100 Landmark Cameras

<p><a href="http://www.visualnews.com/2013/04/24/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras/?view=infographic">Link</a></p>

<p>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?<br /> The list is<br /> D1<br /> D100<br /> D90<br /> D700<br /> D300</p>

<p>My list would have been D1 D70 D700 D800</p>

<p>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 <em>and </em>Reflex Korelle? - I think not! Leica II <em>and </em>Leica III - likewise. Hansa Canon, but not Kwanon? Two Argus bricks!? Pentax K1000 but no Spotmatic or S1a?</p>

<p>The compiler of that list is a complete fool.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>In any case, these lists are largely meaningless anyway.</p>

Really Joe; a complete fool? Let's hear your 100 landmark list, I'm sure we'll all agree ;)

<blockquote>

<p>In any case, these lists are largely meaningless anyway.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree that the list is basically meaningless, but landmark cameras are very meaningful.</p>

<p>I would also like to see Joes list, not to disagree with it but because I think it would be interesting.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"The compiler of that list is a complete fool."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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:</p>

<ol>

<li>D1 - the first successful "from the ground up" Nikon DLSR</li>

<li>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)</li>

<li>D200 - the first non-pro Nikon DLSR with legacy lens support</li>

<li>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)</li>

<li>D700 - the the first non-pro "full frame" Nikon DSLR</li>

</ol>

<blockquote>

<p>"In any case, these lists are <s>largely</s> <strong>completely</strong> meaningless anyway."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Once again I find myself disagreeing with Shun. ;-) :-)</p>

<p>No Contax S ! ! ! and plenty of other landmark cameras not listed, while some that are listed are themselves derivative of ones that aren't.</p>

<p>This is a very idiosyncratic and useless list, IMHO, regardless of the general utility, or not, of such lists.</p>

<p>I wouldn't take the list too seriously. Its purpose is to sell "signed 18” by 24” lithographic print limited edition at <a href="http://popchartlab.com/products/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras">popchartlab.com</a>".<br>

<a href="http://www.visualnews.com/2013/04/24/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras/">http://www.visualnews.com/2013/04/24/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras/</a><br>

<a href="http://popchartlab.com/products/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras">http://popchartlab.com/products/a-visual-compendium-of-cameras</a></p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>i'd hardly call the d90 a landmark camera. sometimes i think these lists are made with the purpose of infuriating people.</p>

<blockquote>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)<br />5. D700 - the the first non-pro "full frame" Nikon DSLR</blockquote>

<p>Michael, I felt constrained to pick just one of these on a 100 most ever.... list.</p>

<p>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?</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>I <em>could</em> 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.<br>

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.<br>

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.</p>

<p>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!</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>continue this thread with our own suggestions for what should be included and see how it builds?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually, I anticipated you and started a thread on this very topic in Classic Manual Cameras:<br>

http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00bsOu <br>

all are welcome, especially Nikon users. ;)</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>As for inclusion onto the list I will nominate the Polaroid Land Camera.</p>

<p>How many of them have you owned over the years?</p>

<p>3 for me on that list.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<p>3 for me on that list too.</p>

<p>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!</p>

<p>I also would have included some sort of Linhof! What about Fuji...GSW690...G617?</p>

<p>I had 4, but I'm probably a bit older than most here.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>No FA? First camera with matrix metering.<br>

Or D800E?</p>

<p>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 <strong>D</strong>SLRs to keep the playing field a bit manageable.<br /> 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).</p>

<ul>

<li>D1: On the list, as first affordable workable DSLR.</li>

<li>D100: Not on the list.</li>

<li>D90: On the list, as first DSLR with video.</li>

<li>D700: Not on the list.</li>

<li>D300: Not on the list.</li>

</ul>

<p>Add:</p>

<ul>

<li>D70: Together with the EOS300D/350D (and whatever Rebel names they have) created the DSLR market for enthusiasts.</li>

<li>D3/D3s: First cameras to bring useable ISO 12800 and 25600 in sight.</li>

</ul>

<p>___<br /> (*) 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.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<p>Wouter, I mostly agree with your Nikon DSLR assessment other than two cameras.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>