PDA

View Full Version : Should I buy a...?


Roger Hicks
06-03-2008, 23:24
This is one of the commonest questions in RFF (and elsewhere). All too often, the answer is, "Yes, if you can get a good one."

But what are the chances of finding a good one today, if the camera or lens ceased production decades ago? A more realistic answer, in many cases, would be "A, B, C and D are all pretty similar, and might suit you. Although a B wasn't as good as a C when it was new, a good B today may well be in better use than a C, the more so as the C may have seen hard professional use."

In other words, shouldn't we rely more on what comes up, and less on our preconceptions (and those of others)?

Cheers,

Roger

sebastel
06-03-2008, 23:48
i guess those questions are more questions for confirmation of a plan that has already been made ...

and, i prefer buying at flea market or shops offering used goods, simply because i can hold the item in hands and compare to other offerings or against my preconceptions. unfortunately, remote tactiles won't be available in ebay for the next several years :-P

s.

markrich
06-03-2008, 23:54
Always tempted by shiny new objects. Tis my precious.... :-)

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 00:17
This is because RFF is all about buying and selling, not images.

I suspect the 'should I buy' crowd are drama queens who need attention.

Buy a camera, use it, and create some good photos, do not chat about bokeh, where to get a CLA, what size filter, what sort of strap, and all such nonsense that has nothing to do with photography.

oscroft
06-04-2008, 00:24
In other words, shouldn't we rely more on what comes up, and less on our preconceptions (and those of others)?
Definitely. Apart from my two M bodies (M6, M2) which I specifically wanted, all my other 2nd hand gear has been bought pretty much because it happened to come up and I fancied it at the time (Actually, the other exception is my Olympus XA-4 - the more I got to like my XA the more I planned to get an XA-4). I would never have planned to buy a Leica CL plus 40/2 and 90/4, an uncoated Summitar, a goggled 35/2.8 Summaron, a Canon 85/1.9, an Elmar-M 50/2.8, two Retina IIs (US and Euro models), and all the FSU gear I have - I bought them all as and when they happened to come up over the past few years and I fancied them. And so far I'm really happy with them all.

oftheherd
06-04-2008, 01:05
Thank you sir! Every time I see one of those threads I cringe. I can see a certain amount of questions from more experienced members of the forums. That makes good sense. But some threads seem to start with the intent of getting the ego massaged. The ones that I perceive (rightly or wrongly) to be that, irk me. Of course, maybe that is due to a personality flaw on my part. :D

Spider67
06-04-2008, 01:09
"where to get a CLA,"

I beg to differ as this can be an essential question!
If there isn´t this inclination to the technical/gear comparing side why bother naming it a Rangefinderforum anyway.

"and less on our preconceptions (and those of others)? "
I Know what you mean and it happened to me as I one of my first question on the froums was if I could use a J 12 on a Bessa R and overly enthisastic answres that it´s possible and that there should be no problem......
But while lurking on RFF I lost some of my preconceptions....

Rayt
06-04-2008, 03:03
I think the vast majority of these questions can be answered if the person can just use one of many internet search engines.

chikne
06-04-2008, 03:09
Shall I get a red one or a blue one?

kshapero
06-04-2008, 03:13
Either way works for me since I am not a philosopher. I rely on flickr more for image feedback and Rff for camera questions. Oh yeah please critique. Taken with a Zeiss Ikon and a CV Classic Heliar shot at probably F8 with Ilford XP2 film:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2071/2496930941_d77c76b2ac.jpg?v=0

sebastel
06-04-2008, 03:55
Oh yeah please critique.

it is a perfect example that shows the infamous colour shift that occurrs on black zeiss ikon cameras with M-mount.
can you notice that all colour has faded away? it is probably shifted to front focus 5 meters from the focus point.

if you had used the nikon mount version of the lens, all colour would be perfectly where it belongs to.

(sorry, i am in "mocking mood")

pvdhaar
06-04-2008, 03:59
In other words, shouldn't we rely more on what comes up, and less on our preconceptions (and those of others)?
This advice, good though it is, comes a little too late for me..

The internet makes you do very silly things.. Ignited by this web-fever somewhere in the mid nineties, I've jumped loops and hurdles to buy gear that's not in your around the corner camera shop's inventory.. though it started innocent enough with a consumer grade Nikon..

And in hindsight, I should have known better. Had I continued to shoot the snot out of my -bought in 1996- Nikon F601 (which replaced a 20 year old Zenit-E that I totally ran down), I'd have saved a lot of money, and I'd probably had better pictures to show..

Fortunately, I've recovered. I got rid of anything that I don't regularly use, and am able now to enjoy photography again with a camera that has its body covering peeling away and a $125 lens..

kshapero
06-04-2008, 04:12
it is a perfect example that shows the infamous colour shift that occurrs on black zeiss ikon cameras with M-mount.
can you notice that all colour has faded away? it is probably shifted to front focus 5 meters from the focus point.

if you had used the nikon mount version of the lens, all colour would be perfectly where it belongs to.

(sorry, i am in "mocking mood")

LOL!!!:p That was sepia and infrared.

tripod
06-04-2008, 04:24
Real photographers don't care or talk much about gear.

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 04:39
Real photographers don't care or talk much about gear.

Not entirely true. When I worked in advertising, there were not THAT many cameras which would deliver what was needed, and new introductions or revised models were widely discussed -- though older gear, especially 35mm, wasn't; at least unless someone found a trick they could use the old camera for. You had a couple of Nikons for copying and AVs, and that was it, though quite a lot of the people I knew also had Leicas just because they liked 'em.

Cheers,

Roger

back alley
06-04-2008, 04:42
i love the smell of cynicism in the morning...such self rightiousness from such nice people...

Keith
06-04-2008, 04:55
I think a lot of us go through a transition with cameras and gear where other peoples recommendations and personal experiences are important and I don't see it as a negative at all I'm afraid. As long as we eventually grow into a system that suits us and encourages us to get out and take photos what's the problem?

Jon is obviously happy with using one camera predominantly and believes that that's right for him but to say that a person can't be a serious photographer if they like to change gear regularly and enjoy the chat in the various gear related threads here is horsesh*t IMHO!

telenous
06-04-2008, 04:58
I bet everyone has asked something or other about gear at some point in their lives. So why exasperate now with gear talk and esp. why rush to throw the first stone? Saying that you don't care about gear does not suddenly a great photographer make you.

Gear talk is a rite of passage for newbies (necessary to sort their needs and desires) and fun for not-so-newbies.

kshapero
06-04-2008, 05:03
Real photographers don't care or talk much about gear.

if that's the case then I proudly declare myself not a photographer just a snapshooter.:p

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 05:11
The thread has wandered somewhat. Gear talk is inevitable. What I'm questioning is how much use the advice can be if you've don't know much about it, haven't much to compare it with, and the kit is decades old.

To take a concrete example, is a 50-year-old Canon worth having? To me, yes if it's silly-cheap but otherwise I'd rather have a Leica, thank you all the same. That's because I've had quite a lot of Leicas, a few Canons, Niccas, etc., and handled many more.

But any individual Canon (especially on ebay, or in a camera store round the corner) might or might not be a better buy than any individual Leica, so 'should I buy a this or a that' is of much more limited use with ancient gear.

Cheers,

Roger

telenous
06-04-2008, 05:22
But any individual Canon (especially on ebay, or in a camera store round the corner) might or might not be a better buy than any individual Leica, so 'should I buy a this or a that' is of much more limited use with ancient gear.

Cheers,

Roger

Roger,

It would seem to me that we need two strata of information: one general that would cover the features of a camera, its aknowledged strengths and weaknesses, commonly occuring problems, price range, first hand experiences (esp. how does it 'feel' to have and use a camera in ideal conditions) and so on. And then a more specific one directly related to the individual camera in question. Both layers of info are important for future buyers. It is the first one that is addressed by questions here and elsewhere. The more specific one, well, one can only hope it is addressed honestly by the seller of the gear.

Best,

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 05:27
Please give me your advice: I am an artist, I want to paint pictures. Should I buy a set of oil paints or water colors? Which is better to use to paint nice pictures?

back alley
06-04-2008, 05:51
there are many misguided folks out there that believe a non interest in gear makes them 'artists'!
and that being an artist makes them better than those who have an interest in gear.

i pity them.

Keith
06-04-2008, 05:54
Please give me your advice: I am an artist, I want to paint pictures. Should I buy a set of oil paints or water colors? Which is better to use to paint nice pictures?


What a simplistic statement! :p

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 06:03
I wish I had a better memory.

Who was the photographer who went to an arts awards ceremony, and an author asked them 'I love your photo, what kind of camera did you use for that?'

And the photographer said 'I liked your last book, what sort of word processor did you use for that?'

back alley
06-04-2008, 06:08
jon, you appear to want to make it a badge of honour to avoid any interest in gear. in doing so, the way you do it, is very insulting and demeaning to others.is this your intent?

Keith
06-04-2008, 06:24
I think as Roger said, this thread has drifted ... with influence I might add!

I wish Jon could make his point without it seeming like an attempt to demean individuals who differ in opinion from him. :confused:

back alley
06-04-2008, 07:09
roger, i can't speak to the experiences of others, but for me i have been lucky in the past when it comes to buying good samples of older gear. i have bought a dud or 2 but mostly the older gear was good.
i know that for me i have to buy on the net as getting most any rf gear locally is impossible.
but the days of old gear are gone for me. i like the look and feel of new gear and that is the route i now take.

gnashings
06-04-2008, 07:17
my wife is a writer, and I know for certain that she can not "get into it" unless she is sitting with a notebook (as in PAPER) or at her Remington Model 17. Her "gear" influences her results. Perhaps she is not very good. Perhaps she is not a writer at all, or at least a "real" one - in which case one of you guys will have to tell her, I don't like sleeping on couches:)

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 07:32
back alley (and Keith).

I do not demean people. I say the truth as I see it.

And back alley: I am not insulting. But I do hold a deep and honest feeling that photography has to do with skill and ability, and not a particular camera.

Having said that, I have contributed to the Olympus 35RC vs XA thread running these past few days as it seems an honest request for information and not a fantasy talk fest thing. I have also been active on the Voigtlander eyepiece thread as it seems to be an issue for that camera.

Over at my day job on another website I do the same sort of thing as back alley, for a salary, and never need to treat people like this. All my comments will start off with words such as: 'We always enjoy your photos and...'. The site owner writes in a similar fashion. We treat our photographers with care and respect. Business is booming. People are leaving RFF to come over to us.

At RFF the site owner seems to think that they can route the discussion in the way they wish. Jorge did it and Stephen does it too. back alley is the Smithers to the Mr Burns.

I am sure Stephen is a great guy to do business with if you're buying a camera. And I'm sure back alley is a great guy to talk photography with. But the combined attitude needs a major rethink.

If RFF is going to attract more than camera fondlers it needs to reinvent itself in a serious way.

Rayt
06-04-2008, 07:36
My pro friends talk a lot more about gear than my amateur friends...:)

The pros I know are all gear heads and they don't hang out at photo forums to talk about it.

back alley
06-04-2008, 07:39
back alley (and Keith).

I do not demean people. I say the truth as I see it.

And back alley: I am not insulting. But I do hold a deep and honest feeling that photography has to do with skill and ability, and not a particular camera.

Having said that, I have contributed to the Olympus 35RC vs XA thread running these past few days as it seems an honest request for information and not a fantasy talk fest thing. I have also been active on the Voigtlander eyepiece thread as it seems to be an issue for that camera.

Over at my day job on another website I do the same sort of thing as back alley, for a salary, and never need to treat people like this. All my comments will start off with words such as: 'We always enjoy your photos and...'. The site owner writes in a similar fashion. We treat our photographers with care and respect. Business is booming. People are leaving RFF to come over to us.

At RFF the site owner seems to think that they can route the discussion in the way they wish. Jorge did it and Stephen does it too. back alley is the Smithers to the Mr Burns.

I am sure Stephen is a great guy to do business with if you're buying a camera. And I'm sure back alley is a great guy to talk photography with. But the combined attitude needs a major rethink.

If RFF is going to attract more than camera fondlers it needs to reinvent itself in a serious way.


i believe you need a rethink on this jon.
it really isn't your place to say if you are rude and demeaning but more it's the person being demeaned to testify to it.
if i feel demeaned then that's how i feel and that's all there is to it. it's not your place to tell me that my feelings are wrong.

as to rff's popularity we have tripled in membership of late so i think we are doing ok.
i never claimed to be the nicest guy around but i do think i'm fair and honest with people and i'm not about to compliment someone as a set up to a negative comment, seems dishonest to me.
and i don't go over to other photo sites to bad mouth people as some here do.

joe

kevin m
06-04-2008, 07:44
To take a concrete example, is a 50-year-old Canon worth having? To me, yes if it's silly-cheap but otherwise I'd rather have a Leica, thank you all the same.

I'm not sure I understand this statement. Are you saying that given a choice between a 50-year old Canon and a 50-year old Leica, you think the Leica is inherently superior?

I thought the subject was the usability of old gear and not personal preferences. :confused:

NB23
06-04-2008, 07:44
The silliest thing, I agree!

I also find silly that everybody recommends what he owns, regardless of its true quality. Like a person asking for recommendation on which 35mm lens and 100 people will recommend 50 diffrerent lenses (the one they own, obviously, even if it's cheap).

Me, personally, if someone asks for the best 35mm lens (as an example), I will simply recommend the latest and greatest as being the best: 35mm lux asph even though I don't own it. Wouldn't that be just normal?

gnashings
06-04-2008, 07:51
back alley (and Keith).

I do not demean people. I say the truth as I see it.

And back alley: I am not insulting. But I do hold a deep and honest feeling that photography has to do with skill and ability, and not a particular camera.

Having said that, I have contributed to the Olympus 35RC vs XA thread running these past few days as it seems an honest request for information and not a fantasy talk fest thing. I have also been active on the Voigtlander eyepiece thread as it seems to be an issue for that camera.

Over at my day job on another website I do the same sort of thing as back alley, for a salary, and never need to treat people like this. All my comments will start off with words such as: 'We always enjoy your photos and...'. The site owner writes in a similar fashion. We treat our photographers with care and respect. Business is booming. People are leaving RFF to come over to us.

At RFF the site owner seems to think that they can route the discussion in the way they wish. Jorge did it and Stephen does it too. back alley is the Smithers to the Mr Burns.

I am sure Stephen is a great guy to do business with if you're buying a camera. And I'm sure back alley is a great guy to talk photography with. But the combined attitude needs a major rethink.

If RFF is going to attract more than camera fondlers it needs to reinvent itself in a serious way.

Personally (and I know that my personal opinion + $1.50 will get you a small coffee - but none the less), I find this kind of commment to be in poor taste, counter-productive and quite frankly smacking of personal agendas/grievences... Why belittle a forum and its members on that very forum - last time I checked we are free to "vote" on the usefulness of a forum by simply choosing to be a part of it, or not...

kevin m
06-04-2008, 07:54
...if i feel demeaned then that's how i feel and that's all there is to it.


In different times, the saying was I take offense, rather than, I am offended. It makes one an active participant in one's own emotional state, rather than the victim of whatever circumstance brings.

brachal
06-04-2008, 08:03
Somebody, I forget who, posted this here a couple of years ago under similar circumstances.

kevin m
06-04-2008, 08:06
Bill, that's frikkin' hilarious!

You didn't do that just to get attention, did you? :confused::D

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 08:08
brachal:


Thank you.

In a few days back alley will be asking about a Zeiss Ikon lens hood, and I'll be talking about a photo, and we'll be back to situation normal. RFF style.

brachal
06-04-2008, 08:22
Bill, that's frikkin' hilarious!

You didn't do that just to get attention, did you? :confused::D

"There are no other reasons, and there are no exceptions." :)

Charly
06-04-2008, 08:31
This comes across as a bit of a dig at me since I recently posted something similar to the TLR forum.

I'm not experienced with TLRs or any MF gear at all. The reason for asking was simple - to find out if there was anything I ought to avoid due to mechanical fragility or being over valued by collectors. Additionally, it could have been that there are "hidden gems" - unloved but very capable equipment that would suit me well.

To follow Roger's analogy into cars, compare a Mk1 Golf GTi with a Peugeot 205 GTi. Given a similar condition and price, which is better? I might be a girl but I know a few things about spanners from a mispent youth and I can promise you that for my money, the choice is very easy and very German. Is it better to drive? not really. Is it better made and easier to fix? Definitely! How do I know? I've owned both. I was simply looking for advice upon similar lines based upon similar experience. No shame in that - unlike how much of this thread has continued.

kevin m
06-04-2008, 08:39
Charly, I don't know about the other replies in this thread, but I don't think the original question was intended as a dig at anyone. He was just asking how the advice might vary considering the cameras in question are now 50 years old. :)

I agree with you about the Mk1 VW, btw! :D

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2038/2402720329_18eab73e2e.jpg?v=0

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 08:41
In the past thirty minutes I have received an email:

RFF is going nowhere with this gear obsession

Wake up Stephen and back alley. Widen it up and embrace the diversity of interests, buyers, members. Also, be nice to people even when they disagree with you.

Dave Wilkinson
06-04-2008, 08:44
there are many misguided folks out there that believe a non interest in gear makes them 'artists'!
and that being an artist makes them better than those who have an interest in gear.

i pity them.


I cut and shaped metal on machine tools for forty years, and still like it!,-and I'll happily sit and discuss lathes, millers, etc. and how to get the best out of them! - so what's the problem here? :(

Dave.

oscroft
06-04-2008, 08:58
In a few days back alley will be asking about a Zeiss Ikon lens hood, and I'll be talking about a photo
And what's wrong with either of those?

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 09:00
Photography is science and art.

Both together lead to good outcomes.

At Lomo there is typically a lot of art, and not so much science.

At RFF there is sometimes too much science, and not so much art.

Some of us try to keep the science and art in balance.

One RFF member recently told me they had gone to an RFF meet. There was in-depth talk about cameras, but no talk about images.

That's like going to a Ferrari owners' meeting and taking the car on a trailer.

ferider
06-04-2008, 09:01
Wake up Stephen and back alley. Widen it up and embrace the diversity of interests, buyers, members. Also, be nice to people even when they disagree with you.

Hmm. So Joe is lacking nicety and tolerance ?


I suspect the 'should I buy' crowd are drama queens who need attention.

Like this ?

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 09:02
And what's wrong with either of those?

Nothing wrong at all. It's just the way we live here. He'll do his thing, and I'll do mine. End of story. We've done it for years.

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:02
In different times, the saying was I take offense, rather than, I am offended. It makes one an active participant in one's own emotional state, rather than the victim of whatever circumstance brings.

just to clarify, i do not feel like a victim and i'm not all that offended either.

my main point is that these people who claim to be into the images often make this claim as an attack on those who like the gear end of things.

i detest the 'moral superiority' expressed.

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:05
In the past thirty minutes I have received an email:



Wake up Stephen and back alley. Widen it up and embrace the diversity of interests, buyers, members. Also, be nice to people even when they disagree with you.

wake up yourself jon and look around at the changes here at rff.
there has been a greater emphasis on images of late.

if you really want to be useful, go to my flickr account and give me some feedback on my images, honest feedback that will help me grow as a photographer, instead of mocking me because i also like to discuss lens hoods.

joe

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:06
I cut and shaped metal on machine tools for forty years, and still like it!,-and I'll happily sit and discuss lathes, millers, etc. and how to get the best out of them! - so what's the problem here? :(

Dave.

no problem dave, i think we are in agreement.

joe

kevin m
06-04-2008, 09:09
i detest the 'moral superiority' expressed.

Ah, gotcha.

Happens alot around here, and I'm sure I've been guilty of it myself. It can be difficult to tell whether someone's being an intentional ass, or if they're just a bad writer. :D

oscroft
06-04-2008, 09:09
Nothing wrong at all. It's just the way we live here. He'll do his thing, and I'll do mine. End of story. We've done it for years.
So what's the problem? The www is a huge marketplace with many sites contributing to the supply and many people providing the demand, and it is up to us as individuals to visit the sites that give us what we want rather than criticise the sites that don't. Would you complain about the butcher because he won't sell you bread? No, you'd go to the baker. Likewise if RFF has a booming membership who might talk more about cameras than about images, what should you do? Should you treat RFF like the butcher who won't sell you bread, or should you appreciate the meat he sells and go get your bread elsewhere? It seems simple enough to me.

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:13
Ah, gotcha.

Happens alot around here, and I'm sure I've been guilty of it myself. It can be difficult to tell whether someone's being an intentional ass, or if they're just a bad writer. :D

sorry kevin, i wasn't directing that last statement at you.

the internet has to be the best worst place to attempt direct communication.

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:14
So what's the problem? The www is a huge marketplace with many sites contributing to the supply and many people providing the demand, and it is up to us as individuals to visit the sites that give us what we want rather than criticise the sites that don't. Would you complain about the butcher because he won't sell you bread? No, you'd go to the baker. Likewise if RFF has a booming membership who might talk more about cameras than about images, what should you do? Should you treat RFF like the butcher who won't sell you bread, or should you appreciate the meat he sells and go get your bread elsewhere? It seems simple enough to me.

i wish i could have said it as well as you sir.

joe

kevin m
06-04-2008, 09:15
the internet has to be the best worst place to attempt direct communication.

True. I think it's just as bad as the automobile. Both the computer screen and the windshield seem to amp up the aggravation level.

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 09:20
My father loves cameras, typewriters and lawnmowers. He collects them.

One day I'll inherit some Barnack Leicas, a Reid with a Taylor Taylor Hobson lens, an Alpa, some Rolleis and so on.

When we talk, he talks cameras, and I talk photos. We get on just fine.

oscroft
06-04-2008, 09:21
i wish i could have said it as well as you sir.
And you, sir, are very kind :)

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 09:26
if you really want to be useful, go to my flickr account and give me some feedback on my images, honest feedback that will help me grow as a photographer, instead of mocking me because i also like to discuss lens hoods.

I recall about six months back I gave you a lot of help getting your avatar and business card looking right. A photo of a mailbox with your name superimposed on it.

Other people helped you also.

You never thanked any of us.

oscroft
06-04-2008, 09:40
Hi Jon,

I recall about six months back I gave you a lot of help getting your avatar and business card looking right. A photo of a mailbox with your name superimposed on it.

Other people helped you also.

You never thanked any of us
I hope you'll take this the right way, because it's meant constructively - I know you only from reading quite a few of your posts, and I know Joe only from his (much appreciated) work in the running of this site and his posts, and on those counts I have respect for you both. But this really is beginning to look like you're getting more petty by the post and turning what might initially have been a valid critique of RFF into a personal spat. And I have to say Joe is the one who's looking the more grown-up right now.

Best regards,

back alley
06-04-2008, 09:41
I recall about six months back I gave you a lot of help getting your avatar and business card looking right. A photo of a mailbox with your name superimposed on it.

Other people helped you also.

You never thanked any of us.

then, let me apologise for this grievance as i usually take the time to say thanks, this was an oversight.
i do not mind being reminded to observe the niceities of life.

tbarker13
06-04-2008, 09:56
Real photographers don't care or talk much about gear.

I love it when I read these sorts of sweeping absolute statements, because they are virtually always wrong. As is this one.

I've been working in the newspaper industry for nearly 20 years, and have worked with dozens upon dozens of professional photojournalists. Some are pure gearheads who love talking about and lusting after lenses and bodies. I was introduced to Leica by one I met while I was back in college.

I'm sorry, but notion that real photographers don't care or talk much about gear is just sort of laughable.

tripod
06-04-2008, 10:00
I wish there were a sarcasm emocon.
I agree with you, Tim.

micromontenegro
06-04-2008, 10:01
Frank G must be happily humming now!

BillP
06-04-2008, 10:48
Err...

Trying to get back on topic, I think I can see what Roger is driving at.

I have no problem with people who ask for opinions on lens x or body y or film z in terms of performance, etc.

Where I struggle is with the questions that are largely a matter of taste - chrome vs black being a prime example. I would no more ask for opinions on that than I would post here to ask if my next suiting should be pinstripe or birdseye check.

The daft question is compounded by the unfounded answer. These come from people who do not own, or have never owned, the gear in question, but have an opinion on it nonetheless.

Opinions, particularly those expressed on the interweb are like arseholes. We all have them and most of them stink.

Regards,

Bill

John Robertson
06-04-2008, 10:59
Real photographers don't care or talk much about gear.

An artist I knew many years ago, McIntosh Patrick said when asked the difference between art of painting and photography said.
"when you ask a painter about his art he will show you his paintings, a photographer will show you his cameras!!"

Very true!!:rolleyes:

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 11:07
Where I struggle is with the questions that are largely a matter of taste - chrome vs black being a prime example. I would no more ask for opinions on that than I would post here to ask if my next suiting should be pinstripe or birdseye check.

The daft question is compounded by the unfounded answer. These come from people who do not own, or have never owned, the gear in question, but have an opinion on it nonetheless.


Very well expressed. Thank you.

ClaremontPhoto
06-04-2008, 11:08
An artist I knew many years ago, McIntosh Patrick said when asked the difference between art of painting and photography said.
"when you ask a painter about his art he will show you his paintings, a photographer will show you his cameras!!"

You said it perfectly John. Or, rather Patrick said it. So right.

Chris101
06-04-2008, 11:13
Before I bought my first Leica (and my first serious old camera - I have many old cameras, but I bought them all new) I knew nothing about the various models. I found one at a local camera shop, but they knew nothing about it. I asked "Should I buy a ..." on a forum where a well known Leica advocate posted often.

In return I got encouragement, testing advice and a raft of useful information. I bought it and now, 13 months later it is one of my favorite cameras. I even take pictures with it.

Please give me your advice: I am an artist, I want to paint pictures. Should I buy a set of oil paints or water colors? Which is better to use to paint nice pictures?

Water colors basically stink - they are for school children, as their main advantage is easy cleaning. Oil will never dry in your lifetime, and clean up requires an EPA supersite. Acrylic is the only real alternative for the 21st century. Good luck with that!

:p:p:p:p

NB23
06-04-2008, 11:19
Chris, the M4-P is king! :D

BillP
06-04-2008, 11:29
Water colors basically stink - they are for school children, as their main advantage is easy cleaning.



Chris, I *think* you are probably referring to what I know as "poster paints" - powdered pigments mixed in water for use.

True water colours certainly do not "stink". I still go out to this day, occasionally, with a small water colour kit and a book of Windsor and Newton's finest. It's a totally different discipline, but no less rewarding.

Regards,

Bill

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 12:15
Sorry to have upset so many people, and really, the original post was not aimed at anyone in particular. Perhaps another restatement of the original premise is called for.

If you ask for opinions about 'should I buy A...?' or 'Should I buy A or B?'

1 Yes, you are going to get personal opinions, and those opinions will vary according to personal experience, expectations and purse.

2 WITH VERY OLD EQUIPMENT (I've used caps and bold because surprisingly many people seem not to have noticed this aspect of the thread), those opinions are going to be of limited usefulness because wear and tear and deterioration will often account for more variation than original quality.

I'll certainly agree with other posters that opinions tend to be polarized and are sometimes wildly overstated, and that some who hold the strongest opinions have never actually owned, used, or in some cases even handled the equipment in question, but that really wasn't the point.

What prompted the post was musing on the kind of reply which, when someone says, "Should I buy am aspheric or pre-aspheric 35mm Summilux?" replies, "No, what you really want is a Summicron/Canon/Nikkor/Voigtländer...

Some of these answers are very useful indeed, because they point out alternatives that are probably related to the inquirer's desires. Less useful, but still fairly relevant, are "Have you considered a 28mm [or 40mm]?" Probably least useful are the ones that go, "No-one needs a lens that fast, and the 35mm Summicron is a lot sharper" or "Why not buy a 90mm?"

None of these points is aimed at anyone either. Rather, the whole idea was a reflection on how questions should be phrased in order to get useful answers, and what answers are actually useful instead of showing off the respondent's knowledge (or lack of it), experience (or lack of it), prejudices or possessions.

Of course any answer is likely to contain one or more of those (knowledge, experience, prejudices or possessions) but some respondents (and some inquirers) seem more aware of this than others.

Cheers,

Roger

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 13:04
I'm not sure I understand this statement. Are you saying that given a choice between a 50-year old Canon and a 50-year old Leica, you think the Leica is inherently superior?

I thought the subject was the usability of old gear and not personal preferences. :confused:

No, the subject was the validity of opinions and preferences on the usability of old gear, given

A: The sample size available to any individual. I doubt I've had more than 30-40 Leicas in the last 38 years, or handled more than a very few hundred. I've only ever owned three Canon RFs, and handled maybe a couple of dozen. By 'handled' I mean 'looked at as carefully as if I were a prospective buyer, and sometimes taken pictures with or even borrowed for days, weeks and months at a time', not just 'picked up'.

B: The likely enormous variations in quality AS A RESULT OF THE INTERVENING DECADES, regardless of initial quality. Again I use bold caps because a lot of people seem to be ignoring this, which was central to the original post.

As I say, on my sampling, which is bigger than many but smaller than some, I'd back the Leica every time. Someone else, who had owned/handled lots of Canons but very few Leicas, might say the opposite. This is why I said, in the post you queried, any individual Canon might be better than any individual Leica AS A RESULT OF THE INTERVENING DECADES.

Sorry I can't make myself clearer.

Cheers,

Roger

Brian Sweeney
06-04-2008, 13:24
If you have a large enough pool that has sampled many cameras, you can probably pick up a trend by asking such questions. If someone wanted to choose between a 1950s Minolta 35 or a 1950s Canon, most here would sway them toward a Canon. The material used for the shutter curtains was much better. A 1950s Leica, we'd be telling them to reserve money for a CLA and possible beamsplitter replacement. I've replaced beamsplitters in 4 of 5 Barnack Leica's, the 5th was "okay" and the body not in good enough cosmetic shape to make it really cost effective. Of seven LTM Canon RF's, I've not had to replace a beamsplitter.

Of course, your mileage may vary.

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 14:40
If you have a large enough pool that has sampled many cameras, you can probably pick up a trend by asking such questions.
Dear Brian,

Very true. But this is still not the original point. The original point is the camera that is available to the inquirer.

On average, taking your concrete example, most might well agree that the Canon is the camera to go for. I certainly would.

But the range of samples available to the inquirer is nothing like the range of samples available to those who are answering his (or, very rarely, her) question.

The chance of getting a good or bad Leica, Canon, Minolta, whatever, is very nearly pure luck -- the more so as a camera that is being sold today is (be definition) likely to older than any camera of similar vintage that an RFF member has been using for a while. Also (by definition) someone is selling it, quite possibly because they are dissatisfied with it. That was my original point about 'If you get a good one'.

To try to restate my point yet another way, isn't it a good idea to find out all you can, about all the cameras you can, and then buy something (almost anything) because it comes up at a price you consider worthwhile, even if it means taking a chance on (say) a Minolta instead of a Canon? And isn't it a dubious idea to set your heart on one specific camera that you know little about, and try to find a good one?

There's always a gamble involved in buying second-hand cameras (and indeed, most other things). It just seems to me that generalizations ABOUT VERY OLD CAMERAS (bold caps not for you but for others who have missed this bit) are a lot less useful than generalizations about more modern cameras THAT HAVE NOT SUFFERED THE WEAR AND TEAR AND DUBIOUS REPAIRS OF SEVERAL DECADES. (Again, please don't take offence at the bold caps -- your reply shows that you have taken this on board, but there are apparently still some who haven't).

Cheers,

Roger

Keith
06-04-2008, 14:42
It's always interesting to go to bed ... get up in the morning and see which way a topical thread has gone. Water colours verses acrylic verses oils. :eek:

A friend of mine does the most exquisit pencil drawings of still life objects ... I love them the way I love classic black and white photos of similar subjects! :)

Chris101
06-04-2008, 15:15
Chris, I *think* you are probably referring to what I know as "poster paints" - powdered pigments mixed in water for use.

True water colours certainly do not "stink". I still go out to this day, occasionally, with a small water colour kit and a book of Windsor and Newton's finest. It's a totally different discipline, but no less rewarding.Hey Bill,

I meant water colors, the kind that come in little tubes and you dilute with water, then mix them in in a little ceramic well. Plastic well these days I guess. And 'stink' was figurative and in 'I always end up with muddy brown and make a hole in the paper'.

I have seen some beautiful watercolor paintings, but I suspect they cheated and photoshopped it! ;) Acrylic has become my (paint) medium of choice and I thought I should add to that sub-part of this thread. I also posted about where I stand on asking for buying advice in internet fora. I'm in favor of it when folks like Ned are so willing to share their passion.

Roger Hicks
06-04-2008, 15:22
I'm not sure if the OP was not completely innocent either.

There's so much complaining about what RFF is lately.


Sorry, Richard, that was the exact opposite of my intention.

As I said earlier, I was trying to think about what questions elicit the most useful answers, and what those answers might be.

Any answers to "I want to buy a ___________, is it any good?" are likely to be of limited use if a _________ is 40 years old and may have been used regularly (but not too much) and stored in a humidity-controlled cabinet; or not used in 30 years, stored in a humid cupboard, and 'repaired' last week by an amateur.

As Brian said, you can determine a trend. My sole argument is that once the kit is old enough, the trend is of limited use with a single camera. When it comes to deciding whether or not to buy the camera in front of you. it is necessary either to have quite a lot of hands-on experience of a variety of old cameras, or to be prepared to take a risk: indeed, usually both.

As so often in photography, people are looking for a certainty that is not there, and cannot be there. At least, that's how some of the questions look to me, and (still more) how some of the answers look: "If you can't get good pictures with this lens, you're not a REAL photographer."

Cheers,

Roger

Dan States
06-04-2008, 15:27
Please give me your advice: I am an old cripple stuck at home most of the day. Should I log on to RFF and chat with "friends", or should I watch porn and just [email protected] myself to death?


Really Jon, your posts in this thread are a big disappointment to me.

I'm not sure if the OP was not completely innocent either.

There's so much complaining about what RFF is lately.

Vote with your feet.

I'll take wanking for 500! Who says you can't do both?

Chris101
06-04-2008, 15:30
Roger, I guess you could say that whenever buying any piece of equipment one should evaluate the specific item, rather than a general consensus of other instances of that item.

This is true except for the person who is not familiar at all with the range of different, similar items. In those cases a general consensus is likely to be helpful regardless of the specific item. But then one should know how to evaluate the specific item of interest.

Because granted, most cameras that are 40 years old are bound to run into mechanical issues soon.

Gumby
06-04-2008, 16:06
There's always a gamble involved in buying second-hand cameras (and indeed, most other things). It just seems to me that generalizations ABOUT VERY OLD CAMERAS (bold caps not for you but for others who have missed this bit) are a lot less useful than generalizations about more modern cameras THAT HAVE NOT SUFFERED THE WEAR AND TEAR AND DUBIOUS REPAIRS OF SEVERAL DECADES.

I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

Doug
06-04-2008, 20:07
I hesitate to enter a contentious discussion, but... Having bought a number of cameras suffering from "intervening decades", one does take one's chances. I'd try for a camera with attractive operational features when new that is likely to be economical to bring back to as-new operation. I do think it should be expected that the old kit will need a CLA unless the seller can document recent service. Old gear that was good when new is likely to be good refurbished.

I have nothing older than 50 years, but that represents some intervening decades! Both the M2 and Pentax were made in 1957 and work fine after CLA. Another old Pentax had been bunged in the nose with sufficient force to cross-thread the lens focusing helix. Fixed ok. Another less old had sat wet long enough to corrode the lens mount and meter circuitry in the baseplate, fixed with spare parts but an unexpected expense. It's always somewhat of a gamble, and any recommendation must be general to the type or model after CLA/restoration.

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 01:35
. . . a general consensus is likely to be helpful regardless of the specific item. But then one should know how to evaluate the specific item of interest.

Because granted, most cameras that are 40 years old are bound to run into mechanical issues soon.

Dear Chris,

Thanks; you have clarified the whole thing.

My basic concern was, indeed, with the evaluation of the specific rather than the general, and it seems to me that some inquirers, and some of those who respond, are not making this distinction adequately clearly.

Those who inquire sometimes seem not to know enough about cameras in general to ask the right questions, and to assume that an RFF consensus is a bit like a new camera review. But with a new camera (or lens) you can just send it back if it doesn't come up to spec. With one that's 40-50 years old, you need to expect the occasional problem, even with the very finest and toughest kit (Leica M, Nikon F, Rolleiflex...)

Those who respond, on the other hand, sometimes seem prone to sweeping generalizations: 'All _________ are verging on perfection' or 'All ________ are crap' rather than 'I've got a good one' or 'I was not satisfied with the two I had.'

Cheers,

Roger

sebastel
06-05-2008, 01:43
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

i'd go one step further: it is so true that it is pointless already.
you must be quite ignorant to expect a similar performance and condition from 50 year old gear like from brand new stuff.

this does not mean that there are no such antique marvels - but better not expect them. at least not at low prices.

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 01:45
. . . Though model choice is valid. I myself had never had a Nikon in my hands untill a couple of weeks ago:eek: so I asked here about a few models which I had noted as a possible purchase, and received useful replies from members who had used them.

Dear Richard,

Oh, sure. But oner of the things that used to annoy me was when someone asked, 'Should I get an F or an F2?' and received the reply 'No, you need an FE2'.

Then I realized that such responses are potentially helpful -- another Nikon option -- but if they are phrased as 'No, both the F and F2 are hopelessly outdated, what you need is a _____' they are less helpful than if phrased as, 'I know you asked about A and B, but have you considered C?'

Cheers,

Roger

ClaremontPhoto
06-05-2008, 01:51
Oh, sure. But one of the things that used to annoy me was when someone asked, 'Should I get an F or an F2?' and received the reply 'No, you need an FE2'.

Then I realized that such responses are potentially helpful -- another Nikon option -- but if they are phrased as 'No, both the F and F2 are hopelessly outdated, what you need is a _____' they are less helpful than if phrased as, 'I know you asked about A and B, but have you considered C?'

That is the most sensible thing I have seen on RFF in a long time.

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 02:06
That is the most sensible thing I have seen on RFF in a long time.

Dear Jon,

Thanks.

To expand on it a little, if someone asks about choosing between two Nikons, maybe he's got a lot of Nikon glass, or other reasons to choose Nikon. Suggesting Canon or Pentax instead should be done more tentatively than suggesting a third variety of Nikon.

Likewise, if he's asking about mechanical cameras, maybe he wants to avoid battery dependency; and if he's asking about TLRs, maybe he's considered SLRs and rejected them. It's legitimate to ask. "Why have you ruled out SLRs?" or even to say "In your position I'd consider an SLR because..." but all too often you get flip or even aggressive replies suggesting something completely different -- large format, say -- without any qualification such as 'This works for me because...'

What I'm thinking about is inquirers who appear to be about to spend quite large sums of money on something they know nothing about (where the best advice is 'postpone the purchase until you know more') and replies that don't really come within a mile of answering the question.

Cheers,

Roger

oscroft
06-05-2008, 02:26
To expand on it a little, if someone asks about choosing between two Nikons, maybe he's got a lot of Nikon glass, or other reasons to choose Nikon. Suggesting Canon or Pentax instead should be done more tentatively than suggesting a third variety of Nikon
What I find slightly frustrating (but only in an amusing way - I'm really not upset, because I know people are genuinely trying to help) is when someone sets some parameters for a purchase (eg maximum price) and asks for suggestions, and a lot of people ignore those parameters and suggest their own favourite stuff regardless.

For example, some time ago I asked for some suggestions for a cheap (I specified my approx limit) but reasonably accurate meter, only for daylight use. And among the suggestions were some for meters costing hundreds of pounds that were super accurate for flash metering too. (But please note I'm not having a go at people who made such suggestions, because I was grateful for them all - I'm only using the example to illustrate one of the things I think Roger is getting at. And I did get a good consensus on what to get, and it wasn't too far over my budget :D)

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 02:38
. . . (But please note I'm not having a go at people who made such suggestions, because I was grateful for them all - I'm only using the example to illustrate one of the things I think Roger is getting at.

That is indeed the sort of thing I was pointing at in the last post (though not in the original, which was solely to do with elderly gear -- hell, I'm drifting in my own thread...)

Again, it's how the replies are phrased. To say, "I know it's outside your budget, but..." and then to give arguments for the more expensive meter is one thing; to say "No, what you need is..." is quite another.

I never mind being told why someone else thinks something is a good idea. I do however take it very ill when they dismiss my reasoning and try to tell me that their way is better than mine. I resent this even on the rare occasions that their way IS better, if they phrase it arrogantly; and I REALLY resent it if I have thought it through carefully for my situation, and they haven't.

Cheers,

Roger

ClaremontPhoto
06-05-2008, 02:44
What I find slightly frustrating (but only in an amusing way - I'm really not upset, because I know people are genuinely trying to help) is when someone sets some parameters for a purchase (eg maximum price) and asks for suggestions, and a lot of people ignore those parameters and suggest their own favourite stuff regardless.

Yes.

There is a thread running here right now.

The member is asking about choosing an Olympus RC or an XA.

He clearly says he can afford one, but not both.

And people here tell him to buy both anyway and sell the one he dislikes.

rxmd
06-05-2008, 02:49
There is a thread running here right now.

The member is asking about choosing an Olympus RC or an XA.

He clearly says he can afford one, but not both.

And people here tell him to buy both anyway and sell the one he dislikes.
They're probably used to buying things on credit.

Philipp

rxmd
06-05-2008, 03:02
and that being an artist makes them better than those who have an interest in gear.
Well it won't make them better persons, but I do believe it makes them better artists, which was kind of Jon's point if I understand correctly.

Gear is a distraction. I'd probably prefer a craftsman who has a drill he knows and trusts, than one who spends a lot of time and money collecting drills and talking about them. I don't want his knowledge on drills, I need someone who knows how to work wood.

Philipp

tripod
06-05-2008, 04:00
Well it won't make them better persons, but I do believe it makes them better artists, which was kind of Jon's point if I understand correctly.

Gear is a distraction. I'd probably prefer a craftsman who has a drill he knows and trusts, than one who spends a lot of time and money collecting drills and talking about them. I don't want his knowledge on drills, I need someone who knows how to work wood.

Philipp

Good analogy, rxmd, but there is an intermediate possibility: a carpenter with both a hand drill for delicate work, and a power drill for when it's appropriate. I'd prefer to hire that one.

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 04:04
Good analogy, rxmd, but there is an intermediate possibility: a carpenter with both a hand drill for delicate work, and a power drill for when it's appropriate. I'd prefer to hire that one.

My oldest friend is an astonishingly skilled woodworker, who in addition to his woodworking day job makes things to see how it's done: the keyed joints on an Athenian galley, for example. He knows a great deal about (for example) draw-knives and spokeshaves, and the restoration of old ones: there are some techniques that are easiest done with old tools, apparently.

I'm not sure I'd have much time for any craftsman who wasn't familiar with the choice of tools available, and who didn't discriminate in favour of the ones that work best for them. Another friend is a hairdresser (owns 2 salons and a school) and pays $100 or more for a pair of good scissors.

Cheers,

Roger

BillBingham2
06-05-2008, 06:19
And the photographer said 'I liked your last book, what sort of word processor did you use for that?'

If it was Phil Donahue he used to have a WANG in his bed room...:eek:

B2 (;->

brachal
06-05-2008, 06:51
One of my musical heroes, Eugene Chadbourne, once wrote that a good musician can make good music with a bad instrument. He'll get a feel for the instrument, understand its shortcomings, and is skilled enough to play around them. With a good or great instrument, the music will be that much better. A bad musician, on the other hand, will produce bad music no matter what quality of instrument he uses. I think you could say the same about photography.

BillBingham2
06-05-2008, 07:00
Roger,

I do not think there is anything wrong with folks asking which should they buy, they are looking for guidance and experience. They should follow it on with the "What should I look for?" question, some do and some don't.

Right now I am lusting for a Ruger MKII. We take my sons shooting and I would like to get back into it. Problem is I need to buy used as they only make the MKIII now and my budget is very low. So I posted a question on another board (rugerforum) to see what I should look for in buying that used pistol. Compared to here the responses have been somewhat lake luster but I do not know the personality over there. One answer was great but I need to do some digging as to how I look for what he said.

My purchasing any one of a series of different MKII models is very depended upon what is available, but the guts are mostly the same and so are the issues. Now if I was asking should I get a Walther P22 or a MKII then I expect I would a lot of personal opinions, along with some warnings about early P22s being picky about ammo and jamming a lot (they needed some tweaking). It's the same when you look at some one asking should they get a Nikon S2, a Canon P or a Leica IIIf. Good answers come back with things to watch for, experienced or 2nd hand, thoughts and dreams and opinions. After reading lots of posts on those cool little Fuji 6x4.5 collapsables I found out what caused the largest issue and decided not to go that way, though I still long for one at times.

The wonderful thing about this site is the sharing of experience, ideas, opinions and dreams. It's not prefect for everyone, but it is way close enough for me. Oh, the pictures are pretty cool too.

B2 (;->

sebastel
06-05-2008, 07:16
If it was Phil Donahue he used to have a WANG in his bed room...:eek:

B2 (;->


wasn't it more like " ... he used to have a bed in his WANG room ..."?

BillBingham2
06-05-2008, 07:54
wasn't it more like " ... he used to have a bed in his WANG room ..."?

In the early to late '80s I did a lot with and eventually work at WANG Labs. I was in the NY Financial District, some of my friends were in one of the other districts that support the company that he worked at. He had a WANG OIS (Office Information System) word processor in his bedroom because he used to get ideas at all hours and wanted to capture them.

I was luckier at meeting cool people when I worked at CBS than at WANG. I worked with some geniuses both at customers and up in Lowell, but at CBS I got to meet Cindy Lauper, Charles Osgood and some others.

B2 (;->

BillP
06-05-2008, 08:07
Hey Bill,

I meant water colors, the kind that come in little tubes and you dilute with water, then mix them in in a little ceramic well. Plastic well these days I guess. And 'stink' was figurative and in 'I always end up with muddy brown and make a hole in the paper'.

I have seen some beautiful watercolor paintings, but I suspect they cheated and photoshopped it! ;) Acrylic has become my (paint) medium of choice and I thought I should add to that sub-part of this thread. I also posted about where I stand on asking for buying advice in internet fora. I'm in favor of it when folks like Ned are so willing to share their passion.

We *are* on the same page, Chris, and a very nice, handmade, deckle-edged one it is too...!

Regards,

Bill

Roger Hicks
06-05-2008, 09:00
Roger,

I do not think there is anything wrong with folks asking which should they buy, they are looking for guidance and experience.

Dear Bill,

I totally agree. The thing is, you have to know a fair amount about cameras (or in the case you quote, guns) before you can judge whether an individual camera (gun) meets 'normal' requirements.

Although I have used both Ruger Mk. I and II extensively, the guns I have used have not been abused and they have not received amateur repairs -- unlike our Hi-Standard, inherently a gun I'd much rather have but which is, in the case of ours, too well worn and (especially) in need of a new firing pin. It's VERY picky about ammunition.

Someone else with a good one would no doubt rave about it.

Cheers,

Roger

tripod
06-05-2008, 09:09
Personally, I've had bad luck with Minox 35s and Oly XAs (several examples of each) while others rave about them.

back alley
06-05-2008, 10:56
i think it only makes good sense for many of us to ask and share our experiences with gear.
why?
because i can't find most of this stuff locally to experience it in person and i bet many others are in that same position.

why not then try to ascertain what you can from the experience of others?
joe

myoptic3
06-05-2008, 11:08
I agree w/ Mr. Alien (Sir). Shiny new objects are GOOD. We must have been crows in another life.

BillP
06-05-2008, 11:31
I agree w/ Mr. Alien (Sir). Shiny new objects are GOOD. We must have been crows in another life.

Or Cats...

Cat: You can't have my shiny thing. I found it, it's my shiny thing.
Rimmer: What are you driveling about?
Cat (producing yoyo): THIS is my shiny thing. And if you try and take it off me I may have to eat you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZqjLa2X3L8&feature=related

Regards,

Bill

rxmd
06-05-2008, 11:45
Good analogy, rxmd, but there is an intermediate possibility: a carpenter with both a hand drill for delicate work, and a power drill for when it's appropriate. I'd prefer to hire that one.
And then there's the other possibility: a carpenter with fourteen hand drills for delicate work, twelve power drills for when it's appropriate, two drills for underwater work, one that works in zero gravity, and one oil drilling rig. And if you google his name you find out that he has 14,258 posts at drillforum.org, where he as on average posted 25 postings per day discussing drills with other drill aficionados. I'd ask this one if I wanted to know something about drills, but I'd prefer NOT to hire that one for carpentry.

But I'm sure as of now we've all understood each other :D

Philipp

BillBingham2
06-05-2008, 12:25
Did you see his "Show us your Black and Decker" thread?

Drill porn.


So what If the guy likes drills?

Is he hurting anyone?

Don't diss the guy, he's having FUN.

But is the wood? Enquiring minds want to know!

B2 (;->

BillP
06-05-2008, 12:44
*sigh*

Brace yourself chuck...

Am I the only one to find all this drill-talk a tiny bit boring....? :D

Regards,

Bill

back alley
06-05-2008, 13:27
groooooooooooooan

sebastel
06-05-2008, 23:12
In the early to late '80s I did a lot with and eventually work at WANG Labs. I was in the NY Financial District, some of my friends were in one of the other districts that support the company that he worked at. He had a WANG OIS (Office Information System) word processor in his bedroom because he used to get ideas at all hours and wanted to capture them.


ah, i see.
though, i'd use a pencil and a paper notepad for that purpose. call me old fashioned, if you want to.


I was luckier at meeting cool people when I worked at CBS than at WANG. I worked with some geniuses both at customers and up in Lowell, but at CBS I got to meet Cindy Lauper, Charles Osgood and some others.
B2 (;->

certainly cooler. :-)

cheers
sebastian

ps: weekend is soon!

Ben Z
06-30-2008, 07:53
But what are the chances of finding a good one today, if the camera or lens ceased production decades ago?

So much gets written (maybe copied would be a better word) about various cameras and lenses, especially Leica's, describing the optical "superiority" and also implying that there is much more precision and therefore much less sample variation than with other brands. I can't argue whether that was ever true, but when you pick up a camera or lens that's been around 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 or more years, even if if looks "mint" there's no guarantee of who's been inside it doing what. Not every drop leaves a telltale dent or scratch, and not every non-expert repair guy leaves telltale gouges on the screw heads and spanner slots. The used camera market has always put a rating system on cosmetics, with the assumption that unless noted, it's mechanically/optically working. But working doesn't necessarily mean it's working up to factory specs.

Bottom line, I wouldn't ever buy anything without a 2 week inspection period where I could return it without questions asked if I felt it didn't live up to my expectations, plus at least a 2-month warranty. That's why I've always bought from reputable brick-and-mortar sellers even if I paid a little more. I have gotten some winners and some losers, but never lost more than a few bucks of shipping on the losers.

Roger Hicks
06-30-2008, 08:41
That's why I've always bought from reputable brick-and-mortar sellers even if I paid a little more. I have gotten some winners and some losers, but never lost more than a few bucks of shipping on the losers.

Dear Ben,

I've always thought it was worth the modest premium, too, unless I can (a) inspect it on the spot and (b) get it silly cheap. That's why I've never used eBay.

My own suspicion is that hand assembly means more sample variation, but ideally around a higher mean quality standard -- and unlike a machine, the hand assembler won't turn out 50,000 cameras with the same fault...

Cheers,

Roger