.jpg

Then again, sometimes it's function over form

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43...titled-55a.jpg

I suppose the ultimate accessory would be the right photographer's car. Ansel Adams was known to climb on the roof of his Cadillac wagon, but there's none for sale in this catalog. Wait... That '69 Ford Bronco on the cover, the one with the model standing at her easel on the roof -- it's for sale, right on page 6 -- for only 20 grand! And it's just the right color to go with my FED...

Michael

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43...titled-11a.jpg

[Abbazz]

Originally Posted by rxmd

I've always wanted a Kodak #3A to use as a panoramic folder with 120 film - 6x14 gives a pretty impressive negative, especially with slides

That how I use mine, but I respool 120 film on 122 spools with the original paper backing, so it is easier to advance the film by looking at the numbers in the red window. I don't use the camera very often though, because I hate the respooling chore!

Cheers,

Abbazz

[Robert Price]

I too, relize that you should accessorize your camera to your personality and taste's. That's why I find myself in a plethora of situations concerning my "Camera Fasion".

If I go out with my Leica 3C gear, do I dress "conservitive" or do I go for the "grungie hip look"?

If I take the wifes car (Saturn Vue) to the zoo. Do I take just a small P&S Digital or P&S Film Camera. What if I take my Car (Toyota FJ Cruiser)? Should I take My Cannon xti or go retro and take my Argus C3 instead.

What about Camping? Back pack or the "Indiana Jones" look leather bag over the shoulder?

Desisions, desisions. I think a list of accecptable situations and gear should be thought out and posted. This just might make all of our lives a little less complicated.

[mjflory]

When I saw the ridiculous ad in the catalog (and I feel for anyone who'd pay $300 for the Seagull!) it reminded me of an incident many years ago on the train into NYC from the Hudson Valley. A very well-dressed fellow with a beautiful deep-sky-blue topcoat sat next to me and we started talking. Turned out he worked for GQ, which seemed to be a sort of fashion magazine (at that time, anyway). There I was in my jeans, wrinkled work shirt, and red-and-black-checked lumberjack's coat. (Might have been a coat I inherited from my father in Wisconsin.) I commented that I certainly wasn't in fashion. He looked at me and said "No! You're the height of fashion! That's just the look this year!" (or words to that effect). Alas, despite my best efforts... (Nowadays I look thoroughly unobtrusively nerdy. Don't tell me that's in, please!)

Oh, no! A 90's Subaru is a fashion statement? They've caught up with me again! (Maybe I'm lucky the floor of the wonderful 1990 Subaru Loyale wagon my dear Vermont aunt gave me finally rusted out and went to that great parking lot in the sky.)

Ash, even from that angle I recognize Amy from other shots of yours. She's always fashionable, even with an SLR. And there's a photographer on a platform, ready to jump onto the fashionable motorcycle after grabbing the shot! But does the camera bag strap in that other shot really read "flab"?!

Do I dare post this shot? Here's the totally fashionable photographer, speaking with another straw-hatted shutterbug on the grounds of a temple in Kyoto. I think he'd spotted my Leitz-Minolta CL, out of sight but around my neck in the shot, and we talked equipment for a while. (Photograph taken with my wonderful Sony DSC-T5 digital minicamera by my colleague Sonia Ragir. Will she forgive me for posting it? Can I forgive her for capturing my ample unfashionableness for posterity?)

By the way, I tried cutting down the spool of a roll of 120 to try to fit it in my (fashionably retro) Kodak Vigilant Six-20, but no luck, the spindle itself is thick enough that even without the -- what do you call them, "spool ends" the film wouldn't fit. So I guess I'll get around to trying to fully respool some 120 one of these days.

Well, I'd better put on my South-Park-style parka and get out into the storm. The new and ever-so-fashionable Subaru probably needs de-icing again.

With icy good cheer,

Michael

[DavidH]

Originally Posted by mjflory

I suppose the ultimate accessory would be the right photographer's car.

Well...no model included but you can take the roof off, comes with a driver, is fitted with a schnorkel and has space for the tripod in the back...as used by mums on the school run in London...

[Jocko]

For the perfect fusion of fashion and photography, look to Mr Teague -
http://members.home.nl/brownie.camer...win_teague.htm

Cheers, Ian

[mjflory]

Oh, no, Ash says my CL is chic! (Posting #35)

[Ash]

Not as much as a seagull

[Wayne R. Scott]

Originally Posted by mjflory

By the way, I tried cutting down the spool of a roll of 120 to try to fit it in my (fashionably retro) Kodak Vigilant Six-20, but no luck, the spindle itself is thick enough that even without the -- what do you call them, "spool ends" the film wouldn't fit. So I guess I'll get around to trying to fully respool some 120 one of these days.

I bought a Foldex 20, in addition to using 620 film, it will hold a 120 spool of film which I wind onto another 120 spool, then I take this spool of 120 and wind it onto a 620 spool which I use in my 620 cameras. It just takes a couple of minutes to wind on the rolls in the Foldex. The trick is to keep your 620 metal spools if you have some one else process your film.

I am curious as to what would be proper shoes to wear when walking about with a Leica M2, or Contax IIa, or Canon P.

(Like I really care.)

Wayne