Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > SLRs - the unRF

SLRs - the unRF For those of you who must talk about SLRs, if only to confirm they are not RF.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 05-22-2016   #81
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
There seem to be some variations in understanding when it comes to "cool". Some apparently think it's good to be "cool". Others (including me) take it as something of a joke word, to be used either ironically or by the terminally stupid.

Cheers,

R.
Yeah but that's just because you're not cool.

Or maybe you're really cool? Sarcasm and irony are after all the hallmarks of "coolness" in our era. Joke words are for hipsters.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #82
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Dear Brett,

Gamma Duflex 1947: instant return mirror, auto diaphragm, right way up/right way round viewing, but via mirrors not pentaprism (late Duflexes apparently had pentaprisms). In the same year (1947) Wray filed patents for a pentaprism SLR but this wasn't present when the Wrayflex came to market.

I completely agree that the 1953 Praktina was one of the most advanced system SLRs of its day, and far more important for innovation than the Praktica. It sold more than the Gamma Duflex but not as many as the Praktica. But don't forget Alpa: Alpa and Exakta both offered interchangeable pentaprisms in the same year, 1950.

Pentax showed a prototype through-lens meter at photokina 1960, which led to their partially honest claims about being "first", but they did not make a production camera with through-lens metering until 1964, the same year that the Alpa 9d offered through-lens metering. The first to market was the Topcon Super D/RE Super in 1963.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #83
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,425
Whatever you think, for me the change from FD to EF was the smartest move they did. All the other makers had to change later on as well leading to several AF lenses that are almost but not quite compatible.

The change to EF-S and EF-M on the other hand is far more dabatable.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #84
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuuan View Post
I understand this is above all about the film era. But in the digital age, hasn't been Canon the SLR market leader? /snip/
Market leader like Toyota? Really cool!
That is part of the problem, they are the market leader and the market leader is never* cool. Microsoft anyone?

*never as in probably not.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #85
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,098
Is Kai Nikon and Lok Canon?
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #86
wakarimasen
Registered User
 
wakarimasen's Avatar
 
wakarimasen is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bromsgrove, UK
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
Whatever you think, for me the change from FD to EF was the smartest move they did.
I believe Nikon are now doing the same thing, with their latest 'E' lenses?
__________________
tap tap tap...
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #87
ajramirez
Registered User
 
ajramirez's Avatar
 
ajramirez is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
I believe Nikon are now doing the same thing, with their latest 'E' lenses?
Yes, 30 years later...
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #88
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post

Was Pentax really first to start selling SLRs with TTL metering? I am an admirer of various Pentax products myself but was unaware of their pre-eminence in this aspect of metering technology. Most references cite the Topcon RE Super.
Regards,
Brett
Your points about the Exakta are just nitpicking and weasel words, but this statement is simply false.

The Spotmatic was presented in 1960 as a prototype, and it was the first SLR with TTL metering.



It also had a spotmeter metering.

Once the prototype was shown all their competitors started to work on the technology, the fact that Topcon arrived on the market few months before Pentax is irrelevant.
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #89
ajramirez
Registered User
 
ajramirez's Avatar
 
ajramirez is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by sevo View Post
G lenses do work in S and P AE mode on the F4, and will stop down to the smallest aperture on all manual focus bodies. Non AI lenses will not fit bodies with rigid AI coupler, and need a AI modification. And some lens/body combinations limit you to stop-down metering or disable all metering. Compared to the Canon issue of a incompatible register preventing focus to infinity these are relatively harmless.
Exactly. Having to shoot lenses at minimum aperture all the time makes them, in my book, useless. This full backwards compatibility claim is, IMO, hogwash.

Canon's approach was kind of like pulling a band aid quickly. Painful in 1987, but painless afterwards. AFAIK, every EF lens made since 1987 is compatible with every body (film or digital) made since then (EF-S lenses being the exception). With Nikon, you may own a set of AF or AF-D lenses (as I do) that do not autofocus on D3XXX or D5XXX bodies. You are also limited by the small lens mount, as to the potential maximum aperture of lenses. I own Nikon and love Nikon, but I have to say that Canon's decision to drop the FD mount and move to a completely electronic interface in 1987 was smart and Nikon should have done the same, instead of doing it piecemeal over the last 30 years.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #90
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfthari View Post
Your points about the Exakta are just nitpicking and weasel words, but this statement is simply false.

The Spotmatic was presented in 1960 as a prototype, and it was the first SLR with TTL metering.



It also had a spotmeter metering.

Once the prototype was shown all their competitors started to work on the technology, the fact that Topcon arrived on the market few months before Pentax is irrelevant.
It is not irrelevant to the question I politely asked you, which was who was the first to sell one. You've claimed my suggestion this was Topcon is simply false, despite also mentioning the Topcon arrived on the market first. Perhaps that's your definition of nitpicking: when a person (other than yourself) is wrong, even when they're right.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #91
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Dear Brett,

Gamma Duflex 1947: instant return mirror, auto diaphragm, right way up/right way round viewing, but via mirrors not pentaprism (late Duflexes apparently had pentaprisms). In the same year (1947) Wray filed patents for a pentaprism SLR but this wasn't present when the Wrayflex came to market.

I completely agree that the 1953 Praktina was one of the most advanced system SLRs of its day, and far more important for innovation than the Praktica. It sold more than the Gamma Duflex but not as many as the Praktica. But don't forget Alpa: Alpa and Exakta both offered interchangeable pentaprisms in the same year, 1950.

Pentax showed a prototype through-lens meter at photokina 1960, which led to their partially honest claims about being "first", but they did not make a production camera with through-lens metering until 1964, the same year that the Alpa 9d offered through-lens metering. The first to market was the Topcon Super D/RE Super in 1963.

Cheers,

R.
You've mentioned the Gamma before here I reckon, Roger, and I'd forgotten about that until you brought it up, thanks!
Off topic to the thread but re: SLRs generally—I responded to your thread about the Super BC a while back. I have English instructions for the magazine backs, I'm pretty sure. I'd love to see you have another go!
Cheers
Brett
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #92
Fraser
Registered User
 
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Dig a little deeper still and you'll find that the Land Rover (preferably Series rather than Defender) is universally acknowledged as best. The Series II/IIa is to 4WD what the Nikon F is to SLRs, i.e. not a mediocre rip-off of what has gone before.

Cheers,

R.
Except a rip-off of a Willys Jeep
Sometimes its just not cool to be cool, oh but that makes Canon cooler
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #93
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfthari View Post
. . . Once the prototype was shown all their competitors started to work on the technology, the fact that Topcon arrived on the market few months before Pentax is irrelevant.
Not really. There's a big difference between patenting an idea, or even building a prototype, and bringing it to market. People had been "working on the technology" for years, well before Pentax showed the Spotmatic prototype.

Wray patented a through-lens meter for an SLR in 1947: see http://www.wrayflex.co.uk/

Canon patented a TTL metering system in 1958: http://www.klassik-cameras.de/Canon_RF_2e.html

The first camera with TTL metering was the Mec 16SB in 1960: http://submin.com/16mm/collection/mec/index.htm

The first through-lens meter in a series production SLR was either the Contaflex Super B (admitredy leaf shutter) or the Topcon Super D/RE Super.

Pentax did NOT make the first production SLR with TTL metering, though they love to pretend they did. Why have you invested quite so much in their misleading claims?

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #94
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,413
Wasn't the Spotmatic intended to have spot metering but didn't by the time it was produced and sold?

As for SLR's I've seen ones that took glass plates but I guess that won't count...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #95
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraser View Post
Except a rip-off of a Willys Jeep
Sometimes its just not cool to be cool, oh but that makes Canon cooler
That's why I said MEDIOCRE rip-off...

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #96
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
You've mentioned the Gamma before here I reckon, Roger, and I'd forgotten about that until you brought it up, thanks!
Off topic to the thread but re: SLRs generally—I responded to your thread about the Super BC a while back. I have English instructions for the magazine backs, I'm pretty sure. I'd love to see you have another go!
Cheers
Brett
Dear Brett,

The REAL "what if", though, is the Wray patent: see http://www.google.com/patents/US2608921 By the time the Pentax prototype appeared, through-lens metering was an engineering problem, not a novelty -- and it was a problem Pentax could not quickly solve in a production context, unlike Zeiss and Topcon.

Thanks again for the offer. I'd love a photocopy, as soon as I can figure out how to pay you for the postage on the book as well. Have you a Paypal account? I don't know how it works but my brother-in-law does. PM me.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #97
NeeZee
Registered User
 
NeeZee is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Age: 40
Posts: 553
Since when are SLRs cool? They all look the same and black out every time you want to take a photo.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #98
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 3,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Dear Jim,

I can remember when they came out. A friend bought one. I couldn't believe how awful it was, especially the very bright focusing screen that was next to useless for focusing compared with almost any appropriate Nikon screen. The lenses were mediocre too.

Cheers,

R.
Roger,

Awful? A matter of opinion I guess, but there’s no denying the impact of the OM-1 on the 35mm camera industry. Almost all 35mm cameras downsized and became lighter because of the OM-1.

Being an old guy, I was around back then and, while tempted, never sold my Canon FD gear to buy an OM-1. But about three years back, a friend of mine, knowing I still used film cameras, gave me her rarely-used OM-1. As somebody who still regularly uses a Nikon F and a Canon F-1, the size and weight difference between the three cameras is dramatic. I can see why the OM-1 caused the sensation it did back in 1973.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:
http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #99
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
. . . Almost all 35mm cameras downsized and became lighter because of the OM-1. . . .
Dear Jim,

Not really. SLRS mostly stayed the same size -- the Nikon F2 is hardly saller than the F -- and compacts didn't really get much smaller after the Rollei 35 came out in 1966, with the exception of the Minox 35.

Such cameras as did get smaller were perhaps a part of the zeitgeist: in other words, it wasn't because of the OM-1, but merely happened at the same time. Many older SLRs were pretty svelte to begin with: the Pentax SV springs to mind.

Yes, the OM-1 is smaller than a Nikon F or Canon F1, but then, those are both fair-sized cameras. When the OM-1 came out I was using Nijkon Fs and Leicas.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #100
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
Roger,

Awful? A matter of opinion I guess, but there’s no denying the impact of the OM-1 on the 35mm camera industry. Almost all 35mm cameras downsized and became lighter because of the OM-1.

Being an old guy, I was around back then and, while tempted, never sold my Canon FD gear to buy an OM-1. But about three years back, a friend of mine, knowing I still used film cameras, gave me her rarely-used OM-1. As somebody who still regularly uses a Nikon F and a Canon F-1, the size and weight difference between the three cameras is dramatic. I can see why the OM-1 caused the sensation it did back in 1973.

Jim B.
Dear Jim,

I'm pretty sure this is an example of sarcasm. It's tough to pull it off on the internet but I think Roger did well!

In reference to the original post that started this thread. "Coolness" is relative. Nikon and Canon both make and have made fine cameras for longer than I have been alive and I'm going to be 56 soon so I've been around a bit.

A few posters have hit on the change from FD to EOS mount as being a sore point for Canon and something that makes them uncool. A few other posters pointed out the brilliance of that same move and said that was what cemented them firmly in the Canon camp.

I am a hobbyist photographer. I own cameras from both sides of the argument, as well as other brands in both film and digitial and I enjoy using them all.

However, if I suddenly found $25,000.00 dropped into my lap and was free to purchase my dream system as one who enjoys sports and nature photography it's Canon all the way for me.

Regards,

Tim Murphy
Harrisburg, PA
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #101
LukeBanks
Registered User
 
LukeBanks's Avatar
 
LukeBanks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: London
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
Stood outside for five hours yesterday in mostly heavy rain shooting an action event and my 5D2/70-200/2.8 never blinked .
I imagine you're well practised at that up in Blackpool!

My niche is white water sports so even when the sun is shining I often end up soggy. Never had a Canon body or lens die on me yet though!
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #102
wakarimasen
Registered User
 
wakarimasen's Avatar
 
wakarimasen is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bromsgrove, UK
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeBanks View Post
I imagine you're well practised at that up in Blackpool!

My niche is white water sports so even when the sun is shining I often end up soggy. Never had a Canon body or lens die on me yet though!
Last year, I took photographs of my sons' school rugby game. Halfway through, the heavens opened (literally) but I carried on with my 1D Mark III and the 100-400L lens (the original version). Although the viewfinder got a little foggy and focus seemed a little slower at times, it was only after the game that I noticed that the rain had been so bad, that water had got inside the lens.

A trip to Elstree sorted everything out (at a reasonable price, I should add) and the lens is still going strong.

Any 'coolness' points there?
__________________
tap tap tap...
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #103
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
It is not irrelevant to the question I politely asked you, which was who was the first to sell one. You've claimed my suggestion this was Topcon is simply false, despite also mentioning the Topcon arrived on the market first. Perhaps that's your definition of nitpicking: when a person (other than yourself) is wrong, even when they're right.
This discussion is becoming an exercise of empty rhetoric : Pentax was the first to introduce TTL metering with the 1960 prototype, that's fact not opinion, then if you like to think I'm wrong be my guest.

Same thing for the discussion regarding the Olympus, some people on this board want to believe the OM-1 is irrelevant and it doesn't matter that after its introduction Pentax stopped the development of the K series and went with the M series, Nikon developed the FM line and Canon the A series, they will keep saying the OM-1 is not an important camera and had no impact because Leica had already designed long before the early Barnacks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Wasn't the Spotmatic intended to have spot metering but didn't by the time it was produced and sold?

As for SLR's I've seen ones that took glass plates but I guess that won't count...

Regards, David
Yes you are correct sir! The prototype had spot metering then they thought it would have been to hard to use for the average consumer and they went with average metering.
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #104
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfthari View Post
This discussion is becoming an exercise of empty rhetoric : Pentax was the first to introduce TTL metering with the 1960 prototype, that's fact not opinion, then if you like to think I'm wrong be my guest.

Same thing for the discussion regarding the Olympus, some people on this board want to believe the OM-1 is irrelevant and it doesn't matter that after its introduction Pentax stopped the development of the K series and went with the M series, Nikon developed the FM line and Canon the A series, they will keep saying the OM-1 is not an important camera and had no impact because Leica had already designed long before the early Barnacks.
Are you familiar with the expression, "My mind is made up. Do not confuse me with the facts"?

And can you understand the difference between "may have had no impact" and "had no impact"?

Arguments are rarely as simple, or indeed as simplistic, as you seem to maintain.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #105
wakarimasen
Registered User
 
wakarimasen's Avatar
 
wakarimasen is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bromsgrove, UK
Posts: 1,003
OK - time outs for all!! Back to why Canon does not have the same cachet as Nikon please
__________________
tap tap tap...
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #106
Wulfthari
Registered User
 
Wulfthari's Avatar
 
Wulfthari is offline
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
Are you familiar with the expression, "My mind is made up. Do not confuse me with the facts"?

And can you understand the difference between "may have had no impact" and "had no impact"?

Arguments are rarely as simple, or indeed as simplistic, as you seem to maintain.

Cheers,

R.
More sophism, zero facts and more opinions that have been trying to be passed as fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
OK - time outs for all!! Back to why Canon does not have the same cachet as Nikon please
Essentially as you can see Canon wasn't capable to brainwash enough people to convince them they are the alpha and omega of Photography, I think this the final result of your topic.
__________________
Canon 7s, Canon 50 mm f1.2
Leica M3,M4-P,M5, Summaron 1:2.8/35,Summicron 1:2.0/50DR,Elmarit 1:2.8/90, Summitar 1:2.0/50
Contax IIA,IIIA, Sonnar 1:1.5/50
Zorki 4K,5,6, Leningrad,Industar 61LD 1:2.8/55,Orion 15 1:5,6/28,Jupiter 8 1:2.0/50,Jupiter 9 1:2.0/85,Jupiter 11 1:4/135,Jupiter 12 1:2.8/35
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #107
johnf04
Registered User
 
johnf04 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
OK - time outs for all!! Back to why Canon does not have the same cachet as Nikon please
According to whom? I own 8 canon cameras, but I don't see them as "cool" or "uncool". I see them as picture making tools.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #108
BlackXList
Registered User
 
BlackXList is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
Last year, I took photographs of my sons' school rugby game. Halfway through, the heavens opened (literally) but I carried on with my 1D Mark III and the 100-400L lens (the original version). Although the viewfinder got a little foggy and focus seemed a little slower at times, it was only after the game that I noticed that the rain had been so bad, that water had got inside the lens.

A trip to Elstree sorted everything out (at a reasonable price, I should add) and the lens is still going strong.

Any 'coolness' points there?
The 1 series especially, are absolute tanks, there's almost nothing you can throw at them that will defeat them.

I'm using 5 series mostly these days, and they're also incredibly capable.

I have affection for other cameras, but I know that the Canons will deliver 99.99% of the time, and I'll probably be defeated before the camera, that's what I want.

As I mentioned earlier there are some things the company does and products they make that infuriate me, but on the whole I can't see changing brands in my future.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #109
wakarimasen
Registered User
 
wakarimasen's Avatar
 
wakarimasen is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bromsgrove, UK
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfthari View Post
Essentially as you can see Canon wasn't capable to brainwash enough people to convince them they are the alpha and omega of Photography, I think this the final result of your topic.
In fact I hoped the thread would help me to work out why I want to keep my F2, F3, F4 and FE, but am unwilling to get rid of my 1D and 5D, and so consolidate with Nikon!
__________________
tap tap tap...
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #110
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
In fact I hoped the thread would help me to work out why I want to keep my F2, F3, F4 and FE, but am unwilling to get rid of my 1D and 5D, and so consolidate with Nikon!
Dear wakarimasen,

Maybe the answer lies in the fact you seen to have a preference for Nikon and if that is so why would you need any justification for your choice?

Unless of course, you think it's the wrong one?

Keep what you like, but please don't become one of those serial switchers I see all the time on photo message boards.

Regards,

Tim Murphy
Harrisburg, PA
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #111
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakarimasen View Post
OK - time outs for all!! Back to why Canon does not have the same cachet as Nikon please
I think that they are all really just one firm (all owned by the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi) that decided to split the market in the late 1940s.

Nikon got the pro concession like with their USA importer Ehrenreich Photo-Optical Industries Inc. and with inflated prices to show their pro pedigree and Canon got the even more lucrative amateur market with a dizzying amount of quickly changing product and model labels.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #112
Tim Murphy
Registered User
 
Tim Murphy is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by xayraa33 View Post
I think that they are all really just one firm (all owned by the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi) that decided to split the market in the late 1940s.

Nikon got the pro concession like with their USA importer Ehrenreich Photo-Optical Industries Inc. and with inflated prices to show their pro pedigree and Canon got the even more lucrative amateur market with a dizzying amount of quickly changing product and model labels.
Actually, this probably isn't all that far from the truth.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #113
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,510
The only cool camera mfgs are the ones that still make film cameras. As long as they make film cameras they can be forgiven for the sins of their digital offspring..

Canon (spits on the ground) first abandoned their original lens mount, then abandoned film.
'nuff said.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #114
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfthari View Post
This discussion is becoming an exercise of empty rhetoric : Pentax was the first to introduce TTL metering with the 1960 prototype, that's fact not opinion, then if you like to think I'm wrong be my guest.
It is true, they built a prototype. But that doesn't mean they "introduced" TTL metering, as they were neither the first to come up with the concept, nor the first to put it into production. Further, Pentax went with stop down metering, which turned out to be a technological dead end. Topcon went with open aperture metering which is what every SLR uses today. Sort of makes the whole Pentax issue simply a "detour" through technological history.

Pentax also liked to claim they invented the layout of the typical 35mm SLR, but they were beaten by Edixa. Wirgin's Edixa Reflex already had the right hand advance lever, pentaprism, bottom rewind button, and so on in 1954. In fact the Edixa Reflex was only the second camera with a right hand advance lever, right after the Leica M3.



Also, Canon is cooler than Nikon.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #115
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeeZee View Post
Since when are SLRs cool? They all look the same and black out every time you want to take a photo.
The 1966 movie Blow-Up by Antonioni had a good hand at making SLRS cool, especially the much vaunted Nikon F .

I still think that the Nikon SP is the coolest camera ever, but then I like range-finder cameras, obviously.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #116
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,397
I think film makers would agree with most of what has been said in this thread. Canon is THE camera to have if you are an indie film maker.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #117
Jack Conrad
Registered User
 
Jack Conrad's Avatar
 
Jack Conrad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,615
Camera coolness depends a lot on what jacket you're wearing.
Leica's cool with tweed. Nikon's cool with leather, and Canon's cool with corduroy.

By the way, the word cool is a cool word.
__________________
_____________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #118
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 5,069
The more stuff nikon makes in China and Thailand, the less cool they get. Most of their stuff is now unfortunately.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #119
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,582
Cool is a great word ... if it wasn't why would they have had a "Cool Wall" on the world's most popular television car show for the cars they considered stood out from the crowd?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2016   #120
johnf04
Registered User
 
johnf04 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Age: 68
Posts: 364
Television can never be cool.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:17.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.