1950s Vintage Camera?

<p>I have a 1937 Bess which I really enjoy, and just bought a 1915 Kodak Special No. 1 with Cooke lens and Optimo shutter. I was wandering what the candidates are for "best" camera of the 1950s might be? I'm looking for flash sync, coated lens, 1/500s or faster, and truly excellent quality. Interchangeable lenses would be nice but not required. Meter not required either. I think it might be fun to have a great camera from the teens, the thirties, and the fifties. SO, what are the greats? Contax IIa? Leica of some sort? Rollie? Zeiss Super Ikonta C? Cameras like the Voigtlander Prominent and Vitessa L have superb lenses and finish, but engineering is only so-so at best? What are some suggestions that would sell for realistic prices?</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>A 1959 vintage Nikon F. :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Leica IIf, IIIg, M3 or any of their FSU clones (excellent quality if you're lucky…).</p>

<p> </p>

<p>A Praktina, of course. ;)</p>

<p>You'd have a hard time actually finding a 1959-built Nikon F for a "realistic" price, but a later model might vie for the 60's title.</p>

<p>Of course, this being CMC, pictures of our preciouses would be good.</p>

<p>Two of these, the Nikon F and the Asahi H2, only qualify barely from 1959, but the Contax S comes in at the beginning of the 50s, from Sept. 1949 to 1951.</p><div></div>

<p>I own many of the cameras of this era, and the image quality of many of these cameras is excellent, but the variation in prices for the cameras is enormous. Among the very cheap quality cameras, prices $25 to $50, are the Kodak Retina IIa and the Voigtlander VitoB. In the $100 to $200 range are the Nikon F, Kodak IIIc, Zeiss Contessa 35, Vitessa, and Vitomatics. At the high price end are the Leica screwmounts, Contax IIA, Vito III, Retina IIIC, and Prominents. Each camera I mentioned is capable of high quality photos. Good luck.</p>

<p>The problem is that you won't be able to stop at just one, or 10, or 50, or 100.</p>

 

<p>From the other end of the decade, 1946-53, it's hard to imagine a "better" camera (although a bit of a bother, since it uses 620 film) than a Kodak Medalist II.</p>

<p>The Retina IIa would be a good choice, for sure. </p>

<p><strong>Voigtländer Prominent </strong> <em> </em></p>

<p><em>(Come on, you know you want one !)<br /></em></p>

I wonder if you should really try to define "one" I think James made a good point. Across the price spectrum there's some fine stuff there. I personally like the Contax IIa and they were damn expensive then and now especially considering the lenses.Probaly the allure then and now was a system camera with multiple lenses, flash, high shutter speed, and slow speeds too, portability, ease of use etc.The same kind of thinking that drives one to consider a D3000S I think you should consider getting something that epitomizes the era in build quality that either fills a void in your collection, or opens an area for further development. An M3 would be a great addition and a corner stone to start building an M mount series.. Do you have any fixed focal length RF's? A Vito B is a good match to the Voigtlaender you already have. A better/great folder like a Super Ikonta , for a collection of folder evolutions across three decades etc. Get the idea! I think it will be hard to settle on just one .. Ok I 'll admit if you keep resetting the rules you're going to end up with a room full of cameras!! Cripes!!

<p>IMHO, the 50's best would be a 4 way tie between Contax, Canon, Leica and Nikon. Any one of their seemingly professional rangefinders, were all great mechanically and optically. Specifically the Contax IIA, the Canon 7, the Leica M3 and the Nikon S3. IMHO, these 4 cameras, were the zenith of film camera manufacturing in the pre-SLR world.</p>

<p>Also IMHO, the medium format icons of the 1950's and earlier decades, are the Rollei TLR's. IMHO, they're among the greatest (hand held), mechanical devices ever built by man!</p>

<p>The Contax will have excellent lenses, but having owned them with those metal-slat shutters and silk shutter ribbons, I find the simpler design of the Nikon rangefinders' focal-plane shutters to be much more reliable over the long term (and easier to fix when they do break). Take a look at the most numerous of the Nikon RFs, the S2. The Nikkor lenses are superb and much more plentiful (and less expensive) than the Zeiss lenses for the Contax.</p>

<p>Easy to operate, fully manual, flash sync and realistically priced. Doesn't get much better than this! What more could you ask for?</p><div></div>

<p>Leica M3, right in the middle of the decade, more plentiful and cheaper than a Nikon S2.</p>

<p>Before the Nikon F the "system" SLR was Exakta. In addition to interchangeable lenses you could use different finders and focusing screens. Another possibility is the Praktina and Praktica SLRs. The Praktina had eye level pentaprism and some models had a separate RF window for fast focusing. The Praktica (FX, FX-2, FX-3) came with waist level finders but one could add a low cost prism for eye level viewing. I found an FX-2 with C.Z. 50mm f2.8 Tessar that had been in non-temperature controlled storage since about 1994. Cleaned it up and it worked just fine.<br>

If more into late 50's besides the Nikon F you could also look for a Minolta SR-1 (or is it SR-2). The beginning of the Minolta bayonet mount that lasted until the early 90's.</p>

<p>Stuart--<br>

I actually already have a Brownie Hawkeye Flash, vintage 1959, LOL. I've been shooting with it all summer. I actually have been getting some interesting shots with it! However, what I've been toying with is this: I now have a D300 and first class Nikon f2.8 zooms. If I lived in the 1910s, what camera would I own? I bought a 1915 Kodak Autographic Special No. 1 with Optimo shutter and Cooke f6.3 lens. If I lived in the 1930s, what camera would I be using? I bought a mint condition Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar f4.5 and Compur Rapid. If I lived in the 1950s, what would I be using? That's what I'm thinking of--what would a hard core camera enthusiast with a decent job buy? I love the Bessa to death, but an now thinking of better viewfinders, flash sync, coated lens, wider lens choice. My wife already has a Minolta SRT-102 so I have the 1970s covered. :-) The more I look at it, the more I'm liking the IIa, but I'm still thinking about it. Seems like the 1950s was when camera tech really took off. The gear from the 1930s was getting very refined, then in the 1940s we had to go kill a little wacko with a nerdy moustache, and finally in the 1950s photography got rolling again.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>For medium format, try the 1954 Kowa Kalloflex:<br>

<a href="00RR3V">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00RR3V</a></p>

<p>For 35mm, try Popular Photography's 1957 Camera of the Year:<br>

The Aires 35-III:<br>

<a href="00TLFY">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00TLFY</a></p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>what would a hard core camera enthusiast with a decent job buy?</blockquote>

<p>Rolleiflex!</p>

<p>An Exakta Varex VX just screams the 50's.</p>

<p>Louis, I have never held an Aires, but that is one fine looking camera and seems to be a great performer. I wouldn't mind having one, but they must be fairly rare by now.</p>

<p>James, not common but they crop up on ebay from time to time. Hefty little buggers but with amazing lenses! Fairly inexpensive with the exception of the 1959 Aires 35-V, with interchangeable lenses, which was the top of their rangefinder line<br>

<a href="00VaLe">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00VaLe</a><br /><br /></p>

<blockquote>

<p>For 35mm, try Popular Photography's 1957 Camera of the Year:<br /> The Aires 35-III:<br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="00TLFY">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00TLFY</a></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I just picked up an Aires 35-V with the f1.5 lens, it looks like an amazing camera. Haven't gotten around to cleaning it up yet (meter is dead, etc). There were quite a few decent rangefinders from the 50s that aren't so well known as the big names, I enjoy tracking them down and trying them out (D'Oh!)</p>

<p>As far as timeless classics, I do think the 1950s was the decade of the Rolleiflex/cord. My MX-EVS was made in 1953, it still works pretty much as well as the day it was made, and if I do minimal maintenance on it, it should last another 60 years. Not all that expensive, either, unless you insist on having the Planar 2.8 lens (I don't care, any of the Rollei's lenses have their strengths and can make amazing photos).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There were quite a few decent rangefinders from the 50s that aren't so well known as the big names</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh yeah! The 1958 Beauty Super II with the Canter-S lens is another stunning performer. So compact and light. A real Beauty indeed!<br>

<a href="00SUYI">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00SUYI</a><br /><br /></p>

<p>Beauty Super might be hard to find. I read your other thread. I used to live in Lenexa, at 104th Pflumm. I'll be down there next month to chase a big steam engine. At night, with flash. </p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

<p>The definitive 1950s vintage, all time classic camera is, of course, the Hasselblad 500 C.<br>

Next best, better perhaps for those who like a more 'antique' look, would be the Hasselblad 1000 F.</p>

<p> </p>