100 Landmark Cameras

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by pge, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. pge

    pge

    Link
    Here is a list of 100 Landmark cameras since 1888. There are 5 Nikon DSLRs on the list. Do you agree with these 5 or would you have chosen others?
    The list is
    D1
    D100
    D90
    D700
    D300
    My list would have been D1 D70 D700 D800
     
  2. There's far too much emphasis on 35mm and rollfilm cameras! Where's the Praktina? (Arguably the first 35mm SLR to take interchangeable viewfinders, bulk film back and a motordrive.) Where's Dr. Salomon's Ermanox? The Nikonos? VP Exakta and Reflex Korelle? - I think not! Leica II and Leica III - likewise. Hansa Canon, but not Kwanon? Two Argus bricks!? Pentax K1000 but no Spotmatic or S1a?
    The compiler of that list is a complete fool.
     
  3. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    I think the D1 belongs there since it was like the first DSLR that was below $10K and was really usable, although it was still a lot inferior than 35mm film back in 1999.
    IMO the Canon Digital Rebel (first one) and D70 were important in 2003/2004 because they dropped the entry price for DSLRs to below $1000; that was the beginning of the end for 35mm film. Those were, of course, very much consumer-grade cameras.
    I am a bit surprised that the D3 is not listed. That was Nikon's first for FX DSLR and was a major breakthrough for high-ISO capability in 2007.
    In any case, these lists are largely meaningless anyway.
     
  4. Really Joe; a complete fool? Let's hear your 100 landmark list, I'm sure we'll all agree ;)
     
  5. pge

    pge

    In any case, these lists are largely meaningless anyway.​
    I agree that the list is basically meaningless, but landmark cameras are very meaningful.
    I would also like to see Joes list, not to disagree with it but because I think it would be interesting.
     
  6. "The compiler of that list is a complete fool."
    I do have to wonder about the selection criteria?? D90? D100? D300? What's really "landmark" about those models? Perhaps he just put everything in a hat and did a blind draw. And yes it was the Spotmatic, not the K1000, that first opened up affordable 35mm SLR photography to the masses.
    With respect to the 5 Nikon DLSR selections, if there need to be 5 among the 100 (debatable) my choices (not that it matters) for landmark cameras would be:
    1. D1 - the first successful "from the ground up" Nikon DLSR
    2. D70 - the first commercially successful Nikon DLSR for the mass consumer market (and the first ever Nikon camera to sell over 1 million units I think)
    3. D200 - the first non-pro Nikon DLSR with legacy lens support
    4. D3 - the first "full frame" Nikon DSLR (and boy did everyone wait with bated breath and wish for that one for a long, longggg time for that one)
    5. D700 - the the first non-pro "full frame" Nikon DSLR
     
  7. "In any case, these lists are largely completely meaningless anyway."​
    Once again I find myself disagreeing with Shun. ;-) :)
     
  8. No Contax S ! ! ! and plenty of other landmark cameras not listed, while some that are listed are themselves derivative of ones that aren't.
    This is a very idiosyncratic and useless list, IMHO, regardless of the general utility, or not, of such lists.
     
  9. The guy is WAY too infatuated with post war cameras. No Voigtlander Bessa, Zeiss Ikon C, Voigtlander Bergheil, or any 6x9 folder for that matter? No mention of the Kodak Vest Pocket, the original 127 model c.1917? Why so few cameras from the 1890s? That was a golden age for camera design as film and dry plates allowed camera design to go in many new directions! Not even the 1927 Ansco Memo made his list.
    Kent in SD
     
  10. i'd hardly call the d90 a landmark camera. sometimes i think these lists are made with the purpose of infuriating people.
     
  11. pge

    pge

    4. D3 - the first "full frame" Nikon DSLR (and boy did everyone wait with bated breath and wish for that one for a long, longggg time for that one)
    5. D700 - the the first non-pro "full frame" Nikon DSLR​
    Michael, I felt constrained to pick just one of these on a 100 most ever.... list.
     
  12. Wouldn't the best two (and maybe only?) landmark cameras from Nikon be the Nikon F, and the D1? The F was the camera that changed the entire course of camera gear in 1959, and the D1 did the same. Other than those two are the other Nikons all that remarkable considering that in the same period we had the Minolta Maxxum 7000 (first AF, first with phase dectection AF,) and the Canon AE1? Is the D700 more of a "landmark" than the 5D--seriously?
    Kent in SD
     
  13. My list - why on earth would anyone be interested in that? Not even me to be honest. In fact I gave that first tongue-in-cheek reply about as much thought as the compiler of the list obviously did to their selection of cameras.
    I could stick a number of pins in a Hove Blue book, a McKeowan's guide, Verkehrs museum catalogue, Brian Coe's book "Cameras", and the advertising pages of a number of old British Journal of Photography Almanacs, but it would be a pretty pointless exercise.
    For example I've always admired the ingenuity of the Compass and Ilford Witness cameras - in the same way that I admire the design of the Swiss Army knife. An Alpa might be included too, but are those cameras relevant to the progress of photography? I don't think so because of the small numbers sold, with even less of them being used to produce great pictures.
    A couple of Nikons would probably make the list; among them the original F. Would any recent digital models? Probably not unless it was a list of 1000 significant cameras and not 100.
    Maybe we should continue this thread with our own suggestions for what should be included and see how it builds? I'll kick off with the 1932 Contax I as first camera to use a vertically-running metal focal plane shutter. Squeak, squeak!
     
  14. continue this thread with our own suggestions for what should be included and see how it builds?​
    Actually, I anticipated you and started a thread on this very topic in Classic Manual Cameras:
    http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00bsOu
    all are welcome, especially Nikon users. ;)
     
  15. pge

    pge

    Joe, seriously a digital model or two must be included on the list. Anything that changes the direction of photography forever has to be included.
    As for inclusion onto the list I will nominate the Polaroid Land Camera.
     
  16. How many of them have you owned over the years?
     
  17. pge

    pge

    3 for me on that list.
     
  18. The first full frame DSLR should have been there...Kodak DCS 14n. The 1Ds and D3X deserve mention. The only Nikon between 1959 and 1999 mentioned was an ... FM2 ? The F3HP or F4 could have been in there.
    3 for me on that list too.
    As mentioned my Kodak 14n (SLRn), and 1Ds should have been there. I would have put my D2X instead of the D200, and my Mamiya C330 TLR with complete interchangeable lens system should also have made the list! That would bring me to 7!
    I also would have included some sort of Linhof! What about Fuji...GSW690...G617?
     
  19. I had 4, but I'm probably a bit older than most here.
     
  20. I have five from the list, but there should have been more! I still have a D300 and no way that should have been there but a 1928 Bergheil was not, nor the 1927 Ansco Memo.
    Kent in SD
     
  21. No FA? First camera with matrix metering.
    Or D800E?
     
  22. Awwww, come on.... let's play for a while like a list like this one has any use or significance... It doesn't (*), but just for fun. And I'm sticking to Nikon DSLRs to keep the playing field a bit manageable.
    Shouldn't this list be about cameras that brought something new to the market, or helped cause disruption in the market? Not about "the camera we like"? In this sense, the D90 should definitely be on that list - very first DSLR with video. The D700 or D800? Hardly - neither did something completely radical new nor created a market that did not exist yet (Canon 5D and 5DII were the pioneers there, I think).
    • D1: On the list, as first affordable workable DSLR.
    • D100: Not on the list.
    • D90: On the list, as first DSLR with video.
    • D700: Not on the list.
    • D300: Not on the list.
    Add:
    • D70: Together with the EOS300D/350D (and whatever Rebel names they have) created the DSLR market for enthusiasts.
    • D3/D3s: First cameras to bring useable ISO 12800 and 25600 in sight.
    ___
    (*) I mean, no explanation whatsoever about why each camera is included? Yes to the iPhone 5, but not any other cellphone? I think it was more the iPhone 4 that inspired millions of people to start using its camera more, not the 5.... and neither was really a first (first I remember was the Nokia 3650 in 2006 somewhere, but I doubt that was the very first). Of course this "list" is rather rubbish. But fun, and it does make you think which advancements have mattered.
     
  23. Michael - I am not a Nikon user but, IMHO, D90 deserves to be in this list beacuse it was the first DSLR with HD video.
     
  24. pge

    pge

    Wouter, I mostly agree with your Nikon DSLR assessment other than two cameras.
    The D700/D3. I think it is splitting hairs given that they have the same sensor, but the D700 brought it to the Nikon masses which is what I think is really landmark.
    The D90. Who cares about video. It was already on most P&S cameras anyways. Its a marketing feature. The fact that used D700s sell for virtually the same price as new D600s suggests that video is not important to many of us, not even as important as build quality.
     
  25. The D90. Who cares about video.​
    It changed the camera in what it could actually do - as such, the D90 is a landmark. The fact that most people here do not care is not significant (we're a niche audience); high-end cameras now simply can do more. It changes enough.

    I have no use for video either, and as a feature for me it ranks up there with Auto-HDR-multi-exposure-stitching-in-camera: stuff I ignore. But the point of a list as this one is not about what you or I like, find important or use - but what came out first (hence the D3, not the D700, for example - mass adoptation always follows if the idea is good enough), and changed the landposts. Some landmark products sold in very low quantities, yet they're the landmark: the first, the original implementation; the real pioneers.
     
  26. pge

    pge

    mass adoptation always follows if the idea is good enough​
    Point taken, but that line of thinking would bump the Nikon D1 off the list in favour of the Kodak DCS.
     
  27. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    The fact that used D700s sell for virtually the same price as new D600s suggests that video is not important to many of us, not even as important as build quality.​
    That price comparison is not even a fact to begin with.
    Check KEH's D700 used prices. It varies from a high of $1599 to $1299: http://www.keh.com/search?store=cam...de=Class&grade=Grade&sprice=0&eprice=0&r=SE&e
    Private transaction prices are lower than that range.
    Meanwhile, a new D600 is $1996.95 at KEH:
    http://www.keh.com/camera/Nikon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DN029991291110?r=FE
    Other mail order prices from trustworthy sources such as B&H, etc. are the same as KEH's.
    There is nothing wrong with the D600's build quality, which is essentially identical to that on the D7000 and D7100. They all have weather sealing and a partical metal frame. I used a D7000 for over two years (and still own it). I took it to the equator and tropics, used it in the rain a few times .... There are no problems.
    The one weakness the D600 has is the AF module does not cover the FX frame as well as any other FX Nikon DSLR. And Nikon manages to keep the D600's price low by manufacturing it in Thailand. All other FX bodies are made in Japan and we are paying for the higher labor cost.
     
  28. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    BTW, the first full-35mm-frame DSLR is neither the Canon 1DS (version 1) nor the Kodak DCS 14n, both of which were introduced at the Photokina in September, 2002 (again, the Photokina is held in even years only).
    The first "full frame" DSLR was the Contax N, which was announced in year 2000 but suffered a lot of delays (read: disaster). It was finally available in the spring of 2002, so it still predates the Canon and Kodak. It was 6MP @ $8000, at a time when Canon, Fuji, and Nikon introduced 6MP, APS-C DSLRs at $2000 or so. Needless to say, the Contax N was a commercial disaster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contax_N_Digital
     
  29. Yes, the Vest Pocket Kodak was important. It folded super small, was very light (aluminum), took a big negative (4 x 6.5cm), and was the "contraband" soldier's camera of record during World War I. It was the first camera that let soldiers take their own pictures in the field, even if it was against the rules, and it was widely used.
     
  30. pge

    pge

    That price comparison is not even a fact to begin with.​
    Refurbed ones are less than $1599, so my comparison is not that far off.
    link
    And Ebay has New D600s for just $100 more.
     
  31. Gup

    Gup Gup

    To this list I would add the Kodak 'Pocket Instamatic' that used the 110 film cartridge. For me that was the predecessor to the Blackberry I use today. Also, the Polaroid Swinger, because it was called 'Swinger'! I have only owned 7 of those on the list (four if you take into consideration I'm on my 3rd D700).
    I tried to invite the list blogger to join our discussion but he is completely insulated from any approach.
    Part of his bio states, 'Known in some circles as the most amazing man in the universe'...
    I don't see how we can argue with those credentials.
     
  32. I am a bit surprised that the D3 is not listed.​
    That was my first reaction, too, Shun. That was a major shift for Nikon users. The D700 and D3s were derivative products of this first foray into full-frame by Nikon. The low-light capabilities of those cameras also broke new ground as to what was possible.
    --Lannie
     
  33. Sony Mavica.<br><br>Some here seem to think that being able to shoot video with a stills camera was a landmark creating invention. Shows they don't know history and where stills digital originated. We have come full circle.<br>If we forget history (heard on the radio lately that vinyl sound recordings - the old record - were popular - knew that - because they give a much better sound then digital recordings and CDs. Clearly people who know the terrible noise that you had to cope with trying to listen to what was recorded on vinyl are few and far between. That, or most forgot about it), we're bound to go round in circles for ever and ever. And it has appears that we do: remove a feature, and sell that as something new everyone must have. Add that feature again later, and sell it as something new everyone must have.<br><br>Anyway: Sony Mavica.<br><br><br>There really aren't any landmark Nikons. the F, F2 and F3 in particular were quite good, and thus popular, cameras, but had nothing that would make them Landmark Cameras. And the rest of them is just that: the rest of them.
     
  34. "Some here seem to think that being able to shoot video with a stills camera was a landmark creating invention. Shows they don't know history and where stills digital originated."
    Actually the Sony Mavica is an analog system. It captures video stills and stores it on magnetic disc. Those cameras do not record continuous video. I know because I have two of them: MVC-5000 and MVC-C1. Below is my MVC-5000
    Nevertheless I concur that the Sony Mavica is a landmark camera in a big way.
    [​IMG]
     
  35. The Sigma SD9 deserves an honorable mention if not an inclusion on the list. It's the first camera to incorporate the Foveon X3 sensor.
     
  36. Indeed, Michael, the Mavica wasn't yet digital. Shows how advanced the thing was.<br>The historical note, what apparently many don't (or no longer) know, is that 'digital photography' started life as 'still video'.<br>Video capture with present day digital cameras? No landmark moment. Back to the roots. It all began with picking a single frame from a video stream. Now series of single frames can be captured as video streams. What progress... stunning! ;-)
     
  37. Phil, I didn't mean to exclude all digital cameras, just digital Nikons, for the reason than none of them have really been innovative landmarks - well, maybe the D90. Kodak's DCS14 camera's I would include, but since they offered both Canon and Nikon versions, that wouldn't count as a true Nikon in my view. And the iPhone4? Really? As if there wasn't an entire generation of previous Windows Mobile and other smartphones/PDAs with built-in cameras. I think someone's been believing too much advertising hype.
    I also take the view that although Contax may have been first to market with a full-frame digital camera, its low impact on the professional scene should count against it. A landmark camera should be game-changing, not sit on the sidelines awaiting substitution!
    However, if we started right back with Niepce, Daguerre and Fox-Talbot, I suspect we'd very quickly have reached 100 very significant landmarks before we even got halfway through the C20th.
     
  38. No Ermanox. No Spotmatic. A couple of redundant Leicas (keep the II and M3, cut the III and M4). Too many dSLRs. Only one AF film SLR (how about an EOS-1, or an F5 as the template for all subsequent Nikons?) and only one AF film compact (I'd be tempted to throw in a Yashica T4 or something). Swap the RTS-III for the original RTS. Swap the M9 for an M8 (warts and all). What's the Lubitel doing there?
     
  39. As for the Mavica, here is a "late flash" on it from Popular Photography, October, 1981
    00bski-541722184.jpg
     
  40. The D3 and D800 are/were game changers. They belong on the list. Everything else is subjective.
    I would have chosen the D70 over the D90. The D70 broke a price/performance barrier and gave many of us our first serious taste of digital capture.
    What the D100 and D300 are doing on the list is anyone's guess. Snooze!
     
  41. pge

    pge

    Phil-
    The fact that used D700s sell for virtually the same price as new D600s suggests that video is not important to many of us, not even as important as build quality.​
    Shun-
    That price comparison is not even a fact to begin with.​
    Refurbed d600's are $1600 at the Nikon store and refurbed d700's are $2000. Link
     
  42. Rodeo Joe
    Re: "I'll kick off with the 1932 Contax I as first camera to use a vertically-running metal focal plane shutter. Squeak, squeak!"
    It seems to me the first camera to use what we think of when we use the expression "vertically-running metal focal plane shutter" was the Konica F in 1960. This shutter reached 1/2000s and synched at 1/125, no mean feat for 1960. That shutter was metallic "structurally", whereas the Contax's shutter slats were activated by straps mounted on a drum. That mechanism was very similar to Leica-type shutters, just tilted 90 degrees. Just because it had metal slats mounted on the straps does not make it a "metal shutter" IMHO.
    Coming back to the list, I would include the Konica F. It was barely noticed when it came out and only some 1500 units were made, but its Hi-Synchro shutter laid the groundwork on which Copal developed (with financing from Konica and Mamiya) the Copal Square shutter.
    Just my 2c.
     
  43. No F-3HP ? Please.
     

Share This Page